Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
DJ Barry Hammond

Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

By DJ Barry Hammond, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

davieG

davieG

Posted
Posted

NHS trusts are calling for equal treatment on business rates after research revealed private hospitals get discounts worth £52m over five years.

A study suggests more than one in four private hospitals are charities, giving them an 80% rebate in business rates.

But NHS trusts all have to pay in full, and will face a £300m increase in rates over the next five years.

University Hospitals Birmingham Trust, the worst hit, is appealing against a rate rise of more than £2m this year.

A spokesman for the trust, which operates the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, said: "The trust believes there is an anomaly in how NHS trusts are treated for business rates when compared to other organisations such as universities, charitable care facilities and private hospitals.

"NHS Trusts receive no additional funding to offset business rates costs.

"We are therefore, alongside other NHS trusts, part of a long-running challenge to seek a similar level of charitable relief on business rates, similar to non-profit organisations."

'Iniquitous'

Research using Freedom of Information Act requests by CVS, a property valuation company, suggests that about 27% of private hospitals receive business rates relief.

Local authorities reported that 123 out of 457 private hospitals were charities, allowing them the 80% rates reduction. No information was provided for a further 169 private hospitals in England and Wales.

CVS calculates that the 626 private hospitals would have been expected to pay a total of £241.4m between them. But accounting for the institutions that are known to receive the discount for charities, the company expects them to save £51.9m.

Nuffield Health, whose income makes it Britain's third largest charity, is expected to pay just £3.2m over the next five years, saving £12.7m because of its charitable status, according to the CVS analysis.

Mark Rigby, chief executive of CVS, said: "It is iniquitous that NHS hospitals pay normal business rates but 26.9% of private hospitals, using charitable status, receive an 80% discount."

While the government has announced plans to reform business rates, Mr Rigby said "this must include all reliefs and the current inequalities that exist within the system".

Dozens of NHS hospitals wrote to local authorities last year to try to claim the reduced business rates, but the Local Government Association rejected the claim, as they are not charities in law.

The revaluation of business rates, which came into effect in April, has increased NHS hospitals' tax bill by 19% to £366m a year.

davieG

davieG

Posted
Posted

You get who you vote for but are you voting for the people you want? Plenty aren't apparently.

 

Tactical voting reached a new peak at June's general election as voters tried to get round a failed system, according to electoral reform campaigners.

The Electoral Reform Society branded the poll a "hold your nose election," claiming 6.5 million voted tactically rather than for what they believed in.

The Conservatives would have won a majority if just 0.0016% of voters had chosen differently, it found.

The ERS campaigns for the introduction of proportional representation.

Green backlash against 'progressive alliance'

Scots votes 'wasted' in general election

Elections for the Westminster Parliament use the "first-past-the-post" system - under which the party that gains the most MPs, rather than the most votes overall, wins.

June's general election, in which Conservative leader Theresa May lost her Commons majority, saw an apparent return to two-party politics as more than 80% of voters cast a ballot for either the Conservatives or Labour.

But a BMG survey of just over 2,000 voters, shortly before polling day, suggested "voters did not flock back to the two largest parties with enthusiasm," according to an ERS analysis.

Some 20% of those surveyed said they they would be choosing the candidate that was most likely to beat the one they disliked, it suggested.

"This is over double the proportion who said they would do so in 2015," said the ERS report.

"Projecting this onto actual turnout would equate to nearly 6,500,000 people voting tactically," it explained.

'Denied choice'

The ERS claims the "first-past-the post" system exaggerated political divisions because of the huge discrepancy in the number of votes cast in an area for a party and the number of seats it won.

For instance, Labour won 29% of votes cast in the South East of England but got just 10% of seats, while Conservatives won 34% of the North East but returned just 9% of seats, according to the research.

"For the third time in a row, Westminster's voting system has failed to do what it says on the tin - produce a strong and stable government," said the ERS chief executive, Darren Hughes.

"June's election has shown first-past-the-post is unable to cope with people's changing voting habits - forcing citizens and parties to try and game the system.

"This surge in tactical voting - double the rate of 2015 - meant voters shifted their party allegiances at unprecedented rates, with the second highest level of voter volatility since the inter-war years," Mr Hughes added.

'Going to waste'

Mr Hughes said a system "designed for two parties" was not up to the job of accommodating the "complex electoral swings" seen in modern elections.

"The vast majority of votes are going to waste, with millions still stuck in the electoral black hole of winner-takes-all."

The ERS repeated its call for a new system to be introduced to stop votes being wasted or voters being forced into tactical decisions.

A spokeswoman for the Cabinet Office, which sets electoral rules, said: "First past the post is a voting system that offers a robust method of electing MPs.

"A referendum on changing the voting system for general elections was held in 2011 and the public voted overwhelmingly in favour of keeping the first past the post system," she added.

If the referendum had gone the other way, and the Alternative Vote method had been introduced, Labour would have been chief beneficiaries in 2017, gaining 24 seats, while in 2015 the Conservatives would have doubled their majority from 12 to 24, according to research by YouGov, which asked more than 13,000 people how they would have voted under different electoral systems.

fuchsntf

fuchsntf

Posted
Posted
On Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 10:40, Buce said:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40972776

Another expert....  Whether for remain or brexit, its these experts that Will  soon be forgotten, and Old excuses With

New twists  will be dished out, while the electorate will be left with pub discussions, all complaining and profaining

Over Experts promises and statements...

Jon the Hat

Jon the Hat

Posted
Posted

Im

8 hours ago, davieG said:

NHS trusts are calling for equal treatment on business rates after research revealed private hospitals get discounts worth £52m over five years.

A study suggests more than one in four private hospitals are charities, giving them an 80% rebate in business rates.

But NHS trusts all have to pay in full, and will face a £300m increase in rates over the next five years.

University Hospitals Birmingham Trust, the worst hit, is appealing against a rate rise of more than £2m this year.

A spokesman for the trust, which operates the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, said: "The trust believes there is an anomaly in how NHS trusts are treated for business rates when compared to other organisations such as universities, charitable care facilities and private hospitals.

"NHS Trusts receive no additional funding to offset business rates costs.

"We are therefore, alongside other NHS trusts, part of a long-running challenge to seek a similar level of charitable relief on business rates, similar to non-profit organisations."

'Iniquitous'

Research using Freedom of Information Act requests by CVS, a property valuation company, suggests that about 27% of private hospitals receive business rates relief.

Local authorities reported that 123 out of 457 private hospitals were charities, allowing them the 80% rates reduction. No information was provided for a further 169 private hospitals in England and Wales.

CVS calculates that the 626 private hospitals would have been expected to pay a total of £241.4m between them. But accounting for the institutions that are known to receive the discount for charities, the company expects them to save £51.9m.

Nuffield Health, whose income makes it Britain's third largest charity, is expected to pay just £3.2m over the next five years, saving £12.7m because of its charitable status, according to the CVS analysis.

Mark Rigby, chief executive of CVS, said: "It is iniquitous that NHS hospitals pay normal business rates but 26.9% of private hospitals, using charitable status, receive an 80% discount."

While the government has announced plans to reform business rates, Mr Rigby said "this must include all reliefs and the current inequalities that exist within the system".

Dozens of NHS hospitals wrote to local authorities last year to try to claim the reduced business rates, but the Local Government Association rejected the claim, as they are not charities in law.

The revaluation of business rates, which came into effect in April, has increased NHS hospitals' tax bill by 19% to £366m a year.

So these government nhs hospital trusts are spending their time lobbying to avoid paying rates to another part of our government.  And people say the NHS isn't inefficient.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ok, I'll say it first. Some positive economic data today.  It's now time ordinary people started to see their household economics improve as there are equally still a range of disastrous economic factors ongoing - household debt, falling wages etc. As the right wingers always say when i have raised poor quarterly stats previously, this is still only a short period but if i raise bad performance i guess i have to raise today's figures. Unfortunate for me as i can see the chancellor using this short term (so far) improvement to loosen the purse strings in the next budget whilst trying to save face over the horrific impact of years of austerity. 

 

UK public finances see first July surplus since 2002 – business live

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2017/aug/22/uk-public-finances-expected-to-improve-in-july-business-live?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

 

Edited by Guest
Guest Kopfkino

Guest Kopfkino

Posted
Posted

Its a much of a muchness, probs still have higger borrowing this year and a 23% rise in the interest bill.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, MattP said:

My word, it really can't come soon enough that this publication finally goes bust.

 

Shall we just tear down every statue we have, no individual has ever been perfect.

I don't even read shit like that. Yesterday they had an article about how travellers are unfairly maligned. As I've said before, it obviously leans to the left but does do some really good work at times with good articles but I'd  agree is spoilt by too much crap about whether gender is a social construct etc.

Edited by Guest
Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

She claims it was a mistake.

 

I don't do twitter, so I have no opinion on whether or not that is likely.

It's as likely as you mistakenly liking and posting a lol to Thracians gay/paedo post.

  • Thanks 2
Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, The Floyd said:

Apologies for the source but my contempt for her grows ever-stronger.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4813870/amp/MP-shares-Twitter-post-telling-abuse-victims-shut-up.html

Another innocent mistake apparantly, just like time she "accidently" shared the Facebook post about about deporting all Jews to America.

 

She's clearly not fit to be an MP. Either she's a nasty little bigot or she's too incompetent. 

Jimothy

Jimothy

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

She claims it was a mistake.

 

I don't do twitter, so I have no opinion on whether or not that is likely.

Joleon Lescott managed to tweet a picture of a sports car from his pocket, whilst driving, so you never know lol 

Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted

The Times investigation into the migrant crisis is well worth a read today, to say it doesn't look good for Europe is an understatement - one thing though - we can never say we weren't warned. 

 

The Libyan government can't handle it, the Italians have accused the EU of abandoning them.

 

They estimate 90,000 have crossed already this year, another 700,000 are waiting to come and we haven't done a single background check on any.

IMG_20170823_000723.jpg

Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, MattP said:

The Times investigation into the migrant crisis is well worth a read today, to say it doesn't look good for Europe is an understatement - one thing though - we can never say we weren't warned. 

 

The Libyan government can't handle it, the Italians have accused the EU of abandoning them.

 

They estimate 90,000 have crossed already this year, another 700,000 are waiting to come and we haven't done a single background check on any.

IMG_20170823_000723.jpg

I've got a brush, if you lift the carpet.

  • Like 1
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

 

Well she's actually doing her job. She's not part of the cabinet and is therefore doing what a local MP should do and that is protecting the interests of her constituents. 

Whist true, unless she's voted against austerity and changes to the nhs my guess is thst you can also see my point. Besides which those nhs changes took away the health secretary's ability to influence commissioning (i would suggest so thr could try to use this as a political shield) so she presumably also wants him to act outside of his powers.

Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Whist true, unless she's voted against austerity and changes to the nhs my guess is thst you can also see my point. Besides which those nhs changes took away the health secretary's ability to influence commissioning (i would suggest so thr could try to use this as a political shield) so she presumably also wants him to act outside of his powers.

Not really, you can be pro cuts and pro austerity but disagree with where and what is cut and affected.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Not really, you can be pro cuts and pro austerity but disagree with where and what is cut and affected.

Nimby

I'm sure complaints of this type made to the health secretary will be taken equally seriously no matter whether it is within a tory seat or a labour seat.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...