The simple and cheap compromise would be to make it taxable. The rich would get 55% of it, the poorest would still get it in full, and the ones "in the middle" - the ones on £12,500+ income who were considered too wealthy to get it - would get 80%%.
Nor is there anything to say that without a deal, UK fisherman wouldn't be able to fish in EU waters. As a general rule, countries own the fishing rights in their own national waters unless they have agreed otherwise. Youmight not remember the so-called Cod War with Iceland, or the spat about...
My workplace pension has simple in/out options for ethical investments. I had assumed councils would be able to do the same. But obviously you wouldn't be so aggressively confident if you weren't sure of your facts.
Local government pension schemes have nothing to do with Farage going on...
In general, "ethical" restrictions are far more wide ranging. For example, they tend to exclude arms dealers - you might have noticed complaints that those companies that supply the UK armed forces are struggling to get investment. Also anything to do with fossil fuels, smoking, drinking...
Then council staff will be distinctly concerned if their pension schemes are underperforming because of limiting their investment opportunities, and the staff ought to be given the chance to opt in or out of "ethical" investment restrictions..
Thanks for the clarification.
I suppose if you shout "Putin, Putin, Putin" often enough it negates the need to prove anything. Putin doesn't fund Reform and Farage doesn't like Putin.
Until this week, the entire fish stocks and fish conservation control over UK waters in 2026 and beyond would belong to the UK. Now it...
Exactly. The point is that if pension funds invest only in those investments which are considered suitable for net zero, they are unduly restricting themselves from investing in other funds which might be more profitable.
With my pension I was given the option by my financial adviser on...
I know that, but NorthStandRaccoon didn't. He thought that people were objecting because they thought she hadn't committed an offence and what she said was just "freedom of speech". Perhaps I should have put my post to NorthStandRaccon as a pm (if you have such a thing) to avoid stirring up...
There is a school of thought that if you post something on TwitterX and change your mind 3 hours later and delete it, it is less of a crime than if you post it again and again and stand by it for ever. (It's well established in libel cases that if you delete a libellous statement and apologise...
If you'd taken the trouble to read what I put, you would have seen that I was very careful not to defend her. The question is not whether she was guilty, but whether the sentence was excessive.
The fishing deal did not need to be agreed. The default position was that the fishing grounds would all be British and that's what Starmer had as a starting point to give away, in exchange for paperwork rules that benefit both us and them, and also a promise that they will think about letting...
The NIC increase is going to have an effect throughout the next year as well. Increasing labour costs by about 2.5% is bound to drive annual inflation rates up for the next 12 months.
Those on her side are saying that 31 months is excessive for an offence that lasted 3 hours and was out of character, when she has a 12 year old daughter and has the mitigating effect that the death of small children upsets her unduly because it reminds her of the death of her own small child...
You're working on the default position that all people are stupid unless they agree with you. Obviously that makes sense to you, but not to me. For the record, I don't think that you disagreeing with me makes you a moron, and even if I did think so I wouldn't be rude enough to tell you so...
Do you genuinely think that Rutter transferring to Brighton would be to the advantage of both Leeds and Brighton. If it was, then it would be an easy deal.
I'm pretty sure that if he had said he was working for ITV or Sky on days when he wasn't working for the BBC, he wouldn't have got away with it. As no doubt we all know, the BBC for years has been trying the tax dodge of counting employees as contractors to save tax and NIC for both themselves...
This sums up part of the stupidity of the EU. (For those on here that can accept the EU has imperfections.)
I agree, the defence parrt of the agreement (although not yet agreed, it's only pro forma) is a Good Thing for both us and the EU. So why did they have to tie it in with fishing rights...