Tax cuts to continue under Conservative plans

The Conservative Manifesto has confirmed the 2015 promise of raising the starting threshold for Income Tax to 12500, and the threshold for 40% tax to 50000.

Published and promoted by Fraser Mc Farland on behalf of John Redwood, both at 30 Rose Street Wokingham RG40 1XU

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

66 Comments

  1. fedupsoutherner
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:11 am | Permalink

    All well and good but how much in other taxes will transpire? OAP’s will already have had £200 taken from them in the form of fuel allowance. I’m not getting excited and am in fact more of the opinion there is nobody to vote for as all parties policies are so dire. Brexit might be the only thing that saves Mrs May but even then I am astounded to hear we might continue paying a ‘golf club’ fee to the EU after we have left. WHY? The marbles are definitely loose.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

      Anyone earning over £100K get their personal allowance removed anyway and anyone on over £50K loses their child benefits. The UK is hugely over taxed the government is hugely bloated, absurdly wasteful and delivers very poor public services. On top of this loads of misguided government red tape and is a further burden on the productive.

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/18/nhs-care-among-worst-europe/

      The government needs to stop pissing money down the drain which seems to be the one thing they are really good at. May and Hammond need to get real and stop the endless waste and inconvenience yet they are clearly planning even more tax hikes, more waste, more greencrap and more inconvenience.

      Better than the alternative, but dreadful, misguided, socialists never the less.

      • Hope
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 9:28 am | Permalink

        Probate tax as well as taxed twice in community charge and sale your home for adult social care!

        • Lifelogic
          Posted May 21, 2017 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

          So three inheritance taxes – IHT, probate tax and long term care. If you are over a certain age sell up and spend it all or give it away – this seems to be the message.

        • rose
          Posted May 21, 2017 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

          Increased insurance premium tax too.

  2. alan jutson
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    Good news, not high enough, but the important point is:

    In what year are these targets promised to be met. ?

    • Hope
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

      They are not. They statements of intent. Meaningless empty words like eliminate the deficit by 2015, or 80 percent spending cuts and 20 percent tax rises. May might as well have a statement if intent to make us all millionaires, a bit like her immigration promise when she holds the record for the most amount under any HS!

      We lack a choice. Totally disenfranchised. Still imposed police commissioners, imposed Mayors is the way forward. Curtail free speech, impose snoopers charter so the state can read everything you do in line, equality suppression to get the PC brigade to report anything suspicious, concern reports from children to monitor parents, to impose a gender free, non Christian society, irradiating culture and beliefs by mass immigration in the hope breeding in long term will change the country as we know it. Brought you by the New Labour Tories.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 21, 2017 at 4:58 am | Permalink

      Usually the last budget before the election, usually to be changed shortly after the election. In the case of Osborne’s £1M IHT promise of 2008 we are still waiting now.

  3. Glenn Vaughan
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    John

    The personal tax allowance target of £12,500 to which you refer was promised by 2020. If that remains the target figure in the current manifesto, then presumably it has been delayed until 2022.

    That demonstrates to me a singular lack of ambition by the “tax-cutting” party, whereas a revised personal tax allowance target should be at least £15,000 by 2022.

    reply No, not delayed

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:18 pm | Permalink

      Ratter Osborne promised a £1M IHT threshold in late 2008, when Gordon Brown foolishly bottled his early election plans. In the state the threshold is circa $5 million each.

      The rate remains at £325K even now. You simply cannot trust a word the Tories say – but the alternatives are even worse. Most of the shadow Cabinet can hardly say a coherent sentence or work out how much a police person might cost (to within say four orders of magnitude) and clearly think they have a magic money tree for endless government “investment”.

      • rose
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

        That IHT proposal which I think was first suggested by our very own Mr R was extremely popular – because, something not understood by socialists, people have aspirations for themselves and their descendants. That was why Brown bottled out of the election.

  4. Jerry
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:28 am | Permalink

    Yeah why not, play one off against the other, treat us as fools and take our votes for granted…

  5. Roy Grainger
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    Summary: the Conservatives have promised to respect a promise they have already made. Why should we be impressed by that ? I suppose given Hammond’s shambolic promise-breaking last budget you had to re-iterate.

    The Conservative manifesto has really put you all onto the back foot hasn’t it – were you actually consulted about the contents John, or was it written entirely by unelected SPAD’s with no experience of the real world at all ?

    • Chris
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

      Yes, my question is “Why should conservative voters now apparently have to accept a manifesto that is written by Nick Timothy, Fiona Hill and Ben Gummer in order to have the Conservatives in power?” Who on earth are they, other than individuals with apparently a great influence on the thinking of Theresa May? They have never been put forward for the electorate to see/scrutinise, but rather hidden in the shadows.

      To me this apparent secretiveness in operations, plus the apparently undue influence that the particular individuals mentioned above wield, are of considerable concern. I have read that Nick Timothy is a Gladstonian admirer and that he sees May’s time in office and the manifesto as his chance to put forward his ideas/policies. If this is true, then to me that indicates a possible serious weakness in Theresa May herself, that she seems to be open to manipulation. Also I am not convinced yet that she has a powerful intellect, nor the wish to espouse true Conservatism. Only time will tell.

      • pleb
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 6:54 am | Permalink

        Chris
        Agree totally.

  6. ian wragg
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    We are taxing at levels not seen since the end of WW2. Saying you are a low tax party is laughable.
    Borrowing to spray away on aid and increasing the debt to £2 trillion by 2025 only too be delayed again.
    This is a sham labour government and I just hope we get a clean Brexit or it’s the end.
    10 on Captcha today

  7. Denis Cooper
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:13 am | Permalink

    Unless the tax cuts increase economic growth they must act to postpone the day when the government will balance its books and can start to pay down its debt, so that policy will attract criticism of the broken promises on the budget deficit. That is, unless the government imposes even more austerity by further cuts in its spending, which will attract criticism for the vicious Tory attack on the poor. We have politicians and media journalists who are almost childish in their refusal to face up to economic reality; they expect the government to work miracles by cutting, or at least not increasing, taxes, while at the same time increasing public spending but without running up more debt.

    • Hope
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

      Dennis, unusually inaccurate. Stealth taxes far outweigh increase in e personal allowance. I rather see tax from income and scrap all the stealth taxes, we would then see the truth. Sad to see JR trying to con us when we consider his blogs back in 2010 regarding spending cuts and tax rises.

      Hundreds of tax rises and the broken promise of capping community charge.

    • getahead
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

      Denis, I’m sure there are areas where government expenditure that can be cut without risking the criticism of austerity. They should start at home with the bloated Westminster and all its special advisory committees.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 8:17 am | Permalink

        I don’t think there are many areas of expenditure where everybody will agree that it could be cut without any harm. There will always be some group or other who will be unfairly hit by one or other of the potential consequences of any particular reduction in state spending, and we have a lot of think-thanks and pressure groups and charities whose main role appears to be to search out any possible adverse consequences, however minor, exaggerate them and then feed them out to the mass media for distribution to the population.

  8. JJE
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:19 am | Permalink

    What a truly awful manifesto Mrs. May has produced. Meddling and interfering in every aspect of life.
    Obviously taxes will rise overall even if you can find a couple at the bottom of the barrel that will reduce.
    Any chance that the Conservative Party will produce a manifesto?

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

      Indeed.

      I understand that there was a lot of input from Ben Gummer (son of the strongly pro EU, Lord Debden (who was instrumental in the passing of the totally insane and unscientific Climate Change Act of 2008 along with Miliband).

      Ben (Double first, History @ Porterhouse) does seem to be rather more sound than his dad, but then who would not be. He even describes himself as a “libertarian” – no sign of that in this totally misguided/socialists/interventionist/high tax/state knows best manifesto.

  9. APL
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:22 am | Permalink

    “Tax cuts to continue under Conservative plans”

    I suppose that’s a nice little crumb.

    Now I support the whole tax cutting platform. But if your government is borrowing £x billion, and proposing to reduce government income from taxation, and at the same time claiming to reduce borrowing.

    How does that work?

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

      By ratting on the tax cutting pledges – as Osborne blatantly did and as Hammond did and tried to but had to back off.

      • APL
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 9:11 am | Permalink

        Lifelogic: “By ratting on the tax cutting pledges ”

        That’s fair comment.

        But here is the problem.

        The government is borrowing £x billion.
        The government is printing £y billion. ( inflating the economy – which is the same as deflating the currency )

        Tax revenue only brings in so much.

        And their spending continues to increase. ( Even though Redwood pointed out in a previous article, the rate of increase is slowing. )

        The result is – there is no scope for tax cuts.

        The increase in the personal allowance is necessary simply to keep up with the rate of deflation in the value of the currency.

        I imagine their other measures, are stealth type taxes – intended to raise extra revenue, without anyone actually noticing that much.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted May 21, 2017 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

          Indeed they need to stop pissing money down the drain, but that is thei their one talent it seems.

          • APL
            Posted May 22, 2017 at 10:05 am | Permalink

            Lifelogic: “Indeed they need to stop pissing money down the drain ”

            One simply must have a 4/5th pension payable after fifteen years at the public expense. It’s so uncivilised after all the ‘public service’ and sacrifice ( viz padded expense accounts – that are rarely accounted for ) the public servants have made.

            We are all, in this together. As a person who had spent all his working life in the public sector once said.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted May 21, 2017 at 8:23 am | Permalink

      Well, cutting tax rates can work if it leads to an increase in actual tax revenues, as it can do, and cutting the overall tax burden can work if it helps to improve productivity and so accelerate economic growth leading to increased revenues.

  10. oldtimer
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    I also note the aim to simplify taxes; but nothing on how this will be achieved.

  11. Chris S
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:41 am | Permalink

    When will this government realise that taking more people out of paying income tax is a huge mistake and an own-goal for the party ?

    Those people who pay no income tax will be perfectly happy to support Labour and Corbyn’s ludicrous largess because they will not be paying for it !

    Rather that increase the personal allowance, May should reintroduce the 10p tax rate for incomes between £12,000-£12,500. I would prefer it to apply to income over £10,000 but that would just be a gift for McDonnell. Instead, I would leave the bottom limit at £12,000 indefinitely so that it gradually increases the percentage of people paying some income tax.

  12. NHSGP
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:56 am | Permalink

    Wanna bet?

    Here’s an offer. Any tax rises that I suffer under the Tories, you pay out of your own pocket.

    How can you refuse?

  13. John Probert
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 10:01 am | Permalink

    Very Good

  14. a-tracy
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    So just to be clear will it be:
    Personal allowance £12,500 – 0 tax
    Basic tax from 12,500 – 50,000 – 20%
    Higher Rate from 50,000 – 150,000 – 40%
    Upper Rate – from £150,000 45%

    Will the NI match or be set on different boundaries?

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 3:35 pm | Permalink

      Do not forget that those earning between £100,000 and £125,000 will pay a marginal rate of tax of 60% (62% if NI is included) as the personal allowance is removed.

      Also do not forget that anyone with children earning over £50,000 pays a marginal rate of tax of 50% if they have one child, 58% with 2 children, 65% with three children, 72% with four children, 80% with five children and 86% with five children (plus 2% NI) as the previously universal child benefit is removed at 1% for each £100 earned over £50K. This is not even worked out on a household basis, it is an a single earner basis so two bus drivers (paying basic rate tax with two personal allowances and two childcare tax giveaways) in a family get to keep their universal child benefit while a middle manager with a stay at home wife paying 40% tax already gets clobbered.

      But the above is OK as any single person earning over £50K or £100K has the broadest shoulders and should carry the load shouldn’t they?

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 9:58 am | Permalink

        Correction -86% with six children

        Child benefit should be universal for two children then none for anyone.

        The child(ren) should also be resident in this country

  15. a-tracy
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    I’m surprised you’ve not mentioned the manufacturing successes with a boost in order book values. Even Jerry could find some happiness in that (or maybe not).

  16. Denis Cooper
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 10:34 am | Permalink

    Off-topic, JR, would it be possible for you to get this concern about the Tory policy on fisheries laid to rest, rather than allowing accusations of betrayal to fly around?

    http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2017/05/manifesto-small-print-4-taking-back-control-of-our-fishing.html

    “I don’t know who wrote this section of the manifesto, but they have ruined it with 4 words:- historically exercised – sovereign control.

    Legally, ever since the Fishery 1976 Limits Act, commencing 1st. January 1977, the EEZ of 200 nautical mile/median line zone we have had sovereign control albeit our Parliament handed it to the EU.

    Not many understand the EEZ was created by a British act of parliament after we joined the ECC

    Technically, historically, we have only had control of our territorial sea of out to 12 nautical miles, even though by a derogation from our Accession Treaty.

    These are complex words not used lightly, so why have they have they been used throwing serious doubt in the policy?”

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

      Why do you think. Because Mrs May sees fishing rights as something she can concede in the EU negotiations. I assume John hasn’t answered the questions on this because he (and other backbenchers) have been kept in the dark over this section.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 8:30 am | Permalink

        That is the suspicion, that the government sees fishing as something that can be used as a bargaining chip. But since then George Eustice has said that this is not the intention:

        http://brexitcentral.com/fisheries-minister-slaps-peddling-soft-brexit-fishing-fears/

        “Fisheries Minister slaps down those peddling ‘soft Brexit’ fishing fears”

        “But George Eustice hit back last night to set the record straight, telling BrexitCentral:

        “Fishing for Leave are shadowboxing and they are wrong. When we leave the EU we automatically regain control of the management of our Exclusive Economic Zone under international law.

        “This means we will have full control over access arrangements and fisheries management out to 200 nautical miles or the median line.

        “The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) becomes the new legal base line and we will become an independent coastal State.”

        I hope that this proves to be the case and he doesn’t get overruled.

      • APL
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 9:15 am | Permalink

        Roy Grainger: ” I assume John hasn’t answered the questions on this because he (and other backbenchers) have been kept in the dark over this section.”

        A member of the Privy council isn’t kept in the dark about anything.

  17. Hope
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    Your headline is an untruthful betrayal of what is going on. Your party is responsible for over 300 tax rises in addition to stealth tax though community charge. The claim about care homes if alse and is a clear betrayal of conservative voters. Your further claim of income tax is another deceit because it was a Lib dem idea stolen by Cameron after it appeared to be a vote winner. To make up for this a vast array of taxes were created like the insurance premium tax to hide how your party is fleecing Middle England. You should know better than to make specious claims and tell part of a story. The highest amount of tax to GDP since 1969 when Wilson was in government. May currently replacing EU nanny state with Her left wing liberal nanny state. We are paying for third world and Eastern European social care, education, health care and tax credits. If that was not enough your government borrows £14 billion to throw away and waste on overseas aid ad pays interest on that money! Meanwhile the deficit kicked down the road to alleged 2025! Ten years after Osborne promised to clear it. This is our taxes! Why is it not included in your specious blog!

    Reply Conservatives are the tax cutters. Lib Dems are proposing income tax rises. deficit is well down

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 3:13 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply

      If this Conservative government truly cuts taxes why has tax freedom day moved from 13 May in 2010 to 3 June (and rising) in 2016?

      Surely with more people contributing we should each pay less, unless the new comers are not actually contributing.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

        Low tax at heart, high tax in their actions.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:29 pm | Permalink

      “Conservatives are the tax cutters”!

      Sure JR. Have you looked at the tax rates and endless back door tax increases recently. They have abolish the personal allowance for many, attacked pension pots, robbed landlords and tenants, put stamp duty and IPT up, extended CGT and abolish child benefit for many more, have stamp duty at insane rates, pushed up energy costs, the IHT threshold had declined in real terms, next the winter fuel allowances, state pension, long term care changes ….. these are all tax increases in effect!

      Next thing you will be telling me Cameron really was a low tax Conservative at heart.

      You can only cut taxes if you stop spending and pissing it down the drain. When the Tories cancel things like the green crap grants, HS2, Hinkley C and the endless further increases in red tape then perhaps ……

    • Hope
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

      False claim not based on fact. Tell us how many tax rises your party imposed on us since 2010? It was the Lib dems against Tory wishes to introduce increasing the personal al allowance. Come on JR, be truthful and admit it.

      reply No, it was a joint policy put through by a Conservative Chancellor

      • graham1946
        Posted May 21, 2017 at 9:37 am | Permalink

        reply to reply

        Can you then confirm it was in your 2010 manifesto?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted May 21, 2017 at 8:35 am | Permalink

      It’s not surprising the deficit has been kicked down the road to 2025 when every tax rise, however small, is treated as a gross betrayal and every spending cut, however small, is condemned as an outrage and a vicious attack on group X or Y or Z.

  18. adams
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    How does it feel being in T May’s Party John ? The Conservative name is very much on the back burner . So is democracy when she gets a “landslide” on 30% of the electorate .
    http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/blog/conservatives-just-pledged-take-our-democracy-back-decades

  19. Bob
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    Don’t you think that the minimum wage based on a 40 hour week should be the logical level at which to set the zero rate tax allowance ?

    Couldn’t you just pledge to ditch the 0.7% ring fence for the foreign aid budget, have a real cutback of overpaid quangocrats and cut tuition fees ?

    That would really upset the Lib Dems, but then of course the Tories are really Lib Dems at heart themselves, aren’t they?

    (Mr Redwood and his minority of like minded Tories excepted from the foregoing).

  20. Richard1
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

    Jolly good. How about getting rid of the 45p and 50p rates, both of which are uncompetitive, cutting the 40p rate to 35p, & cutting the non dom charge? Obviously leftists would shriek about ‘tax cuts for millionaires’ but the reality is such cuts would raise receipts due to the Laffer Curve effect and attract or retain all those wealthy foreigners who we hear think of leaving due to Brexit. The Conservative Govt will need to be relentlessly competitive – or we may as well stay in the EU or have ‘soft brexit’ whatever that is.

  21. Mark Watson
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

    Bizarrely those welcome tax cuts are getting zero publicity!

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

      Because they are mitigated by commensurate increases in NI or no increase in NI thresholds.

  22. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    In April 2017 the higher rate threshold was raised from £32,000 to £33,500 (plus personal allowance of £11,500 = £45,000) which reduces the higher rate taxpayer’s bill by £300 per annum.

    In April 2017 the NI Upper Earnings limit over which taxpayers pay 2% not 12% was raised from £43,000 per year to £45,000 which increases the higher rate taxpayer’s bill by £200 per annum.

    This government is using NI to pay for the increase in higher rate threshold, it sill desires to tax earners to the hilt. We are merely here to pay for government largesse and waste

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tax-and-tax-credit-rates-and-thresholds-for-2017-18/tax-and-tax-credit-rates-and-thresholds-for-2017-18

  23. English Pensioner
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

    Nothing about Estate Duties or the devious “death tax” imposed by higher fees for probate.

  24. English Pensioner
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

    I find it hard to trust any politician. After Cameron’s “Cast Iron Promises” and deviousness over the referendum (which he still lost) I won’t believe anything that Mrs May says until she’s proved that she will carry out the party’s promises and the will of the electorate in respect of Brexit. Her long delay before the formal letter was sent to the EU and some of the “messages” coming from government leave me in doubt as to whether she will do what she says.
    Time will tell, but in the meanwhile I will continue to support UKIP.

  25. ooohhhwer chips agin
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

    The British Government is like a ageing housewife in what has been a loveless marriage for nigh on three centuries.The kids left home long ago, the garden is mature,providing vegetables and fruit in abundance and the rest are all established perennials needing only a clip here and there. But despite a regular and increasing income, she always demands more and more for housekeeping without the slightest improvement on the Sunday roast of back- bacon chips and egg with apples as a dessert from your own appletree. You sleep separately because she says she likes to stretch her legs.
    I don’t know why we vote for that.

  26. getahead
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

    Raising tax on dividends to 7.5% after the first £2,000 is not much of a cut John.
    Pensioners need all their dividends.

  27. Where's the Pea?
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

    ..and with farming out tax increases to Councils via increased Council Tax and with those Mayors thrust upon us against our will in Northern Powerhouses who will increase tax..it being THEIR fault and not that of Government. We’ve seen this movie before in various guises.A cheap one pea and three shell back street conjuring trick .

  28. graham1946
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

    Bet you didn’t expect such an avalanche of criticism from basically Tory supporters here.

    Same today on ‘Any Answers’ and people I talk to are not going to vote for a cut in pensions triple lock or the £200/£300 fuel assistance. On Any Questions, your man could not deny that the fuel allowance will be cut from those above Pension Credit level – can you? He just more or less said we’ll be told after we vote – not good enough.

    The new Care costs system is cynical. You allow people with Cancer but not Dementia, presumably because Cancer patients either get cured or die quite quickly, whereas Dementia can last decades.

    Maybe this election result won’t be such a walk in the park after all – Labour are actually gaining ground, no doubt not enough, but it needs considering. If the old turn against you and the young who do not like Brexit vote you could be in trouble.

  29. Newmania
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

    Taxes must go up spending must be cut , interest rates will go up and all of this is going to worse than it needed to be because of Brexit. The threat of Brexit , never mind the reality caused a demand vacuum which was filled by turning monetary and fiscal instruments to 11 all of which has a cost as does the drop in the pound
    If you would like to know how John`s plans to square that with the heaven on earth Brexit was supposed to bring have a look at the way educational spending has been lied about
    It is falling in real terms per pupil; and my god what a lot of work you have to do to get at that fact even when it is entirely obvious from the lack of money turning up
    So in addition to defrauding our children Brexit is actually attacking them in their schools
    Great job

    Reply How to pay for social care gas nothing to do with Brexit. Since the vote the economy has grown well.

    • Anonymous
      Posted May 21, 2017 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

      Sorry, Newmania.

      The cliff edge took place between my dad’s generation and my kids.

      From early retirement/paid up 5bed after a career with few qualifications to doctor with no home of their own.

      All whilst in the EU and BEFORE Brexit !

  30. Amanda
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:00 pm | Permalink

    I will be voting for my ex Conservative MP, because he is a good MP and has supported leaving the EU for 10 years. I will absolutly NOT, NOT, NOT be voting for this manifesto which I look on with horror, especially the ideological bits. I will be lobbying my next MP for changes to many of the proposed policies – the UK needs to build its individuality, endeavour and skills. Mrs May sees to think individuality is selfish?

    • BCL
      Posted May 21, 2017 at 7:54 am | Permalink

      I will be voting Tory but reluctantly. I’d like to vote conservative because the conservatives were truly conservative. The manifesto is far too far to the left for me but it’s better than the alternatives. I just hope there’s no back sliding on Brexit but I’m not at all confident. As to “tax cutting”, ask all those running businesses through their own companies about the new dividend tax that came in in 2016-17!

  31. Mark B
    Posted May 21, 2017 at 6:14 am | Permalink

    Good morning

    Paid for with borrowed money, like the Overseas Budget.

  32. John H
    Posted May 21, 2017 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    JR, of course you have to toe the party line in a run up to a election, but I suspect you are as disappointed as I and many others are with this manifesto. This is not at all the right blueprint for a strong post Brexit economy, that would require the sort of bold and radical policies you were esposing pre referendum. We have a historic opportunity to deliver that, but it looks like it will be squandered by the latest incarnation of the Blair mantle to sense that by outflanking the opposition a Parliamentary majority can be sustained. Good short term politics perhaps, but longer term fundamentally damaging and only increases the sense of desperation, alienation and cynicism with politics that is being seen in thewestern world. Not encouraging.

One Trackback

  • By best site on May 27, 2017 at 1:05 pm

    best site

    Tax cuts to continue under Conservative plans

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page