More NuLabour playing with words (as in 'never say spending, say investment').
Andy Burnham on the Government's proposal to levy a 10% charge on all estates below the Inheritance Tax threshold:
“This is not a flat fee and would enable people to protect 90 per cent of their homes and savings.”
Hows' that? Before a penny has been taken, we are being told that taking 10% out of the estate enables people (good word, 'enabling', suggests power and autonomy) to protect most of what they already have anyway. Protect? A raid of 10% is cunningly presented as a chance to keep 90%. I'll remember that next time I rob a Post Office:
"Look, give me £50,000 and I will enable you to protect the other £50,000 you have in your safe."
See how a cash grab is wrapped up in cosy, feel-good words like 'protect'? It's amost as if we should be grateful.
One thing to remember: before this idea was mooted, you could 'protect' 100% of your estate, simply by doing nothing. It was your property, remember?
The way that these jolly clever spin-savvy folk will prove that you are totally out of step in thinking 90% is a 10% loss rather than a 90% saving is to have a 'consultation'. Like that you ask everyone via an obscure process and slewed questions and get the answer you first thought of. Easy (was going to go for 'simples' but thought better of it.
ReplyDeleteI keep hearing about these 'extensive consultations with the public', but no-one, EVER, has asked me about anything. I suspect they ask four people (and probably the same four people) what they think, and then go ahead and ignore it.
ReplyDeleteWhat's worse are these fake charities like Alcohol Concern and ASH. They exist mainly on government money and are paid to say what the government wants to hear so that
a) they can do what they planned, citing 'independent experts', or
b) do something slightly less radical than suggested, and hope we will be relieved that it wasn't as bad as we thought.
New govt's first task - a bonfire of the Quangos.