Gordon Brown wasn’t at PMQs today, so Harriet Harman filled in. Rather than answering questions on his Government’s policies in the House, the Prime Minister was away ‘welcoming’ the President of South Africa to our shores. The point was made on the Daily Politics that he could have quite easily pushed this meeting back, and it is a fair one. Brown has missed twice as many PMQs in his two and a half years as Tony Blair missed in his ten years, and it simply isn’t good enough.
It was an extremely noisy session, with insults flying back and forth – mainly about Lord Ashcroft. Harman worked hard at the insults but often lacked the substance to back them up, frequently looking out of her depth on the economic and defence questions Hague threw at her today. In such a rowdy environment mistakes were frequent: Harman referring to Hague as Foreign Secretary was matched by the Tory backbencher forgetting to ask his question, and the Leader of the House not bothering to listen to one from her own back-benches.
As to Lord Ashcroft, Harman got a dig in on the subject during most of her answers but anything she offered up to Hague on the subject was thrown back in her face with relish, particularly with a reference to Harman’s own husband’s selection as PPC for Ladywood – “she doesn't’ want to recognize marriage in the tax system, but she sure does in the political system”. Vintage.
In all I can’t help feeling that this Ashcroft saga is becoming a bit of a
On another note, I was impressed with the Speaker today. Bercow tried to keep order during the Leaders’ questions with little success, but lost it properly when the noise continued into backbench questions – well done!
Why People Care About Ashcroft:
ReplyDelete- His donations to the Conservatives are running at least at hundreds of thousands of pounds a year.
- He has also made loans to the party of up to £3.6m and provides free flights for the party leader, David Cameron, and other senior Tories.
- He doesn't pay taxes in this country.
- His nomination for a peerage was rejected in 1999, partly because of his status as a tax exile, then Hague wrote to Downing Street demanding a change of heart on the grounds that the businessman intended to become resident in Britain "in order properly to fulfil his responsibilities in the House of Lords...This decision will cost him (and benefit the Treasury) tens of millions a year in tax, yet he considers it worthwhile."
....Ashcroft never did pay any taxes but did get his peerage.
Nice to know the Tories are being funded by tax dodgers.
Hi Katie, thanks for commenting.
ReplyDeleteI'm not for the slightest moment suggesting that the status of Lord Ashcroft, or indeed any non-domiciled donor, doesn't merit attention. Personally, I don't see why non-doms should be stopped from donating money to a political party, but I certainly don't think they should be able to sit in Parliament. It's a pity that plans to stop this from happening weren't brought in when they were originally mooted in the late 90s.
What I was saying is that it's another example of politicians and Parties going in circles around oneanother, rather than trying to engage with an electorate that is at present rather anti-politics in general.
James
p.s. As far as I am aware, Lord Ashcroft does pay taxes in this country on all business that he carries out in this country.