[Kizzy]

'A survey, published this week but conducted just days before the Panama Papers leaks, finds that 77 per cent of the public believe David Cameron has a “moral responsibility” to ensure the UK’s overseas territories are as transparent on tax as possible.

The ComRes poll, commissioned by Christian Aid and Global Witness, also found that 81 per cent agree that all companies, whether registered in the UK or in overseas territories, should be legally required to reveal who owns them.'

Seems the majority of people would like a more honest approach to 'offshore' dealings.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6970486.html

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

'A survey, published this week but conducted just days before the Panama Papers leaks, finds that 77 per cent of the public believe David Cameron has a “moral responsibility” to ensure the UK’s overseas territories are as transparent on tax as possible.

The ComRes poll, commissioned by Christian Aid and Global Witness, also found that 81 per cent agree that all companies, whether registered in the UK or in overseas territories, should be legally required to reveal who owns them.'

Seems the majority of people would like a more honest approach to 'offshore' dealings.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6970486.html

Yes of course they do because if we allow MP's and peers to cover over their off-shore tax dodging's, how can we, the electorate, decide if they are representing us or representing themselves and their friends/families.

like Dave says, "we are all in this together"...well Dave, transparency starts at the top and so you need to be the one turning over the stones.

[DemolitionRed]

The problem is Kirk, at every given opportunity you will try and turn a perfectly reasonable debate into some sort of veiled personal put down. Instead of discussing the issue, they want to discuss you want to discuss, with ridicule and accusational tone, the posters who are trying to concentrate on topic. This always moves us away from the debate and into some sort of psychological war on words with each other.

"These are the same people who for years on here, have called David Cameron and some of his closest cronies, every bad name in the book - from 'Evil', 'Dishonest' and 'Corrupt', to 'Uncaring' and 'Heartless' - UNTIL it comes to Cameron and his closest cronies stance on remaining in the EU, which just happens to coincide with their own viewpoint, and then they READILY accept EVERY one of Cameron's claims about the benefits of EU" [/B]

What you are suggesting here is, those people, the ones you're accusing of being 'turncoats' have made their decisions on staying in the EU because of what Cameron says and if they agree with what Cameron says, they are somehow retracting all the vile things they said about him previously.

Well I've got some news for you cupcake. I certainly didn't decide to vote out because of what Johnson said and I didn't decide to vote out of the EU because of what you said, in fact I never even read what you said, so its highly unlikely that the left leaning in voters are taking a lot of notice of Cameron and have done their own reading and their own research. Voting to remain 'in' Europe doesn't mean they agree with Camerons politics, it just means they agree with him regarding Europe. Since when did politics become all one camp?

[Livia]

How many years have people been joking about their Swiss bank accounts... or their dealings with the Cayman islands? It's like everyone has just woken up and realised there is a problem. Successive governments haven't done anything to end the practise. I'm astounded that everyone is so very shocked. It looks like people have suddenly woken up to it simply because David Cameron's family is involved and it's an excuse to be appalled by him. I've love to have a look at Blairs' accounts... just for my own interest.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Livia

How many years have people been joking about their Swiss bank accounts... or their dealings with the Cayman islands? It's like everyone has just woken up and realised there is a problem. Successive governments haven't done anything to end the practise. I'm astounded that everyone is so very shocked. It looks like people have suddenly woken up to it simply because David Cameron's family is involved and it's an excuse to be appalled by him. I've love to have a look at Blairs' accounts... just for my own interest.

We all knew there was a problem but that problem had never been unearthed like it just has.
I agree, NL were culpable for a lot of tax dodging. This is something that has been going on for a very, very long time.

Shocked? why would we be shocked? Delighted more like

[Livia]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

We all knew there was a problem but that problem had never been unearthed like it just has.
I agree, NL were culpable for a lot of tax dodging. This is something that has been going on for a very, very long time.

Shocked? why would we be shocked? Delighted more like

And that says all that needs to be said about this thread.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

And that says all that needs to be said about this thread.

Why is that all that needs to be said about this thread?
What have you misread into that statement that isn't what DR clearly stated here-
' if we allow MP's and peers to cover over their off-shore tax dodging's, how can we, the electorate, decide if they are representing us or representing themselves and their friends/families.'

[bots]

Originally Posted by Livia

How many years have people been joking about their Swiss bank accounts... or their dealings with the Cayman islands? It's like everyone has just woken up and realised there is a problem. Successive governments haven't done anything to end the practise. I'm astounded that everyone is so very shocked. It looks like people have suddenly woken up to it simply because David Cameron's family is involved and it's an excuse to be appalled by him. I've love to have a look at Blairs' accounts... just for my own interest.

There were countless examples of corruption and nepotism in the Blair years. Who can forget Cherie's investments in property or my personal favourite where she was invited to pick an item from a Knightsbridge fashion store, and helped herself to the shops contents

[Livia]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

There were countless examples of corruption and nepotism in the Blair years. Who can forget Cherie's investments in property or my personal favourite where she was invited to pick an item from a Knightsbridge fashion store, and helped herself to the shops contents

I was more disgusted at the cash she made from the Human Rights Act, oiled through by her old man. Truth is, politicians are human and humans are fundamentally greedy.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

I was more disgusted at the cash she made from the Human Rights Act, oiled through by her old man. Truth is, politicians are human and humans are fundamentally greedy.

Is this you justifying corruption?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Why is that all that needs to be said about this thread?
What have you misread into that statement that isn't what DR clearly stated here-
' if we allow MP's and peers to cover over their off-shore tax dodging's, how can we, the electorate, decide if they are representing us or representing themselves and their friends/families.'

No, it was me replying to DR's comment that you're DELIGHTED that Cameron's father has been implicated. I don't know how you could have misinterpreted that.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Is this you justifying corruption?

No. In no way have I tried to justify anything. I stated a fact. But your misinterpreting skills are really coming on.... well done you.

[Niamh.]

You all should be like the Irish and realise that all Politicians are corrupt

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

You all should be like the Irish and realise that all Politicians are corrupt

Oh don't worry the scales are falling for many thick and fast

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

You all should be like the Irish and realise that all Politicians are corrupt

Exactly I only vote for independents now that I know won't get a seat as I don't like the idea if not voting.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Exactly I only vote for independents now that I know won't get a seat as I don't like the idea if not voting.

Well I would never vote for Fine Gael/Fine Fael anyway, they may as well be the same party

[Cherie]

It all comes down to morals and principals, I suppose some justify it by saying they pay enough tax, people can talk themselves out of paying anything, are cash in hand payments so different

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

You all should be like the Irish and realise that all Politicians are corrupt

It must be the Irish quarter in me then, because I've been saying the same thing for years.

[arista]

On our PM Dave
he has confirmed he is not part of this.

So Put Up or Shut Up

His Dead Dad was , though.

[Kizzy]

oops...
'Swiss police have raided Uefa’s headquarters in Nyon to seize details of a contract signed by the Fifa president, Gianni Infantino, following the Panama Papers leak.

The files, seen by the Guardian, show that Infantino – formerly director of legal services at Uefa – co-signed a television rights contract in 2006 with two businessmen who have since been caught up in football’s corruption scandal.'

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016...anni-infantino

[smudgie]

Well I for one would like a nice easy little tax dodge, any money we can save the taxman taking from hubby's hard earned pensions would suit us very well at the minute.
Hopefully the accountant earns his money shortly. Legally of course.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Well I for one would like a nice easy little tax dodge, any money we can save the taxman taking from hubby's hard earned pensions would suit us very well at the minute.
Hopefully the accountant earns his money shortly. Legally of course.

In all honestly most people would, as long as it's legal, accountants would go out of business if this wasn't the case

[Kizzy]

Oh don't bother I see the supercilious point scoring for what it is, my issue is the 'do as I say not as I do' attitude from the so called elite. Those who have to toe the line are justified in their condemnation for me.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Well I for one would like a nice easy little tax dodge, any money we can save the taxman taking from hubby's hard earned pensions would suit us very well at the minute.
Hopefully the accountant earns his money shortly. Legally of course.

Originally Posted by Cherie

In all honestly most people would, as long as it's legal, accountants would go out of business if this wasn't the case

..to be fair, I think that Livia's comments have been very valid because it was stated specifically that 'delight' was being taken with this because of the involvement of David Cameron's father...I agree with Cherie and Smudgie (so long as it's legal..)...most people if not all who have or have had limited companies, have in some way evaded taxes or their accountants have through 'clever/inventive or whatever book-keeping'...and I would think that the more wealthy a person is, the more able they are to employ an accountant who will know more complex ways, so larger tax evasion sums...and who then would say, no thank you, I'd rather pay full taxes...not many people I would think, also because they go by advice from their accountants, they're the ones who find the loopholes and suggest using them and that won't change while loopholes exist...you yourself DR in the budget thread, said that you owned a limited company and that your accountant was becoming very excited and referencing tax evasion in a way that didn't seem condemning at all of it, so that does seem quite contradictory to the stance taken now, with this....


..this section I have to say is such a mess of personal agendas and personal insults, it starts to become nothing about the topic at all, which is why the amount of posters in it is becoming less and less sadly...one would have thought for people who seem to love these topics, that the smart move would be to stop being so rude and antagonistic/ridiculing etc so that the section doesn't dwindle even further, with very little pleasure from it of hearing different and diverse opinions...

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..to be fair, I think that Livia's comments have been very valid because it was stated specifically that 'delight' was being taken with this because of the involvement of David Cameron's father...I agree with Cherie and Smudgie (so long as it's legal..)...most people if not all who have or have had limited companies, have in some way evaded taxes or their accountants have through 'clever/inventive or whatever book-keeping'...and I would think that the more wealthy a person is, the more able they are to employ an accountant who will know more complex ways, so larger tax evasion sums...and who then would say, no thank you, I'd rather pay full taxes...not many people I would think, also because they go by advice from their accountants, they're the ones who find the loopholes and suggest using them and that won't change while loopholes exist...you yourself DR in the budget thread, said that you owned a limited company and that your accountant was becoming very excited and referencing tax evasion in a way that didn't seem condemning at all of it, so that does seem quite contradictory to the stance taken now, with this....


..this section I have to say is such a mess of personal agendas and personal insults, it starts to become nothing about the topic at all, which is why the amount of posters in it is becoming less and less sadly...one would have thought for people who seem to love these topics, that the smart move would be to stop being so rude and antagonistic/ridiculing etc so that the section doesn't dwindle even further, with very little pleasure from it of hearing different and diverse opinions...

The 'delight' comes not in the fact he is Camerons father, nobody has a personal vendetta against any one person do they? That would be silly, so to make an accusation like that is not helpful to the debate.
DR has clarified their point, as have I therefore any further digging in that vein is purely to derail the conversation further, which if the discussion appears a mess I would say that was the cause.
Having to defend your standpoint so regularly is very wearing, believe me I do not enjoy being antagonised at all.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Oh don't bother I see the supercilious point scoring for what it is, my issue is the 'do as I say not as I do' attitude from the so called elite. Those who have to toe the line are justified in their condemnation for me.

I don't understand the pettiness.

It's a big fraud. This is a part of our society that is corrupt and anyone who thinks its okay is deluded. This is exactly the sort of thing that puts millions of Brits into financial slavery. It sickens me. problem is: why doesn't it sicken everyone? are some people so divorced from reality they can't see the obvious.