Young non voters

There may have been a local election in mcem's area in 1969.
Nit-picking.

There wasn't an election in 1969. It was 1970, when I was 21.

I voted in 1969 just as I turned 21!

Voting at 18 was introduced in 1969 - the year I reached that age!

We didn't have the vote until we were 21, so it didn't matter. Had two kids by then, so I was a real grown up.

Back to the op - when I pointed out that my eldest granddaughter would miss the election and her first chance to vote, she said vaguely, "Oh, will I?"
I totally understand her apathy, I've been bored to tears with months of electioneering. She is just off travelling in the east for three months then goes to university. She has her first intense relationship with a lovely boy.
How can politics compare with the concerns of teenagers?

Just went on parliament.org and Hodge's shares are listed, so completely legal. It was her father, Oppenheimer who set up the business and the family trust, about which she knew nothing.
I imagine that she has found out a lot more about these things since she became chair of the PAC.
While I was on there, I noticed a Tory MP's listing. I did not take note of his name, but he has had over £200,000 in donations over the last year.

Well, of course, Hodge (Labour supporter) with her £250,000 is labelled by some as a hypocrite even though all the appropriate taxes have been paid. Meanwhile, Barlow (Conservative supporter) who used a convoluted tax-avoidance scheme - subsequently found by the Tax Tribunal to be illegitimate - to shelter around £20 million, is portrayed by some as a "victim".

www.stemcor.com/Response%20to%20further%20allegations%20of%20tax%20avoidance%20in%20the%20UK%20press.aspx

From the company itself, when the allegations were made.

I'm a bit confused as to why her shares are off shore, I thought the point of that was that you don't pay tax on anything invested in an overseas tax haven, but would have to pay it if those assets are brought on shore.

jane, couldn't have said it better. There is nothing wrong with owning shares or inheriting money, if all taxes due are honestly paid- and in the case of an MP, properly declared, is there?

I thought that, too, jane. How many other MPs would have asked the right questions, or known what questions to ask?
The PAC is a group of MPs from all different persuasions, not just Labour. Some of the Tories ask quite searching questions as well.
I think it was Pritti Patel who had to apologise to Margaret Hodge for libelling her.

"But Mrs Hodge said she had ensured that 'any shares I held were above board and that I paid all relevant taxes in full. Every time I received any benefit from the company this happened.'

She has always declared her holding in the parliamentary register of financial interests.

Her share of the £1.5million was around £280,000."

So she inherited some money from her father and paid all the relevant taxes. What's the big deal?
I get tired of politicians of all hues being blamed for their family backgrounds, as if this somehow disqualifies them from holding office or empathising with anyone different from themselves.

I would have thought Margaret Hodge's personal knowledge of how foreign investment trusts and so on actually work would have helped her to do a good job as Chair of the PAC.

But experts dont live where things might happen.
What would happen if experts agree on say a nuclear plant at your back garden?
Science says yes so it goes ahead?

soon I think the consensus on windmills shouldn't be about whether people like them or not.
It should be about a cost/benefit analysis of whether their impact in the visual environment, given that they are often situated in areas of outstanding natural beauty, is justified by how efficient they are in terms of energy production.
As I understand it, they are not very efficient because they only produce electricity on windy days and that electricity can't be stored, but I'm willing to be corrected on that one. Other forms of energy production may be more efficient, but they have their downsides too which people also feel strongly about.
It's actually a good example of how politicians should be guided by experts in their field, rather than taking a knee-jerk view simply to oppose their political opponents.

Lord Rothermere, owner of the DM, is a non-dom.
So the DM is not exactly impartial, is it?

ja. As regards the environment and say windmills, some love them, some hate them. I cant see a consensus.

So because the amount is only around £280,000 that makes it all right then, does it?

Could well be DJ.

Perhaps the Public Accounts Committee could look into legal tax loop holes a little more robustly.

They go after the likes of Garry Barwell perhaps they could/should concentrate on Family Inheritance Trusts and Transfer Pricing during their next tenure.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3060029/Labour-s-Hodge-1-5m-shares-offshore-tax-haven-Senior-politician-accused-hypocrisy-following-earlier-fierce-criticism-tax-avoidance.html

Read the full article. Margaret Hodge has shares worth £250,000, not 1.5 million.

It was two years ago, POGS.
Do you also think Cameron is a hypocrite as his father's money came from tax avoidance?

Yes, I read that too. She's a hypocrite of the highest order.

I read that Margaret Hodge has 1.5 million stashed away in a tax haven. Unbelievable as she is a vociferous critic of tax evasion. I didn't see the Krishnan Guru-Murthy interview though.

Some very interesting reading on Lady Hodge recently, I thought the Krishnan Guru-Murthy interview with Lady Hodge was interesting viewing on channel 4.

Did anybody see it?

Thanks for the links jen.