Whilst Labour MPs were undermining their government over its clumsy welfare cuts, another UK refinery went bankrupt.

A hand wringing Labour Minister blamed the management and promised to get involved in either finding a new owner who thinks they could turn a profit, or looking at some other use for the site. This latter offer implies acceptance that 440 good industrial jobs will go as the refinery closes. The Minister claimed credit for a government meeting with the industry prior to this collapse. Clearly the likely meeting  messages from the industry about high energy costs were ignored by a government determined to deindustrialise us to hit unrealistic carbon targets.

The predictable collapse of refineries, ceramics, vehicle manufacture, petrochemicals and other energy dependent industries is proceeding apace. The government sheds crocodike tears and blames others. The prime cause is sky high energy prices. The main cause of them is the high taxes and subsidies needed to supercharge decarbonisation. It makes us hopelessly uncompetitive. It also adds to world CO 2 in a cruel irony of total policy failure.

 

Some of you have written in querying the Motability scheme. This allows people on disability benefit to acquire a new car on  a lease from the Motability  charity. For people on the highest level of PIP mobility payment there are 48 cars to choose from where the Pip payments will cover all the lease costs. The charity is free of VAT on buying the new cars and those on the higher payments can qualify for Vehicle Excise exemption.

The original idea was for government to allow tax breaks to cover costs where a physically disabled person needed expensive modifications  to a standard car for a wheel chair and or different controls. The Motability  charity also now qualifies for the tax exemptions to lease a standard  car to a benefit  recipient.

Motability  now accounts for 20% of all new  car purchases in the UK. People can lease dearer cars on the scheme by putting in additional money. The car has to be returned if the individual loses benefit entitlement.

What changes are critics wanting to see? Should the scheme be limited to vehicles needing modification? Should all Motability cars be bought VAT free? Should they be for the disabled person to drive and not for others in the family?

Unemployment up

Inflation up

Dear energy got even dearer

New UK oil and gas stopped for the year

Ban on new petrol cars brought forward to close UK factories sooner

National Insurance hiked for self employed and employees, hitting jobs

More tax on the rich led  to many more leaving the country with loss of tax revenues

Disabled threatened with benefit loss, then a partial U turn

Refusal to enquire into rape gangs delays getting to truth

Gave away Chagos needlessly

Committed to paying Mauritius for 100 years

Gave in to EU demands with no legal agreement to any improvements for UK

No growth in their first six months thanks to run up to budget and budget tax rises. Further fall last month after some Q1 growth

Claimed they inherited  too much spending and borrowing, only to make very large increases  in both

 

 

 

 

Of course most of the tax revenue needed has to be paid by the rich and the better off. The art of  taxation is to set rates that maximise revenue without killing enterprise and forcing out the wealthy.

You do not make the poor rich by making the rich poor. If you try to tax the rich too much you drive them abroad. They do not  have to stay to pay. They do not have to pay  to play here when there are plenty of lower taxed places to go. They also have the option of paying more to hire better defences against a predatory state.

The current Chancellor inherited taxes that were already high as a result of the over spending and fall in tax revenues brought on by the covid lockdowns. She was warned upping the rates would be damaging. She ignored the advice and now  watches  in horror as the billionaires and the millionaires flee the country in increasing numbers.

The Office of Budget Responsibility is poor at forecasting revenues. It often underestimates the negative effects of high rates on revenues and exaggerates the revenue likely to accrue from higher rates. Even the OBR will have to tell the Chancellor before her next budget the bad news that higher wealth taxes have driven away too many better off people, and higher National Insurance has destroyed jobs and business profits. As a result higher NI has reduced income and business tax revenue.

If the Chancellor wants to raise more revenue she needs  to do a  U turn on her tax rises last time. She needs to ask herself why Ireland has been raising four times as much business tax per head as the UK with a much lower rate.

Yesterday I proposed a big saving on prisons by deporting many more foreign criminals. Today I propose welfare reforms.

The priority task should be to greatly reduce the flow people onto benefits.

Illegal migrants should never qualify for regular   benefits. If they have to stay for a bit before leaving the state needs to find a cost effective way without allowing them to establish benefit entitlements.

People seeking entry on work visas should not qualify for benefits. They should be self sufficient on the pay they are receiving and should return home when the contract ends. We need to prevent  low pay migrant jobs  which get in the way of better pay for others.

The government needs to review eligibility to come in as a dependent to make sure they do not go straight onto  benefits.

The government needs to improve support for those seeking work. It needs to cut taxes to make it more  worthwhile to work. It needs  to ensure those on benefits who can work are actively seeking work and not turning down jobs they are offered.

It should not allow a sicknote for life to be granted to younger people with mental health problems, unless their condition is acute and likely to be incurable..

 

 

 

 

There are over 10,000 foreign prisoners in UK jails. In a recent poll more that 80% of those polled wanted serious offenders deported, including 80% of Lib Dem and Labour. voters with a higher percentage of Conservative and reform.

It us expensive to keep prisoners in jails. It is very dear to build extra orisons to keep up with surging demand. Successive government have been returning modest numbers and this government is now talking if sending some out of the country earlier in their sentence.

Why not take tge public advice and send more out of the country more quickly after conviction. Why do  taxpayers have to pay  more than £50,000 a year per prisoner, or over £500m a year to keep these people? Building new  places for them is £600,000 per place or £6 bn to provide for 10,000.

The Foreign secretary tells us China is a threat. He tells us the government is increasing its spending on Intelligence by £600 m. Like the US the UK seeks to keep China out of crucial defence and digital systems.

Meanwhile the PM will not confirm he sees China as a threat. With the Chancellor he wants friendly enough relations to promote more trade and investment.

China is running rings round US, EU and UK in producing much cheaper battery cars, based on a big home market assisted by subsidies and other encouragements. The US has placed a very high tariff on them to keep them out, followed by high tariffs from the EU. The UK has imposed no new high tariff, inviting in many more Chinese vehicles. The UK is also very reliant on imported solar panels and wind turbines for its big drive to net zero.

Has the UK become too dependent on China? Is China a threat? Should trade and investment with China be encouraged?

The government faces 123 of its own MPs refusing to support important parts of its welfare reform. They seem to be making some important points. It was a pity yesterday that the BBC Today programme hectored and overrode the Chair of the DWP Committee who wanted to set out problems with the welfare reforms . The BBC agenda was to paint her and the opponents as destructive rebels not interested in getting welfare bills down.

As she said, many of the 123  and  Conservatives and Reform MPs do think there needs to be welfare reform. They do think too many people are not in work, and see helping more people into work as a win win. The individuals will be better off and there will be substantial welfare savings.

The issues which need exposing are

1. Are too many people granted a sicknote for life who will be able to return to work?

2. Is it sufficiently worthwhile to take a job given the way benefits are removed and the tax/ benefit system hits people on lower incomes?

3 Can’t some more people with mental health issues receive help whilst having a job? Isn’t  work itself with the purpose and company it brings sometimes a good part of therapy?

4. If the UK cut migration levels more wouldn’t that make it easier for local unemployed to find a job?

5. Shouldn’t vocational education and training be strengthened to work with young people who will otherwise be on benefits?

6. What conditionality should be linked to benefits? What actions should someone take to get a job? How many jobs can they turn down whilst still

There needs to be a more  effective  and faster acting set of policies to get more into work and to make work more worthwhile.

President Trump was elected on a No more foreign wars ticket. He has let Israel wage war on Iran, just allowing one bombing flight if US planes to damage nuclear facilities Israel could not reach.

Trump supporters argue this was legal as there is a threat to the US – and allies- if Iran is about to make a nuclear  bomb. Years  of pretending Iran is a normal state  we can negotiate settlements with has  meant turning  a blind eye to Iran terrorist supported activity throughout the Middle East. The West has had to overlook Iran’s progress to producing weapons grade uranium. The idea is one  raid to force Iran  to negotiate from a position of weakness.

The Europeans worry about the legality of the action. They are concerned about Iranian retaliation. Some Maga supporters think this is a needless foreign diversion from the domestic  agenda. What say you?