Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
It was shambolic, Paxman seems to be getting past it or not caring any more.
There was one thing that came out of it, all promised to publish their tax records, although Boris qualified this with 'relevant'. It will be interesting to see what comes of that.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
I suffered for the cause also.
The programme, the debate, was not so much shambolic as symbolic of politics today. It's the media wot done it.
One that has not been given a mention here, so far, is the independent Siobhan Benita who too got her 60 seconds. How impressed one can be with her or the process when it was claimed on her web site that she was to take part in last night's debate;was she invited to join in then sidelined, probably not.
Boris began in saying, "This election is all about trust." A statement aimed at any who have their eye on Ken again for two reasons. His election supremo "the Australian Rottweiler" and the fact that the words trust and Boris do not go together without the word 'fund' somehow.
The programme did make a difference. Paddick is not worth a light. Ken could lose votes to Jones; the Eric & Ernie of this particular play-bill.
For entirely personal reasons it may well be La Bella Benita for me. Better to stick out for the Independent than roll around in the mire with the Red and the Blue.
Ken's creeping back to the New Labour fold was a huge disappointment for me.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
glad i missed it, i am left wondering why the mayor of london issue takes precedence on a national news programme.
complete irrelevance to anyone working outside the capital.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Howard you didnt miss anything much and as I said in post 39 it would do your head in if you watched..it was completely noisy and incoherent all round. But somehow an opportunity wasted.
With regard to a London event going national. Paxman justified this, or attempted to justify it, at the beginning of the programme saying that London had a bigger population than some of the countries in the EU and created much of the national wealth, so one should be interested sort of thing..etc etc..although he did say he wouldnt blame anyone living elsewhere if they failed to enthuse...or words to that effect.
One other item of small interest. JP asked Boris if he would apologise to Ken for his outburst the other day and Boris said....."No"
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Boris has now released details of his earnings, tax and NI paid for the last four years, showing he had no income from companies and paid about 45% total in tax over that period from an annual income around £400,000.
The pressure is now on Ken to follow up - the politics might be boring but the sideshow is livening up!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17622189
Some trivia to bring up a local link to this, the conservative agent for this area in the late 90s moved on to be Boris's agent when he first became the MP for Henley on Michael Heseltine's retirement.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
jolly good show,paying his tax's like a good chap.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
We have been `advised`that people like Boris,not avoiding paying tax are .....fools/foolish................
Best you leave him alone to pay his fair share..............Flashman and Olly say that the tax avoidance merchants are
damaging our Treasury revenue......the message appears to be they bring the finance industry into disrepute........
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
It is quite possible to own a whole string of companies but take no income from them. Many people do that; the company's cash builds up (net of corporation tax) until they need the dosh. Then they take it as dividends. Simples.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i find it incredible that a city as important as london will be run by either of these clowns.
once the tax issue is played out there will no doubt be something equally infantile as how much each gives to charity.
i think boris has badly damaged his chances of becoming prime minister.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Peter Peter Peter.
I was just about to say something nice about BB paying his Tax's but if your right then the fool is fooling us again.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
I don't know Gary but as a company is a separate legal person from its owners, you can never tell.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
we need tp get away from these boring meet ups and childish playground stuff
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Where did that come from Keef?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
from me
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
You can find out about directors and companies at Companies House, along with their accounts, so all this innuendo and smears aimed at Boris is pointless.
The issue here though is not Boris but Livingstone's proven hypocrisy, exposed by Companies House records.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Now that all Mayoral candidates have revealed their tax arrangements and all seem to be roughly in order..calls have gone out today for this to be a set precedent...that all politicians should come clean about their tax affairs. National Newspapers are today leading the call on this... according to the radio this morning. I think I mentioned this very thing yesterday when referring to the tax return situation from some of the super rich Conservative frontbenchers. These are the ones targeted I believe.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Barryw
I think theres an even bigger issue here.
at the moment more and more people are switching off of politics.
there are a number of reasons for this some being;
1; just find politics boring
2; just not interested
3; M P expenses scandal and not much done about it
4; Government squabbles
5; parties just all saying they are right(and rarely are)
6; MP's lifestyle far removed from the every day person on the street
7; total distrust of politicians even when they have a good case
so this verbal fisty cuffs on television just gets even more people not voting
i hope not to many people watched it
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Keith, you are right in a lot of that, politicians are too hooked on polling and media bites in the age of instant and 24 hour reporting instead of getting on with the job, fuelled largely by the media who want to be first with each and every story.
Paul, there's a lot more to come out yet from Ken, his tax arrangements were reportedly put out by his ex climate change adviser and not signed of by his accountant, and there's a lot of detail missing that could still possibly cause him trouble.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ray;
please be careful agreeing with me baryw won't like it
and you will be put in the stocks and your membership suspended lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
