BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[Taffia]

Well at least you gave HMRC something to do instead of bullying us.

I wonder how much the postage cost?

Royal Mail Special Delivery no less. £8.65. I almost felt honoured as it makes a difference from the normal 2nd class mail they use.

[PlaneSailing]

Hazel Blears actively practiced capital gains tax avoidance on the properties that she funded with taxpayers money. Gordon Brown describes it as “unacceptable behaviour”. I dare say he may even sign up to the term “unacceptable tax avoidance”. When asked if further action would be taken against her, he said:

"But she has not broken the law, she has not broken the rules of the House of Commons.”

(from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8057559.stm )

Any interest payable on that amount Mr Brown?

Any retrospective law changes as it is clearly “unacceptable behaviour”?

Any consistency Mr Brown?

One rule for you and another for us Mr Brown?

Perhaps Gordon Brown would like to explain why he thinks this an acceptable way to deal with Hazel Blears?

Why attack us with retrospective legislation and back interest (BN 66 2008, s.58 FA 2008), and not good ole Hazel and your other chums?

(The chancellor's been at it too http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...rling_alistair )

Mr. Brown, we didn't break the law either. Our claims for DTA relief were within the rules.

In a funny sort of way, all this nonsense is in our favour. No one,
Gordon Brown included, 'legitamately expects' the rule changes to
be retrospective!

[macdat]

In a funny sort of way, all this nonsense is in our favour. No one,
Gordon Brown included, 'legitamately expects' the rule changes to
be retrospective!

I was thinking exactly the same, but then its always been "one rule for them and another for 'us' " !!

Time will tell I guess, roll on June !!!

[BrilloPad]

Royal Mail Special Delivery no less. £8.65. I almost felt honoured as it makes a difference from the normal 2nd class mail they use.

JUst as well. Else you could have claimed you had received nothing.....

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I was strongly against going to the media previously to highlight our plight due to the fact that most people will see what we did as immoral, and I thought that the Government would spin avoidence into evasion in the publics mind, however in the current climate I don't see how Government can spin this against us without people asking "Well if they retrospectively changed the law for them then why haven't they done that for their own expenses?"

What are your views on this????

MajorGowen...

I approached a couple of Journos earlier this year just to sound them out. One was a reporter for the Sunday Times. They weren't interested. Nothing about the story was that newsworthy in their opinion. The sums of money at stake (£200M) were nothing exceptional, there was no-one in the public eye involved, it only affected a couple of thousand IT and management consultants, and the case hadn't even gone to court yet.

If we wanted the media to take up the story, it would have to be a lot more interesting.

Other than us staging a publicity stunt (eg. demo outside the Treasury), I think it's only when a JR takes place that the media may pick up on it.

Sadly, even then, this will probably only ever be a minor news story, so the Govt won't need to spin it.

[BrilloPad]

I approached a couple of Journos earlier this year just to sound them out. One was a reporter for the Sunday Times. They weren't interested. Nothing about the story was that newsworthy in their opinion. The sums of money at stake (£200M) were nothing exceptional, there was no-one in the public eye involved, it only affected a couple of thousand IT and management consultants, and the case hadn't even gone to court yet.

If we wanted the media to take up the story, it would have to be a lot more interesting.

Other than us staging a publicity stunt (eg. demo outside the Treasury), I think it's only when a JR takes place that the media may pick up on it.

Sadly, even then, this will probably only ever be a minor news story, so the Govt won't need to spin it.

I have a great idea for a demo out the treasury. Would get massive amounts of publicity........

[iansbud]

in my opinion i wouldn't want to put any pressure on the govt to consider retrospectively changing their cushy expenses rules - just change them going forward, and then put the pressure on to treat us in a fair and equal way... dont want the floodgates on retrospection opening on anything really, it's just wrong in my opinion.

[Emigre]

I have a great idea for a demo out the treasury. Would get massive amounts of publicity........

I can't do heights....

[TheGadgetMan]

I have a great idea for a demo out the treasury. Would get massive amounts of publicity........

if it involves dressing up as a super hero, then count me in....

[helen7]

I assume the only people now who can infuence the decision are the panel on the judicial review and, the ECHR when it gets there.

The MPs seem to tow the line that it is now law so they can't do anything to help. My MP didn't even bother responding to any of my letters after the 2nd one (six letters now sent).

If we did a protest, who would our target audience be? and can they be of any help to us?

I don't think we will get any sympathy from the public or the reporters. Any of my friends/collegues to whom I have spoken to about it have responded with 'serves you right'.