| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 12:31 - Feb 17 with 1065 views | Championship |
If this is true, he should be stripped of his knighthood at the very least. |  | |  |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 12:52 - Feb 27 with 895 views | Butterbing |
Not really hidden. It is number 7 in the top ten most read. |  | | |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 12:54 - Feb 27 with 886 views | Swansea_Blue |
That's nice of him. He's going to invest for personal gain £1bn of the £4bn he's depriving the public purse by becoming a tax exile. And in fossil fuels too. |  |
| |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 13:51 - Feb 27 with 836 views | Butterbing |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 12:54 - Feb 27 by Swansea_Blue |
That's nice of him. He's going to invest for personal gain £1bn of the £4bn he's depriving the public purse by becoming a tax exile. And in fossil fuels too. |
And then pay no tax in the UK on the gains (presumably). | | | |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 13:52 - Feb 27 with 833 views | Steve_M |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 12:54 - Feb 27 by Swansea_Blue |
That's nice of him. He's going to invest for personal gain £1bn of the £4bn he's depriving the public purse by becoming a tax exile. And in fossil fuels too. |
And exactly what would happen to the Forties pipeline without maintenance given it's age and the outage last year? |  |
| |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 14:40 - Feb 27 with 771 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 13:52 - Feb 27 by Steve_M |
And exactly what would happen to the Forties pipeline without maintenance given it's age and the outage last year? |
That's a slightly separate issue over tax avoidance. My issue isn't primarily with the pipeline, but with someone supporting Jim Ratcliffe's decision to deprive the UK of £4bn in tax revenue.
As for the pipeline, presumably this work will see the lifetime of the pipeline extended at a time when we should be scaling back. But as demand is now then I suppose it has to be done one way or the other. That wasn't the point of Withnail's post though - it was to try and score points over someone who'll still be depriving the UK public purse of a c. £3bn loss even after this investment. I just thought that was a bit of a strange argument defending a Brexiteer ship-jumper. | |
| |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 14:47 - Feb 27 with 762 views | Steve_M |
| Hypocritical brexiteers Part 23495686 on 14:40 - Feb 27 by Swansea_Blue |
That's a slightly separate issue over tax avoidance. My issue isn't primarily with the pipeline, but with someone supporting Jim Ratcliffe's decision to deprive the UK of £4bn in tax revenue.
As for the pipeline, presumably this work will see the lifetime of the pipeline extended at a time when we should be scaling back. But as demand is now then I suppose it has to be done one way or the other. That wasn't the point of Withnail's post though - it was to try and score points over someone who'll still be depriving the UK public purse of a c. £3bn loss even after this investment. I just thought that was a bit of a strange argument defending a Brexiteer ship-jumper. |
Yes, I don't disagree here but was adding to your point re: investment in infrastructure being presented as an amazing piece of business generosity. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
