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

[elpinar]

Why did he not force a vote - i dont understnad

[screwthis]

He didn't even put up a fight.

Guake said nothing apart from that other tax payers wouldn't like it.
Since when does that dictate the law.

Guake didn't address the Lamont question.

Baker just bent over and basically said, "Well you gave it your attention. I'm grateful that you let us know your views so I would seek to withdraw"

huh?

[helen7]

Chin up. We are chipping away bit by bit. Sounds like we had a lot more support this time?

My chin is weighted down by a 300k tax bill.

[foolishboy]

This is like last time. There may be more to this that we dont understand. I am not convinced its all over and I was at least expecting a vote on this.

Wouldnt mind some input from someone who knows whats going on

[nevergiveup]

My chin is weighted down by a 300k tax bill.

You, me and lots of other people. As DR said this is just part of the plan. I've no choice but to fight on....

[smalldog]

Yep Gauke just spouted the same old tripe and all of a sudden thats that. dont get why it didnt go to vote either and Baker didnt reply to anything Gauke said. Dont get it myself.

[nevergiveup]

You, me and lots of other people. As DR said this is just part of the plan. I've no choice but to fight on....

I'm just gobsmacked it actually got debated. I thought Guake would ensure they ran out of time before NC1 was debated.

The fight goes on....

[elpinar]

Yep Gauke just spouted the same old tripe and all of a sudden thats that. dont get why it didnt go to vote either and Baker didnt reply to anything Gauke said. Dont get it myself.

indeed - what happens to - but it was legal and its not about the moral view - its about the legalality

[nevergiveup]

Yep Gauke just spouted the same old tripe and all of a sudden thats that. dont get why it didnt go to vote either and Baker didnt reply to anything Gauke said. Dont get it myself.

From what I understand, if it was voted on and we lost then that would be it. Game over.

[Guttersnipe]

This is like last time. There may be more to this that we dont understand. I am not convinced its all over and I was at least expecting a vote on this.

Wouldnt mind some input from someone who knows whats going on

I can't profess to understand all Parliamentary chicanery but it was described before the debate as a "probing amendment," i.e. it was never intended to take it to a vote at this juncture.

It would have been wonderful if it had and been decided in our favour but the withdrawal should come as no surprise to anyone. At least, it's what I understood to be the plan.