The Lord Ashcroft Saga
March 3rd, 2010 | 
Author: 
The Independent in their infinite wisdom is trying hard to make some significant mileage out of the Lord Ashcroft and his domicile/tax status none of which I find remotely interesting or relevant however to Labour and the “Cleggies”, they are very frightened of Ashcroft.
The reason because he has been carefully targeting over 100 key marginal seats which could prove crucial if the current national polls are anything near correct come polling day. In fact what Ashcroft is doing is exactly what the LibDems should have been doing for these past two years in order to displace the Labour Party as the alternative party to the Conservatives.
A Plonker and a Reply
Today the Independent left it to a right plonker called Mark Steel to further hammer the “cause” but he made a right Horlicks of it. There is nothing wrong with having left wing views but that does not absolve you of common sense. John Rentoul is left wing but he often writes well balanced articles that explore the issue not “pig bum, yah sucks” as this fool did.
Of course I had to field a suitable reply, as follows:
The Independent has a “thing” about the Ashcroft story and is determined to be “Right” but instead this is really not a major issue and no great principles are at stake.
Firstly as I understand it, the statement: “…when a man may compile a billion pounds and hoist it out of the country…” is fundamentally incorrect, his income arises in the Caribbean area, not in the UK, more a case of not bringing it into the UK than exporting it from the UK which would be a different case altogether.
Also and although not personally wealthy, I live on £130 per week, I do not see the ruling made in the 1930s is incorrect, that no one is obliged to so arrange their financial affairs so that they may be plundered by the Inland Revenue. On death, the UK Government will claim Inheritance Tax on the world wide assets of any British Citizen and that presumably includes Lord Ashcroft. It is one of those oddities that whilst you may change “residency” easily, “domicile” is a very different matter so, Ashcroft is considered “British” as indeed he is.
Tax Status
The ban on “foreign contributions” was for obvious reasons but Ashcroft isn’t foreign. As to being a UK taxpayer, that is all huff and puff too because on that basis, anyone reliant on State Benefits for their income would automatically be disenfranchised – intellectual nonsense !
As at 64 I am distinctly not wealthy, you may imagine that I should be jealous of Ashcroft and his ilk but I am not indeed, when it comes to politics, I pity him and his like. I am nothing, I don’t in my wildest dreams expect the “Lotus eating politicians and media people” who inhabit the bubble that is the Palace of Westminster to take a blind bit of notice of anything I say, want or care about but for people paying shed loads of UK tax, the same applies too.
If I were Wealthy
That must be frustrating as another 5 years of Labour will no doubt see more money wasted on the pet schemes of the mad and totally deranged people who make up the current Government. If I were rich, what prospect for my taxes ? Another slew of “Rights Legislation” to protect Hamsters and Voles with them accorded the right to get married in Church ? Plus all government literature available in the Hamster and Vole languages who will then campaign for equal rights for Rabbits and Ants and “Tax Credits” for all working creatures (including worms) and no, I didn’t mention Straw or Hoon !
At least I know they don’t give a Tom Tit about me, must be Hell if you think you are important and ought to be listened to, I would avoid paying as much UK tax as I could on that basis and so would you !
Another Contributor
It was only after I had penned the above that I started reading the other comments which mainly were “against” this daft campaign on the grounds of unfairness or plain hypocrisy by the other parties. An example of this came from one fellow contributor and if what he is saying is correct, how terribly funny !
“Ashcroft’s money is his affair. He earned: he can spend it. Secondly, he pays a huge amount of tax to the UK exchequer and keeps a significant part of the economy buoyant because of his not avoiding paying UK tax. What he does with his money is legal. As a peer, he has claimed NO expenses whatsoever. Not one penny.
Contrast this with Labour’s Lord Paul. As one of the richest men on the planet, he is classed also as a non-dom, and pays no tax in the UK. Incredulously, Labour gave him a peerage and made him a Privy Councillor. He not only contributes to the Labour party, as a privy councillor, he affects the lives of people in the UK. Labour is making us the taxpayer pay for one of their donors. And, he claimed nearly £50K in expenses as a peer last year alone. Now, you tell me where the criticism should fall.”
To be honest if that is true, Labour would be best advised to keep their mouths tightly shut over Ashcroft.
Another Negative
One of the few who wrote in supporting Mark Steel also suffered from the same disease, wanting to write “anti-Tory” stuff rather than dealing with the hard facts and there was one that on the basis Ashcroft told the truth, was worth picking up on.
My Comment
“…Ashcroft is seeking political influence and authority without paying a penny into the UK…”
I believe that is wrong, Ashcroft has paid tax on all income arising in the UK for the past decade, if he hadn’t, the Inland Revenue would have sorted him out long since. Tax Avoidance is legitimate, it is Tax Evasion that is a criminal offence. Ashcroft may well have taken advantage of the former, if the latter he would end up in prison.
This whole “campaign” is merely ‘got up’ by Labour and the LibDems to unsettle the Tories in the run up to the General Election and anyone who is fooled by it is either totally naive or a Labour or LibDem supporter. In terms of Labour hypocrisy, see kykckm ‘s entry “Mark Steel: on Ashcroft’s money”, in comparison to Ashcroft, a far more outrageous case I might suggest.
Posted in 
Tags: