Costing who? The Government? It's not their money.
You could put it another way and say it is SAVING the tax payer £17.5bn.
Costing the Treasury, as that will be the amount that will NOT be collected,
Can't quite see how it's saving the taxpayer anything - the Government will be getting less money in tax revenues to the tune of £17.5bn
BTW "costing" is a word mist commonly used by political commentators and others when describing giveaway tax changes. More likely to be heard in conjunction with the Budget speech.
I would like more information on the British Bill of Rights aspect of the speech such as who will be involved in drafting it. Will the general public have a say? I would say we would need to have a say on such an important issue.
The Tory and Labour conferences have at least confirmed beyond any lingering doubt that for the first time ever at a General Election I will not be voting for either.
The Tory and Labour conferences have at least confirmed beyond any lingering doubt that for the first time ever at a General Election I will not be voting for either.
Costing the Treasury, as that will be the amount that will NOT be collected,
Can't quite see how it's saving the taxpayer anything - the Government will be getting less money in tax revenues to the tune of £17.5bn
BTW "costing" is a word mist commonly used by political commentators and others when describing giveaway tax changes. More likely to be heard in conjunction with the Budget speech.
The treasury should not be including money not collected in it's budget drafts.
Isn't the way the cost of it is described. The cut in benefits lost for those working will be repaid in raising threshold and tax levels. Give and take in basic terms
You assume that all those affected will be on benefits. That will not be the case.
However, I was simply passing on that information, I have no knowledge as to what mechanisms were used in order to arrive at that figure, or whether any benefits savings have been factored in.
I would like more information on the British Bill of Rights aspect of the speech such as who will be involved in drafting it. Will the general public have a say? I would say we would need to have a say on such an important issue.
Should imagine it will very much mirror the Human rights bill and is just political speak, after all didn't he point to how we lead the world in equality and fairness.
I would like more information on the British Bill of Rights aspect of the speech such as who will be involved in drafting it. Will the general public have a say? I would say we would need to have a say on such an important issue.
It's nonsense. If there was any real substance to it, we'd have heard it. It's the same 'pledge' he made in 2010.
He said he is going to go to Europe and change our relationship and they know he means business. Farage pointed out that would require treaty change.
Cameron just thinks he can walk into Brussels and demand changes. To do so will require all member states to agree which would be highly unlikely.
Poland have previously stated it would take "a mountain of gold" in order for them to agree to any changes, which to me is a cheek considering the number of their people who live, work and benefit from the UK.
You assume that all those affected will be on benefits. That will not be the case.
However, I was simply passing on that information, I have no knowledge as to what mechanisms were used in order to arrive at that figure, or whether any benefits savings have been factored in.
Not necessarily all. Just a fair proportion which creates a mountain of difficulty and bureaucracy and by simplifying matters at original point, a persons earnings and deduction of tax, it will equate overall.
Does not know how much policies mentioned by Cameron will cost!
Nobody knows how much exactly it will "cost" as it all depends on the state of the economy and exactly when the measures are introduced. All of these calculations are just estimates and depends on how you measure it.
Brillo is just doing his job and it just shows, despite his critics he really doesn't give anyone an easy ride.
It's nonsense. If there was any real substance to it, we'd have heard it. It's the same 'pledge' he made in 2010.
Don't care what Cameron comes up with he has shown himself to be a complete pratt. His continual attacks (and inability to control outbursts from others) towards members of the public who vote for UKIP, coupled with his recent admission he cares "1000 times less about the UK leaving the EU than Scottish independance" means that he or the Tories have ZERO chance of my vote in 2015.
Comments
http://www.adamsmith.org/news/press-release-pms-personal-allowance-announcement-will-help-beat-low-pay-once-and-for-all/
Supportive but also states what should be next to deal with low pay.
Another one said it was "extremely mediocre". The party heavies will be sorting him out now ;-)
Costing the Treasury, as that will be the amount that will NOT be collected,
Can't quite see how it's saving the taxpayer anything - the Government will be getting less money in tax revenues to the tune of £17.5bn
BTW "costing" is a word mist commonly used by political commentators and others when describing giveaway tax changes. More likely to be heard in conjunction with the Budget speech.
Does somewhat sum up the situation the Tories are in that their delegates are thinking about UKIP before Labour.
It is hilarious watching Michael Gove being ripped to shreds by Andrew O'Neill on Daily Politics.
1) Because he's the only one of two Dave ever met?
2) Proof Cameron never heard of David Hockney or Alan Bennett?
3) Designed to piss off Pickles who would surely have to be number one if "greatest" = "Biggest"?
Did Cameron mention the In/Out referendum?
That's not the way it's meant to be.
The treasury should not be including money not collected in it's budget drafts.
He said he is going to go to Europe and change our relationship and they know he means business. Farage pointed out that would require treaty change.
You assume that all those affected will be on benefits. That will not be the case.
However, I was simply passing on that information, I have no knowledge as to what mechanisms were used in order to arrive at that figure, or whether any benefits savings have been factored in.
Read the whole speech: http://press.conservatives.com/post/98882674910/david-cameron-speech-to-conservative-party-conference
He mentioned quite a lot of things than Miliband forgot about.
Should imagine it will very much mirror the Human rights bill and is just political speak, after all didn't he point to how we lead the world in equality and fairness.
He knew better than Andrew Neil.
Neil kept quoting a figure of £10bn.
ETA: BBC have just confirmed these numbers.
BIB - Yeah right.
So no referendum in other words.
It's nonsense. If there was any real substance to it, we'd have heard it. It's the same 'pledge' he made in 2010.
Cameron just thinks he can walk into Brussels and demand changes. To do so will require all member states to agree which would be highly unlikely.
Poland have previously stated it would take "a mountain of gold" in order for them to agree to any changes, which to me is a cheek considering the number of their people who live, work and benefit from the UK.
In simple terms, without those changes the Treasury will be forecast to bring in £x billion in tax receipts..
With those changes, and assuming that all else remains equal, the Treasury will be forecast to bring in £x - 17.5 billion in tax receipts.
No matter how you wish to represent it, they will be bringing in less money. thereby "costing".
However, i have no wish to argue over simple semantics here.
Not necessarily all. Just a fair proportion which creates a mountain of difficulty and bureaucracy and by simplifying matters at original point, a persons earnings and deduction of tax, it will equate overall.
Nobody knows how much exactly it will "cost" as it all depends on the state of the economy and exactly when the measures are introduced. All of these calculations are just estimates and depends on how you measure it.
Brillo is just doing his job and it just shows, despite his critics he really doesn't give anyone an easy ride.
Don't care what Cameron comes up with he has shown himself to be a complete pratt. His continual attacks (and inability to control outbursts from others) towards members of the public who vote for UKIP, coupled with his recent admission he cares "1000 times less about the UK leaving the EU than Scottish independance" means that he or the Tories have ZERO chance of my vote in 2015.