No To Retro Tax – Campaign Against Section 58 Finance Act 2008

[Boycie]

It means 'lets forget we ever discussed it and get to the nearest bar'

That's exactly how it sounded. And now it's big pats on the back all around. Haven't we done well.
Shove your red and black blouse... WTF

[Boycie]

really wish i'd never listened to this... my blood is boiling! Democracy. Bunch of public schoolboys is how it sounds.

[nevergiveup]

That's exactly how it sounded. And now it's big pats on the back all around. Haven't we done well.
Shove your red and black blouse... WTF

Look DR/TSBT did say this was just testing the water. I wouldn't give up just yet!

[Boycie]

Here we go - drinks on the terrace to celebrate!

[Basher]

This is a joke !

All I heard was people agreeing. Gauke read out a pre-written script and then Mills withdrew it.

And now they are waffling like teenagers after their first pint.

I am so livid.

It means 'lets forget we ever discussed it and get to the nearest bar'

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Calm Down

if it was a Gauke ploy to get Nigel ills to raise the clause and then...withdraw it.

All,

This matter has been discussed at length off radar and was not only expected but required. Sure, they left time tight and we figured that out. Withdrawing the amendment was expected and needed. But if you listened to what was said by others and the lack of grumbles in the background I think you'll see what today did. We know who is onside and who is not and critically, what Gauke thinks and why. You may think I'm losing it but with the little time made available some salient points were made and nobody chaffed what Nigel Mills said. Recon done.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Why did he withdraw it, there was plenty of support, only Gauke opposed.

Because if it had gone to a division (vote) all the Government MPs would have fallen into line.

This is a game and if you don't understand the rules you lose.

That is why we have Whitehouse.

[nevergiveup]

All,

This matter has been discussed at length off radar and was not only expected but required. Sure, they left time tight and we figured that out. Withdrawing the amendment was expected and needed. But if you listened to what was said by others and the lack of grumbles in the background I think you'll see what today did. We know who is onside and who is not and critically, what Gauke thinks and why. You may think I'm losing it but with the little time made available some salient points were made and nobody chaffed what Nigel Mills said. Recon done.

Told you so!

[Boycie]

So what happens next?

Does anyone know what happens next then? The amendment was withdrawn dispite lots of agreement about how awful retrospection is and Gauke just reading out the usual pre-prepared puff piece. Now what?

[StellaFan]

Was it Jacob Rees-Mogg who was very vocal about his opposition to retrospection?