The total tax gap is estimated as £35billion.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/an-introduction-to-the-uk-tax-gap/
How much of that is down to “nixers” is debatable. It counts the hidden economy as 6% of that, which seems very low, but quite a few other categories would come under the cash-in-hand category.
The fact that she is still and MP is absolutely ridiculous. As is the fact that Labour is still defending her. She helped broker a deal with Hasina and Putin to secure a nuclear reactor at twice the price and their family pocketed the difference.
That’s the people of Bangladesh’s money. One of the poorest countries in the world.
Fuck off Robinson.
Another coked-up, toxic white male.
Yeah Robinson. Where does he get funded from. That’s the question. Ignorant racist shit. Who should be in prison but has the funding to lead a party.
Social media is making everything worse at this point.
And people like these are out to make easy money at the detriment of entire countries.
Don’t tell me to take a hike when you are the one who instigates the animosity! laughing emojis to my posts without any reference, mocking my posts without applying context.
Furthermore don’t try and back track on this by justifying your inaccuracies and deflecting this by claiming I am splitting hairs and that your figures may need a tweak. You were only too happy to try and mock me a few posts ago. Don’t throw shit if you can’t take it back.
Maybe, instead of telling me to take a hike, you should just acknowledge that you were wrong in this instance. You tell me to take a hike and then still try to prove yourself right, changing the context of our debate.
We all have our opinions, we all have our views and beliefs, however what is important is that we are all passionate and want the best. What is more important is that we treat each other with respect.
So, I apologise for my part in this exchange and suggest we drop this. 
I completely agree, the problem with politics is that everyone else is to blame. That goes for both Parties. It is why parties like Reform in the UK and similar parties across Europe are gaining traction, people are generally just fed up with the lack of direction and ownership.
I do not deny that, but as I alluded to it is not just a UK/OZ problem and it is not solely a Construction sector problem.
Subcontractors in the UK get paid by the Shift and the nature of the industry will see people sitting round for a bit. I am a Site Manager and I have done night shifts and no one has turned up, so what have I done to justify getting paid, probably very little but I have committed my services, booked/paid for accommodation, travelled, etc.
Look at other sectors, I referred to Security guards in my previous post but as you referenced Australia, what are your thoughts about employing Life Guards to sit on standby? It may require an incident for them to look busy, an incident that may not happen but they are there just incase - sitting on standby…
As a Site Manager I have had Labourers on Site and struggled to keep them busy for a Shift, let alone the whole week, it really bugs me. But, i understand that people have their personal responsibilities, their bills to pay, their need to provide for their family and also that if I can not guarantee work will most likely go elsewhere. So in affect, I am paying for their availability.
There is an argument that productivity, expenditure could be more costly to not have them sitting on standby .
Seriously, no. You were way off trying to be clever. I’m more than happy to be corrected on stuff and have often conceded to those that are clearly more knowledgeable on a particular subject.
However, your efforts to compare a gross figure for irregular immigration to a net migration figure is simply disingenuous.
Fear not however, this is the last time you’ll see a response from me to anything you say on here.
Are you referring to Gary or Tommy?
Pay close attention to Lineker in his presenting over the last few years and observe how often he touches his nose. It has been mentioned (I accept probably just rumours) to me by a person I trust, who works in the industry that he also has a habit.
I am not trying to be clever, I am not trying to troll you, I am not trying to prove I am right. What I am doing is not accepting your approach to the way you engage to my posts.
Just be honest, you tried to mock and be little my posts. I have countered a number of your posts with actual facts. Look through your posts, apart from a graph which had literally no data to contest my post, what have you provided to support any of your points?
I am no cleverer than you, I am no more knowledgeable than you. My opinion has no more validation than yours. I have adapted my approach to interacting with you a number of times and I still get the same shit.
I have no objection to hearing from you, as long as it is balanced and fair. If your decision is to never respond to a post of mine, then I respect that and will ensure I do not provoke a response.
All the best.
Nope, I don’t think they are. For example, I brought pensioners into the discussion to show how an argument could be made, not that it should. It was in reply to a specific comment about pensioners paying ‘for people with three kids’.
As I replied to your later post, to acknowledge it was basically more of a thought experiment than a serious question.
And, I think this still stands. For example, look at how many posts/ arguments you have put forward to ‘defend’ pensioners ‘rights’ to benefit - and contrast that with your consideration of those who might lose out from the two child limit on benefits. Can’t some of those arguments for pensioners also apply to this group?
i understand the need to have appropriate labour assigned, and if some shifts are not as demanding as others, the reasons behind it
i understand the lifesaver analogy, the firefighter analogy would be similar
this is not that.
this is just purely booking guys for no reason but to line pockets.
the behavior is bordering on criminal
This is another good example of the ‘thought experiment’ comment I made earlier. That first line equally applies to non pensioners too doesn’t it?
Your second comment is somewhat of a misdirection - My point wasn’t a reference to pensioners but anyone (government included) denying benefits, or calling for benefits to be denied, to people in need in this scenario with the two child limit.
The government’s position at the time was that it was waiting for the Child Poverty Review to be completed before making a decision. The two child limit removal by itself does not solve everything and a decision is required as to how that change would be funded along with any others that could be made as part of that work.
From what I remember those MPs who were suspended had voted for the SNPs amendment as a political gesture to embarrass the government. I don’t recall whether a 3 line whip had been applied by the government for the vote, but it obviously felt the need to take a strong stance towards backbench dissent.
It’s entirely possible the timing to end the two child limit was a sop to backbenchers, but as I said before, it was a direction the government had wanted to go in anyway.
The bigger problem for the government is that the limit, despite being a bad policy (as per @ISMF 's post) it is very popular with the electorate, and opens it up to further attacks by the opposition and media.
It was a u turn, I wasn’t suggesting the opposite. That cut had already been accounted for within the government’s spending plans. By reversing that decision to go ahead with it, the government was now faced with spending £5bn more than it had said it would over the period. That meant that it had to find £5bn more to compensate - either through additional revenue or finding cuts to be made elsewhere.
That you asked this question shows exactly what you are.
Take your Reform-simping elsewhere.
I’m not sure what evidence you are expecting me to provide, given you frequently mention contracts in your posts about construction I had assumed it was all self explanatory and nothing further would be needed.
You said there was ‘still no plan’ - The Get Britain Working White Paper was published a year ago.
Get Britain Working White Paper - GOV.UK.
Launch of the Inactivity and Youth Trailblazers in May this year.
Thousands of young people set to benefit from new support into work and training - GOV.UK
The Secretary of State for Department of Works and Pensions answering a parliamentary question in October confirming that the trailblazers were now all live, and had been extended for another year.
Youth Guarantee Trailblazer Scheme - Hansard - UK Parliament
A recent BBC article on the chancellor providing further funding in the budget for this programme of work.
Reeves unveils £820m funding to support jobless young people - BBC News
And as it is somewhat local to you, a link to the West Midlands Combined Authority that is delivering one of the trailblazers.
Yeah, but other than that, I’m not seeing any discernible plan…
I’m waiting for the denial…
Sure as death and taxes, it’s coming.
I know we’ve talked about this but this is straight from our chief constable. And still Starmer decided to run his mouth.
