Right and wrong

Let us just remind ourselves that, two weeks ago The Sunday Times was endorsing a cut in VAT from 17.5 to 12.5 percent for a period of two years, "an eye-catching five-point cut", as proposed by the Centre for Economics and Business Research.

View full article here

Unbelievable!

After all these years that we’ve been in the European Union, you really would think that The Sunday Times would have learned something about our new government. But no! Its leader proclaims, "Be bold like the Bank and cut VAT", drawing a parallel between the Bank of England's base rate cut and possible measures that our provincial government could take to kick-start the economy.

View full article here

How long can this charade continue before they either realize or admit the obvious?

Is it a conspiracy of silence or just good old ignorance?

I suppose this is another example of why "knowing is half the battle."

I see someone's already put them right. And curiously, the 'comment' facility isn't working now.
(Unless I'm doing something wrong)
JO

What happened when the Tories put it up from 15% to 17.5%? Was this before the EU took it over or did the Tories have permission?

I wonder if there is anyway to get MPs to answer a questionnaire?
Basically the list should be all common-sense, doable policies with three tickboxes by them. Approve, Don't Approve and Powerless.
Motivation for our elected would obviously have to be some free hand-out for completion of the questionnaire, crate of champagne say, because we all know how much Socialists like champagne.
(No I can't afford it).

You can increase it unilaterally, but you cannot decrease it without permission.

They can increase it to 25% without permission from the colleagues, can't they? The colleagues don't object to extra revenue!

I've occasionally found the subject of VAT useful for tying politically correct Europhiles in knots: I ask them why successive Chancellors of the Exchequer haven't abolished VAT on women's toiletries (ie tampons). Usually, they don't know that such decisions can be taken only in Council. In fact, they don't know anything about how the EU "works". For what it's worth, the revelation makes them think just a little harder about how we are governed.

Two of the comments on the Sunday Times piece are from me. I had intended to quote Dr North exactly but comments on the article were limited to 300 characters.

This restriction forced me to edit the quotation and to add the relevant link to Dr North's piece here in a separate comment. The link I posted was: http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/1 ... vable.html.

The liars have changed that link to point at their own article.

More spin/lies from Cambell and Lady Mandy of Mince....They don't care that it is demonstrable rubbish, it's meant to keep the voters happy.....but why do supposedly sensible papers go along with it, every time.

I just attempted to post the following on the Sunday Times's comment section:

"That link I gave earlier should be
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/1 ... vable.html
and not the self-referential link to this, your own article.

Alternatively, go to http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com and read the post entitled "Unbelievable"."

In response, their pop-up window declared, "Thank for your comment. We cannot guarantee to publish all because of the high volume received."

So far there are 6 comments up.

"Unbelievable" indeed.

Something else the media has chosen not to let public know, MEPs have voted to scrap Britain's 48hr working time opt out. Stephen Hughes, EU Parliament MEP for the Socialist Group, said they voted to scrap it for 'health & safety' reasons.

I've e-mailed this piece of dross telling him exactly what I think of him, in no uncertain terms. What they're doing is banning people from earning extra money. How can they, with all conscience, ban the low paid, because that's who it will affect most, from doing overtime to earn extra money, it's criminal. These champagne socialist politicans are all for equality, as long as they and their comrades in arms are more equal than the rest of us.

Soon they'll ban us from breathing unless we have a licence.

I hate them with a vengeance, a double pox on the greedy, rotten to the core, stinking b**tards.

I posted there, backing up Harry and wondering why neither the useless think tank nor the Times itself knew the tax couldn't be reduced. That was this morning, no sign of the comments on the site.

Could the government redefine the list of zero-rated product categories without permission from above?

Definitely no! What we have was hard negotiated during the accession talks ... there is a lot of resentment that we have kept them, and the "colleagues" would not be disposed to allow us some more. The pressure is all the other way!

I remember some years ago there was an attempt to take VAT off the cost of repairs to Cathedrals and Churches which I think was rejected by the EU, and also to take it off refurbishment of houses because if you pull down a historic building and put up a modern structure it is VAT free but if you repair the old building it attracts VAT.

We did up an old barn to make it into a ballet studio and claimed back the VAT, but if we sell that barn we will have to charge VAT to the buyer.