General elections

whenever the elections come along, i don’t usually feel very interested. but this time it’s different. i feel that my way of life, and my livelihood is being threatened by our own government, the european parliament, and the armies of pointless jobsworths that are ruinning our country.
but i havn’t found a single party that stands out from the others, that will address the haulage industry issues. no one has mentioned fuel pricing, foreign lorry charging, speed limits, the compensation culture, scrapping the WTD/RTD, scrapping speed limiters.

does anyone know any different?
and what is important to you?

Pretty much the same as you but I do fear for the future for our Children…

My first thought was when are we going to get rid of this buffoon un-elected prime minister of ours !, then i thought its not just him, but his whole cabinet..i thought my views would change when i listened to the live debate from all 3 major parties. At the end i feel even more confused..i thought brown did ok, cameron did better, but the greens with their scrap our nuclear weapons, and leaving these shores vulnerable, plus the mere mention of road haulage, being the first to trial the new road toll pricing, and the fact clegg wants more trucks off the road, shows to me that he is anti-truck....when will all muppets realise that this green` planet of ours, could not function without trucks…and i only wish i could prove it to them…by calling a national strike of all those involved in road transport…anyway…
like i said i am confused…but theres little choice…same old labour…same old tories…national front are a no go area…so it looks like ukip could get my vote…or maybe none at all…

BNP or UKIP. We need a radical change, the same lot have had it too cushy for too long.

hiya,
Labour has’nt been Labour for years, the Conservatives have always feathered their own nest’s, the only time the Liberal’s got hold of power they skint the country I know it was donkey’s years ago but they are still preaching the same rubbish, consience won’t let me give the BNP my vote so it looks like i’ll have to give my vote to the UKIP they are promising things to benefit the OAPs, of which i’m a long serving member, so people say i’ll be wasting my vote, could’nt give a toss.
thanks harry long retired.

This election seems quite straight forwards to me, there are only two possibilities to actually form a government Labour or Conservative. UKIP etc will be very lucky to get even one MP never mind the 323 needed for a majority.

So the choice is to vote Conservative and get David Cameron as PM, or vote for anybody else that takes our fancy, and get 5 more years of Gordon Brown.

limeyphil:
‘… i havn’t found a single party that stands out from the others…’

Er, UKIP stands out from the Big Three - who are each extremely content that I run at kph not mph, fill-up with litres and not gallons and undemocratically take it up our national botty with aplomb.

I know that they’ll never make a government, but staying quiet about it is definately worse than good men doing nothing or voting for Brussels/Strasbourg via the Big Three to keep raiding my wallet and our hopitals & schools of potential improvement money to the value of £40,000,000 plus per day.

My mind isn’t made up yet as to which party gets the tick on my postal vote. But the comment from Harry Gill about UKIP helping the pensioners may be correct, and he mentions about wasting a vote, if he votes for anyone that is not a wasted vote, a spoiled vote is not a wasted vote, but a non vote is a waste.

Anyway as I said I haven’t made my mind up yet, but I have made my mind up who not to vote for.

New Liebour for these and million more reasons.
Gordons Financial 10 Best Bollock Droppings.

  1. Taxing dividend payments

Before 1997, dividends issued by UK companies and paid to pension funds were tax-free - that is, the tax could be claimed back via a system of tax credits. Not any more, decided Brown. Tax relief was scrapped, reducing the amount collected by pension funds by around £5 billion a year. Pension funds holding the cash that you, me and almost everyone else in the country plan to use for our retirement have lost around £100 billion over the last 12 years. That’s one hell of a stealth tax.

  1. Selling our gold

In May 1999 Gordon Brown had a plan to sell some gold. There were two problems with this, which concerned his economic advisers deeply. The price of gold had slumped after a decade of stagnation, but was likely to increase in the proceeding years. Added to this, the announcement of a major sell-off would drive the price down further. Little of this worried Gordon. Experts believe that the poorly timed decision to flog our national treasure has cost us all around £3 billion. Granted, that doesn’t seem much nowadays, but more of that later.

  1. Tripartite financial regulation

The system of financial regulation dividing powers between the Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Services Authority, established by Brown as Chancellor in 2000, missed what amounted to the biggest financial crisis of our lifetime. Whoops. This has led some glass-half-empty commentators to conclude that the system set up by Brown failed and should be replaced. The Commons Treasury Select Committee’s report on the collapse of Northern Rock said that the Financial Services Authority had “systematically failed in its duty” to oversee the troubled bank’s activities. Little did it realise at the time that Northern Rock was the over-leveraged tip of the securitised iceberg.

  1. Tax credits

“Gordon Brown claims the tax credits system lifts children out of poverty,” says Simon Blackmore, 38, who was pursued for £6,057 in over-paid tax credits. “Maybe it does, but only to plunge them and their families into debt two years later.” Millions of low-income families have had to pay back the Treasury after receiving too much money in tax credits, putting them under huge financial and emotional strain. Meanwhile, 40 per cent of workers and families who deserved tax credits left billions of pounds unclaimed in the 2008-09 tax year for fear of being chased for the cash later on. Introduced in 1999, reformed in 2000, tax credits have been “a complete disaster zone”, according to tax experts.

  1. The £10,000 corporation tax threshold

In 2002, Gordon Brown introduced a new tax regime to help small businesses. He announced a new zero per cent rate of corporation tax on profits below £10,000. It was designed to boost the ability of small businesses to grow and prosper. It didn’t quite work out this way. It became advantageous for sole traders such as taxi drivers or plumbers to turn themselves into limited companies to take advantage of the new rules. A Treasury Minister later commented that “the Government did not realise how many people would engage in abusive tax avoidance”, despite the fact that it was “blindingly obvious” to tax experts “within 5 seconds” of the budget announcement that this would happen. Gordon scrapped the rules a few years later, raising the rate from 0 per cent to 19 per cent when he released how much money was being lost.

  1. Abolition of the 10p tax rate

Mr Brown rarely apologises. In fact, he never apologises. But occasionally he acknowledges “mistakes”, albeit begrudgingly. Over the abolition of the 10p tax rate in 2007, Mr Brown told Radio 4’s Today programme that “we made two mistakes. We didn’t cover as well as we should that group of low-paid workers who don’t get the working tax credits and we weren’t able to help the 60 to 64-year-olds who didn’t get the pensioner’s tax allowance.” Experts use stronger language to describe the Budget of 2007, which was designed to produce positive headlines for the 2p cut in income tax. Accountants calculated that the scrapping of the 10 per cent tax rate, coupled with the increase in the proportion of tax credits withdrawn from higher earners, would leave 1.8 million workers earning between £6,500 and £15,000 paying an effective tax rate of up to 70 per cent.

  1. Failing to spot the housing bubble

Gordon Brown said he ended boom and bust, and in those innocent days before the collapse of the global finance system we believed him. In 1997, he outlined his plans. “Stability is necessary for our future economic success”, he wisely informed an audience at the CBI. “The British economy of the future must be built not on the shifting sands of boom and bust, but on the bedrock of prudent and wise economic management.” The other components of that bedrock including a trillion-pound debt mountain and a decade of unchecked and unparalleled house price inflation presumably slipped his mind. In 2003 a mild-mannered Liberal Democrat MP by the name of Vince Cable dared to question the mantra of “the end of boom and bust”. He asked Gordon Brown: “Is it not true that…the growth of the British economy is sustained by consumer spending pinned against record levels of personal debt, which is secured, if at all, against house prices that the Bank of England describes as well above equilibrium level?” Gordon replied: “The Honourable Gentleman has been writing articles in the newspapers, as reflected in his contribution, that spread alarm, without substance, about the state of the economy…” We all know what happened next.

  1. 50 per cent tax rate

Robert Chote, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, has said the tax hike which heralded the end the new Labour may actually end up losing the Government money. “If you look at what happened when higher rates were last changed in the 1980s, that might lead you to suggest that such a move might actually lose you revenue, rather than gain it, as people actually declare less income for tax,” he said.

  1. Cutting VAT

“It would be funny if it wasn’t so serious,” said a tax accountant when asked about the Brown-Darling brainwave to cut VAT by 2.5 percentage points. As a nation of shoppers, rather than shopkeepers, a chopped down sales tax sounds like a good idea, providing a vital boost to hard-pressed families at a time of financial hardship. There were two problems. It costs £12.5 billion a year and it has made little discernable difference to those hard-pressed families because it is shopkeepers, rather than shoppers, who have pocketed much of the benefit.

  1. Public-sector borrowing

If Gordon had only saved a little more in the good times, we might have had a little more to fall back on in the bad, economists sigh. Last month saw public-sector net borrowing hit £19.9 billion, the highest on record, according to the Office for National Statistics. The chancellor of the exchequer, Alistair Darling, has forecast that Government borrowing will reach £175 billion this year. It is forecast that total government debt will double to 79 per cent of GDP by 2013, the highest level since World War 2. Mr Chote recently warned that "the scale of the underlying problem that the Treasury’s detailed forecasts identify will require two full parliaments of mounting austerity to repair.”

James Charles in The Times.


To my non political mind the choice between the BNP and UKIP is slim, too close for comfort and a bit like choosing between Martin McGuinness or Gerry Adams to be a clown at a child’s birthday party.

UKIP also seem to use smoke and mirrors in their mini manifesto on tax.

UKIP will:
Abolish National Insurance

No income tax below £11,500,then a flat rate of 31%

Cut Council Tax by scrapping EU laws

Abolish Inheritance Tax

I went back to school and worked out a few figures from this based on a probable truck drivers salary of £35k or £500 per week nett.

Income Tax

  • £6,475.00 is tax free (this is your Personal Allowance)
  • £28,525.00 is taxed at 20.00% (£5,705.00)

Total Income Tax paid: £5,705.00

National Insurance

You don’t pay NI on the first £5,736.00 of your income
You pay NI at 11.00% on the next £29,264.00 of your income (£3,219.04)

Total National Insurance paid: £3,219.04

So these figures added together come to £8842.75 with New Labour

Nigel Farage wants you to pay £8924.04 with UKIP

£81.29 with which to build new prisons and hospitals, build a 200mph train set and leave the EU. We already have got trade deals with the rest of the world, so where is he going to find customers for our massive increase in manufacturing, sudden loss of cheap imported labour to do the nasty jobs we don’t want.

Not a lot of mention on the Workshare scheme but I am not sure if you want to give up half your wages to another bloke to share your job.

I will go and rip the other election leaflets apart and see what I can discover before my ballot paper drops through the letterbox in the morning.

Wheel Nut:
‘… the choice between the BNP and UKIP is slim, too close for comfort …’.

Surely UKIP is far less radical - evidenced by them having a former EU accountant on it’s leadership ‘cabinet’ (Marta Andreasson) who knows the negative effect of EU financial corruption upon our national best interest. That, allied with them having much allegience with like minded & democratically elected members within the otherwise corrupt, undemocratic & highly questionable EU parliament surely shows it’s tasteful & accountable pedigree whilst placing them in a much higher league than those other folk.

Wheel Nut:
‘… Nigel Farage wants you to pay £8924.04 with UKIP…’.

I suspect that Nigel would freely admit that he’s got a cat in hell’s chance of UKIP forming the next government. But imagine how the next lot will listen a lot closer to those of us disgusted at being bullied by pro-European bullies & their zealotry - as epitomised by the Kinnocks (that family of ‘done-nothing’ multi-millionaires: Failed EU Transport minister to boot!) & the silent manifestos of the crown-jewel salemen of the Big Three.

Wheel Nut:
‘…We already have got trade deals with the rest of the world…’

Excellent point, Wheelers: So why do we pay £45,000,000 of our earnings a day to the EU? Also, have you seen how poor the non-EU nations of Norway & Switzerland are doing? (Clue: They are the two richest and most stable countries in Europe - as we fester under that ridiculous flag, it’s daft, unheard but expensive State anthem and it’s grey-faced and undemocratically appointed ‘leadership’. Yes, I am jealous of them!)

As we are all interested in transport on these forums, this is a snapshot of the plans that each of the main three political parties propose.

Labour manifesto: transport policy.
Key transport policies include:

  • Building a new high-speed rail line linking North and South.
  • Improving commuter services and electrifying new rail lines.
  • Completing the east-west Crossrail line in London
  • Targeted motorway widening, including the M25
  • No road pricing
  • Supporting a third runway for Heathrow
  • Ensuring there are 100,000 electric vehicle charging points by end of next Parliament

Full Labour manifesto: general election 2010 party policy

Conservative manifesto: transport policy

Key transport policies include:

  • Building a high-speed rail link connecting London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds with the Continent
  • Blocking moves for a third runway at Heathrow Airport
  • Improving Britain’s railways
  • Cutting congestion and making Britain’s roads safer
  • Making local transport greener

Full Conservative manifesto: general election 2010 party policy

Liberal Democrat manifesto: transport policy

Key transport policies include:

  • Creating a Future Transport Fund to protect funding for improvements from budget cuts
  • Building a high-speed north-south rail link
  • Shifting freight from road to rail
  • Charging road freight on motorways on a pay-per-mile basis
  • Creating a non-profit making toll scheme on motorways and trunk roads
  • Scrapping Vehicle Excise Duty
  • Reducing fuel duty
  • Opposing expansion at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports
  • Cutting commuter rail fares

Happy Keith:
Excellent point, Wheelers: So why do we pay £45,000,000 of our earnings a day to the EU? Also, have you seen how poor the non-EU nations of Norway & Switzerland are doing? (Clue: They are the two richest and most stable countries in Europe - as we fester under that ridiculous flag, it’s daft, unheard but expensive State anthem and it’s grey-faced and undemocratically appointed ‘leadership’. Yes, I am jealous of them!)

But instead of the constant ramblings about the £45million, what is your answer? simply pulling out of the EU like UKIP want to do is not an alternative.

Along with the other large payers we are still amongst the richest countries, because of the extra trade the EU brings. The UK is 6th richest while Switzerland lie at 19th and Norway at 23rd respectively with only the USA, Japan, and China being way ahead of the European members.

Germany, Italy, and France also have a massive input into the EU.

Switzerland are members in all but name and their agreements on border control through Schengen are becoming even closer. Many of the financial experts that I have heard believe Switzerland would be better off being in the EU than out on a limb. The people are reluctant to give this up because of the secretive banking regulations.

The non-EU member states of Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Switzerland participate in the single market but not in the customs union.

Wheel Nut:
‘…But instead of the constant ramblings about the £45million, what is your answer?
simply pulling out of the EU like UKIP want to do is not an alternative…’

Why not an alternative? What’ is one’s opposition to democratically asking us?

As for alternatives, perhaps see their www site? There is scant benefit in me replicating it here but as they relevantly state ‘…[EU membership] costs us far more than money … It is costing us our democracy…’ Perhaps see ukip.org/content/manifestos-and-literature to better assuage the minutiae of one’s curiosity?

Wheel Nut:
‘… Many of the financial experts that I have heard believe Switzerland would be better off being in the EU than out on a limb…’

That wouldn’t be pro-EU propaganda at all, eh! :unamused: It’s hardly as if Swiss clocks & chocolate would turn solid gold overnight by having the expensive, unaccountable smugness of Brussels to endorse it! Besides, the Swiss are hardly down to the bones of their arse being ‘out on their limb’ as they are [sic].

‘…The non-EU member states of Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Switzerland participate in the single market but not in the customs union…’

And so could we! The rest of the world wants our kit - what little we make of quality - so what would stop them from continuing to do so? We still need passports to leave these Isles so where’s the snag?

Happy Keith:

Wheel Nut:
‘…But instead of the constant ramblings about the £45million, what is your answer?
simply pulling out of the EU like UKIP want to do is not an alternative…’

Why not an alternative? What’ is one’s opposition to democratically asking us?

As for alternatives, perhaps see their www site? There is scant benefit in me replicating it here but as they relevantly state ‘…[EU membership] costs us far more than money … It is costing us our democracy…’ Perhaps see ukip.org/content/manifestos-and-literature to better assuage the minutiae of one’s curiosity?

Wheel Nut:
‘… Many of the financial experts that I have heard believe Switzerland would be better off being in the EU than out on a limb…’

That wouldn’t be pro-EU propaganda at all, eh! :unamused: It’s hardly as if Swiss clocks & chocolate would turn solid gold overnight by having the expensive, unaccountable smugness of Brussels to endorse it! Besides, the Swiss are hardly down to the bones of their arse being ‘out on their limb’ as they are [sic].

‘…The non-EU member states of Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Switzerland participate in the single market but not in the customs union…’

And so could we! The rest of the world wants our kit - what little we make of quality - so what would stop them from continuing to do so? We still need passports to leave these Isles so where’s the snag?

I asked for your alternative, not the UKIP Anti EU Propaganda.

And as you say the rest of the world wants our kit, etc. Because no one else will

Let us do a little experiment, ABC Chemicals in Switzerland need 6 pallets of feedstock urgently, at the moment, the driver loads it from a warehouse in Maidstone, drives to Dover, waits around for two hours and pays for an EUR 1 and T1. He is eventually sealed & cleared to leave and drive to St Louis and take another 3 hours to clear French and Swiss customs. By the time that truck is empty, it is now well into the 3rd day since collecting the pallets.

His next job is to deliver a full load from the UK to Frankfurt, he queues in Lord Warren House for paperwork,then clears customs & drives to the tunnel, and onward to the customer, he cannot tip that day because the customs office closed at 3pm, the following day he gets unloaded behind a Polish truck who loaded in Wroclaw that morning. He reloads and on his third day he is heading back towards Calais with empty stillages, not forgetting to stamp his corridor card or risking being sent back or fined.

The urgent load to Lyon will be given to anyone but a British haulier because he has to clear customs and the French have reintroduced bilateral permits :exclamation:

If you are operating goods vehicles from the UK using bilateral permits, you must obtain these permits before commencing the journey. By producing the permit at the border, the driver is allowed to pass into or through that country. Depending on the terms of the bilateral agreement, they may still have to pay certain local taxes.

How much will all this cost us per day Keith?

Who wants to queue on the stairs again?

Wheel Nut:
'… I asked for your alternative, not the UKIP Anti EU Propaganda …?

Suit yourself

Wheel Nut:
‘…Let us do a little experiment?..’

I’d rather not trawl through rambling, mate.

Wheel Nut:
‘…How much will all this cost us per day Keith?..’

Given the demeanour that you’re evidently content to stick with, have you possibly mistaken me for being:
a) An accountant
or
b) Overly bothered to work the imagination of contentedly disgruntled others?