UK Politics Mega-thread - Page 78

On March 19 2016 06:30 KwarK wrote:
The Quiet Man speaks up. Am strangely impressed, even if it's just political grandstanding. IDS surely can't have leadership aspirations, he was deposed once already.

Dear Iain,

Thank you for your letter this evening.

We are all very proud of the welfare reforms which this government has delivered over the last six years, and in which you have played an important part.

As a government, we have done a huge amount to get people into work, reduce unemployment and promote social justice. There are now more people in work than ever before in our country’s history, with 2.4 million more jobs created since 2010.

I regret that you have chosen to step down from the government at this moment. Together we designed the personal independence payment to support the most vulnerable and to give disabled people more independence.

We all agreed that the increased resources being spent on disabled people should be properly managed and focused on those who need it most.

That is why we collectively agreed – you, No 10 and the Treasury – proposals which you and your Department then announced a week ago. Today we agreed not to proceed with the policies in their current form and instead to work together to get these policies right over the coming months.

In the light of this, I am puzzled and disappointed that you have chosen to resign.

You leave the government with my thanks and best wishes. While we are on different sides in the vital debate about the future of Britain’s relations with Europe, the government will, of course, continue with its policy of welfare reform, matched by our commitment to social justice, to improving the life chances of the most disadvantaged people in our country, and to ensuring that those who most need help and protection continue to receive it.

Yours, David

Argentina’s government is celebrating a decision by a UN commission to expand its maritime territory in the South Atlantic Ocean by 35% to include the disputed Falkland islands and beyond.

The Argentine foreign ministry said its waters had increased by 1.7 million square km (0.66 million square miles) and the decision will be key in its dispute with Britain over the islands. Argentina lost a brief, bloody 1982 war with Britain after Argentinian troops seized the South Atlantic archipelago that Latin Americans call the Malvinas.

The UN commission on the limits of the continental shelf sided with Argentina, ratifying the country’s 2009 report fixing the limit of its territory at 200 to 350 miles from its coast.

“This is a historic occasion for Argentina because we’ve made a huge leap in the demarcation of the exterior limit of our continental shelf,” foreign minister Susana Malcorra said. “This reaffirms our sovereignty rights over the resources of our continental shelf.”

Oil exploration is already pumping millions of dollars into the Falkland Islands economy. Many islanders remain concerned about Argentina’s claim as well as the potential for problems from rapid change brought by the new industry.

The UN commission’s finding included the caveat that there is an unresolved diplomatic dispute between Argentina and Britain over the islands.

David Cameron intervened personally to prevent offshore trusts from being dragged into an EU-wide crackdown on tax avoidance, it has emerged.

In a 2013 letter to the then president of the European council, Herman Van Rompuy, the prime minister said that trusts should not automatically be subject to the same transparency requirements as companies.

The EU planned to shine a light on the dealings of offshore bodies by publishing a central register of their ultimate owners but, in a letter unearthed by the Financial Times that remains publicly available on the government’s website, Cameron said: “It is clearly important we recognise the important differences between companies and trusts … This means that the solution for addressing the potential misuse of companies – such as central public registries – may well not be appropriate generally.”

The prime minister’s personal involvement in the EU-wide debate emerged as he continued to face questions about his family’s connections to Blairmore Holdings Inc, the offshore trust set up by his late father, the existence of which was revealed in leaked papers from the database of Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca.

The prime minister’s spokeswoman said that Downing Street had responded to allegations about Ian Cameron in the past.

When asked earlier if there was still any family money invested in the fund, a Downing Street spokeswoman had said: “That is a private matter.” But subsequently No 10 has issued a series of clarificatory statements.

On April 08 2016 07:02 KwarK wrote:
The Cameron thing is a colossal non story, except that somehow a PM has no PR experience at all.

On April 08 2016 07:02 KwarK wrote:
He had 30k of shares in a Panama based trust, given to him by his father. While shell companies can be used to play financial games this one just traded and gave out dividends with the profits which were declared and taxed at the time. Then, to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, he sold his shares before becoming PM.

David Cameron was in Washington rubbing shoulders with world leaders, sun-tanned and relaxed after a holiday in Lanzarote, when an email revealing what the Guardian knew about his father’s tax affairs dropped on Conservative HQ.

From that moment, the prime minister would have known there was a serious risk of people finding out about the £30,000 of shares he previously owned in Ian Cameron’s offshore investment fund.

It would look terrible to a public already outraged about tax avoidance that a wealthy young Cameron had chosen to buy shares in Blairmore, the fund based in Panama and the Bahamas that never paid a penny of tax in Britain.

This was the point at which Cameron should have made a clean breast of the facts, Labour and some of his own Conservative MPs now say.

The prime minister took the unprecedented decision to release his personal tax records on Saturday, as growing anger over revelations in the Panama Papers threatened to derail his premiership.

But the extraordinary move seems set to plunge David Cameron into further controversy, as it emerged that his mother transferred two separate payments of £100,000 to his accounts in 2011, allowing the family estate to avoid a potential £80,000 worth of inheritance tax.

On April 10 2016 08:16 KwarK wrote:
No way out of that one, his tax records were going to have to go public. He'll pay back the 80k, explain everyone does it, state that nothing bad was done but that he's paying back the 80k to avoid the appearance of wrongdoing and get back to the business of running the country, and the people who cared will care and the people that didn't won't. It's certainly looking harder to be PM now though. I wonder why people bother.

On April 10 2016 10:27 Sermokala wrote:
Has there been any polls about Cameron resigning or calling for new elections?

On April 10 2016 10:27 Sermokala wrote:
Has there been any polls about Cameron resigning or calling for new elections?