Paul Johnson of the IFS stated in an interview on the BBC’s ‘The World This Weekend’ that:

I think both main parties are making up numbers here in terms of what they can get from tax avoidance and evasion. The Conservatives are committed to getting £5 billion a year extra;Labour are trumping that by saying £7.5 billion…

It’s almost impossible to know upfront what you can achieve by cracking down on avoidance and evasion.You can do so much that you begin to put off real economic activity… so you do have to be careful about exactly how you do this.

Guest Who (and H/T Dover Sentry) brought this to our attention…from the lefty Huffingtion Post:

Jeremy Hunt’s Woolly Answers Over The Tory £8bn NHS Promise Aren’t Going Down Very Well

Health secretary Jeremy Hunt has been accused of “making stuff up” after he seemed unable to explain how the Tory party would meet today’s commitment to invest at least an extra £8 billion a year into the NHS by 2020.

Despite saying the announcement was a “significant moment in the history of the NHS”, Hunt seemed rather hazy about where the £8 billion would actually come from, prompting a BBC Breakfast host to ask “Do you make this stuff up as you go along?”

Asked where the money would be coming from on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme, Hunt said, “Well, it’s the right question to ask, because..”

“It’s the obvious question to ask, because you haven’t said so far,” replied presenter Mishal Husain.

So two interviews from the BBC that were the masterclasses into how to present a one-side picture of events have become examples of Tory evasiveness and economic incompetence….whilst Labour, who also haven’t told us how they would fund the NHS, are allowed to get away with murder….as we looked at in a previous post….Just saying you will fund the NHS by raising certain taxes in a policy that most experts think is very doubtful doesn’t in any way mean you have laid out a credible plan to fund the NHS…but the BBC is fully ready to accept Labour’s smoke and mirrors without challenge whilst at the same time tearing into the Tories.

The Huffington Post article demonstrates the power of the BBC to shape the political narrative and limit what information the Public get to hear and by doing that alter their perceptions and, they hope, voting patterns, especially when the BBC’s line on things is taken up by other media outlets and used as a stick to beat the Tories with….note there is no questioning of Labour’s policies in the Huffington Post.

Labour has just announced that it will collect £7.5 billion from tackling tax avoidance…does the BBC challenge that?  Does the BBC tell us that Balls is ‘making it up’?  Does the BBC go to their normal ‘goto’ guy at the IFS to dig into the fgures?  No, No and well yes….Mark Mardell interviews the IFS’s Paul Johnson(6 mins or so in) and they concentrate on the Tory inheritance plans….apparently it will be the richest who get taxed as a  result…and get this….that’s bad because it will have a damaging effect on the eocnomy as it will act as a disincentive to earn.  Couldn’t make it up could you?  It’s now bad to tax the rich.

Then we hear that Labour is to raise (in the news they now say ‘hope to raise’) £7.5 billion from tax avoidance measures…..

Here’s what Johnson said….

I think both main parties are making up numbers here in terms of what they can get from tax avoidance and evasion. The Conservatives are committed to getting £5 billion a year extra;Labour are trumping that by saying £7.5 billion…

It’s almost impossible to know upfront what you can achieve by cracking down on avoidance and evasion.You can do so much that you begin to put off real economic activity… so you do have to be careful about exactly how you do this.

Mardell ignored that completely and moved rapidly on…why does he do that when it is central to Labour’s, as well as Tory, policies…… how Labour will fund the NHS…it claims it will raise £1.1 billion of its £2.5 bn by closing down tax loopholes…..and yet they are just making that up…as well as guessing about the claimed £1.2 billion form the mansion tax.  Hunt was roasted by the BBC…and yet Balls is given the red carpet treatment…

Labour to raise £7.5bn from tax avoiders

But will they?  Who knows if you get your news from the BBC…will the IFS’s statement make it out into the BBC’s other reporting and analysis?  Listen out for it….somehow doubt it will be making as big a headlines as other IFS statements that laid into the Conservatives alone.

And that last sentence from the IFS was interesting…

You can do so much [cracking down on tax avoidance] that you begin to put off real economic activity… so you do have to be careful about exactly how you do this.

So Ed Balls was right in January when he refused to close down non-dom status….but now he’s fully on board that bus it seems…close em down!!! he says.

Think that will be picked up by the BBC when they interview him?

Oh yes and there’s this…

— Stephanie Flanders (@MyStephanomics) April 12, 2015

Sorry that @thesundaytimes follows Mail in raking over Miliband’s past today. We “dated” fleetingly in 2004. V costly few wks, it turns out.

A BBC economics correspondent going out with a Labour economics adviser….why would that be important….especially as later reporting from Flanders was consistently backing Labour’s Plan B and urging the government to borrow more and spend on infrastructure?  Is it just a matter of the Mail ‘raking over Miliband’s past’ or is there some real dirt to find?

Caught a bit of Pienaar today and, well, nothing’s changed.  He always seemed to have a soft spot for young Miliband and it’s rare that he will utter a critical word against him.

Now today’s snippet (around 11:20) may not be at all representative of the programme as a whole, I’m sure that the rest of it was a Tory propaganda fest, however there was a distinct narrative to this part where Pienaar visited the gloriously multicultural palace of diversity that is Brixton to sniff the air and imbibe the political vibes.

He took that most popular of BBC devices to give voice to public opinion…the vox populi….which allows the BBC to not only pick who they ask but also to edit out those who don’t give the right answers and then it is for the BBC to interpret the results.

First up was Rasta ‘Brother Culture’ who didn’t do politics and didn’t vote …however he then gave a masterclass in political messaging.   He says he only recently began to take an interest in politics in order to get rid of UKIP which is ‘dividing the nation’ with its racist message…the stakes are high, we must get out there and use the vote…oh and Miliband’s non-dom message was spot on, Blair’s message that leaving the EU would be terrible is important,   and by the way he will be voting Labour….any chance he was from ‘Operation Black Vote’?

Could this possibly be the very same ‘Brother Culture’?

UKIP Nazi party

 

Can Jon Pienaar really  just ‘happened’ to have met a well known reggae MC who hates UKIP and supports all the BBC favourite causes?  Maybe there’s a reason we had all the reggae music in the background.  Pienaar knew exactly who the guy was.

Next we had someone who thought that politics had just turned very nasty and personal…all very misguided….meaning of course Fallon saying Miliband had stabbed his brother in the back…a message that was apparently ‘orchestrated and unnecessary’….she seemed very instantly ‘on message’ there…was she really just a member of the public?  Curiously well versed and articulate on the subject.

Then we had, for balance, a Tory who said he would be voting Conservative as the Tories had done a reasonable job…Pienaar dismissed him as someone who heard the message but it went in one ear and out the other….no wonder he votes Tory…he’s so stupid!

Then we had two disabled people whom Pienaar asked ‘If I say to you Labour will tax non-doms what would you say?’   No leading question there at all.

The reply was that ‘Oh yes that’s good…tax the rich…the Tories have just stung us left, right and centre…making it very hard to live.’  She told us that she didn’t like Cameron….though she didn’t even know his name.

Pienaar then went on to say ‘Look the programme is all about balance…’   Of course it is Jon.

So we had one who hated UKIP, would vote Labour, wanted to tax non-doms and stay in the EU, another who thought Fallon was nasty, another who would vote Tory but was ignorant, and a disabled person who wanted to tax the rich and hated Cameron (whoever he is).

Balance…it’s out there somewhere.

I watched the Marr Show on BBC1 this morning and couldn’t help notice the contrast with the vigour with which he attacked George Osborne and the lethargy of his interview with Harman. As this interminable election campaign continues the BBC is more and more overt in its pro-Labour pro Leftist “pact” colours. It has no shame because it can afford to be biased.

PROGRAMME PITCH TO THE BBC

A guest Contribution by Graeme Thompson who posts as hippiepooter

Via the good offices of B-BBC, I’d like to make an open programme pitch to the BBC Documentary Commissioning Editors for a series on what those who have forged history have made of the world’s great religions. Let’s give it a working title, ‘RELIGION: THE HISTORYMAKERS’.

A mini-treatment below for a pilot to kick off the series starting with one of the world religions that on the BBC’s terms there never seems such a thing as ‘over-exposure’:-

WINSTON CHURCHILL ON ISLAM

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries ! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.  Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

Winston S. Churchill, The River War, pp 248-250 (First Edition, Vol II, Longmans, Green & Co, 1899)

ADOLF HITLER ON ISLAM

Hitler had been much impressed by a scrap of history he had learned from a delegation of distinguished Arabs. When the Mohammedans had attempted to penetrate beyond France into Central Europe during the eighth century, his visitors had told him, they had been driven back at the Battle of Tours. Had the Arabs won this battle, the world would be Mohammedan today. For theirs was a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith. The Germanic peoples would have become heirs to that religion. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament. Hitler said that the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of the country. They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire.

Hitler usually concluded this historical speculation by remarking “You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?”

‘Inside the Third Reich’, Albert Speer, p96

What the makers of history have to say might of course lead viewers to think that the problems we’re having with Islam today are part of a 1400 year continuum, but for a BBC that abides by its Charter to present facts fairly and objectively to the greater good of our democracy, this should not be a problem.

If any B-BBC readers would like to help flesh out this programme idea by sharing whatever other insights of great historic figures they may be aware of, I’m sure it can only enhance this programme’s chances of being made (!).

This person would make a great presenter.

When Hitler was on the rise Churchill warned us time and time again in the Commons that the facts and what Hitler himself had laid out in Mein Kampf made it perfectly clear what the intentions of Nazism were. We chose instead to bury our heads in the sand until faced with war or surrender. 50 million people died.

No-one in the Commons today is warning us of the consequences of appeasement and ready to take the helm when we take our heads out of the sand. Hopefully that might change this election. If not, we are heading incrementally and unobtrusively to a reckoning that will eclipse the evil of Hitler.

The islamo-correctnick BBC is a full and active player in the propaganda axis of this evil.

Here is a guest post by Biased BBC reader Robin for your perusal.

“In the election , the satirical shows on the BBC will have a profound influence adding a reinforced message to the news and current affairs programmes like Today , WATO and Panorama and the discussion programmes like Question Time . So as the Beeboid comedians poke fun at the political parties ,their leaders and policies there is one party singled out for an extra dimension ,and you can guess who it is .

A general outline of the fun the BBC will provide

Conservatives ;
The leader is a bit thick , out of touch ,Bullington Club , the other luminaries as rich selfish and slightly stupid .
Policies will be self serving and destructive

Labour;
The leader is clever but not forceful enough and Could Do Better . The other luminaries need to put their backs more into the fight
Policies are not as left wing as they should be , watered down to avoid controversy from newspapers ( although not the BBC and Guardian ) .

LibDems
Leader should not have hitched himself to Tories . He should be strong against them but “constructive” if in bed with Labour
Policies are good , Principled and pragmatic especially about the EU .

Greens
The leader is a bit naive and we should feel sorry for her , they are all good people with humanity at heart
Policies , they mean well here but perhaps the world is not ready for them yet .

UKIP
The leader is a slippery character and the other luminaries dubious to say the least
Policies ; unless we BBC can find some gaffes , or changes from last week we won’t dwell on them in case they become popular , a cardinal sin in a democracy .

Now here comes the change . Unlike the other parties , we the BBC will traduce the supporters and voters of UKIP . So the average ukip voter is portrayed as old , confused by the modern world , resentful , a loser .

And that’s that . The BBC knows these people better than they know themselves .

It’s funny that the average Beeboid will think himself respectful of old folk . But that’s only if they have something like dementia and there is headline news about lack of funds for their care needs .

And it’s great film footage to let them speak about Hard Times in the past . But as for a say in the political here and now , unless the old codger or bint denounces the mistakes of the past and tells Yoof to make a new world free of prejudice , inequality etc he/she can just be butt of The Now Show’ s incontinence gag .

It’s also an anomaly that the BBC will try to make out that a Ukippers will want to return to the 1950s , but allow the Greens a free pass to what decade or even century they want us to return to . Or why the other main parties allow a project – the EU – that was founded in the First World War to be their guiding light in the 21 century . The Hapburgs Empire went down then , and the Ottoman Empire expired BBC , just as you were born . You moved with the times until the sixties , where your clothes fashion changed but not your minds .

The really serious issue is why the BBC is allowed to intimidate by psychological means so that some of the electorate won’t vote . Is this a full and fair democracy ?

Empty handed promises

Labour’s plans to fund the NHS are just as speculative and based upon guesswork, or ‘projections’, as the Tories and yet the BBC only targets the Tory plans and relentlessly insists that they are unfunded promises whilst Labour’s are models of financial probity….apparently ‘Labour is sticking to its £2.5bn plan which it says is fully and robustly funded.’

But is that true?  Miliband has said that he will fund the NHS with ‘whatever is necessary’, his Shadow Health Minister has said that Labour will ‘Do whatever it takes’.…..remind me…which part of the economic’s syllabus did those two equations come under?

Let’s have a look at the BBC’s reporting of this issue in detail……

There will be a funding gap in the NHS, a figure accepted by all Parties, of £30 bn by 2020….How to close that gap?….£22 bn will be found by making efficiency savings in the NHS, but who will fund the remaining £8 bn and how?

From the NHS review that sets out the future shape of the NHS and how much it will cost….

In order to provide the comprehensive and high quality care the people of England clearly want, Monitor, NHS England and independent analysts have previously calculated that a combination of growing demand if met by no further annual efficiencies and flat real terms funding would produce a mismatch between resources and patient needs of nearly £30 billion a year by 2020/21. So to sustain a comprehensive high-quality NHS, action will be needed on all three fronts – demand, efficiency and funding. Less impact on any one of them will require compensating action on the other two.

 

Battle has been joined and the dividing lines drawn up…the Tories say they will increase NHS funding by over £8 bn a year by 2020 funded by growth in the economy and Labour says it will raise £2.5 billion from a Mansion tax, a levy on Tobacco companies and a crackdown on tax avoidance….but refuses to commit to funding the remaining £5.5 bn necessary to fill that gap in NHS spending.

The BBC has been investigating the issues…well, sort of.  They conclude that Labour have made credible and clear spending commitments but that the Tories in contrast have made unfunded promises on the NHS which aren’t based on any realistic plans.

The BBC isn’t bothering to fact check Labour’s claims…apparently just saying you will raise ‘x’ amount from ‘y’ is sufficient evidence that Labour has it all worked out and that such plans are totally credible….and never mind the missing £5.5 bn to deliver ‘a comprehensive high-quality NHS‘.

Tory Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, was interviewed on the Today programme by Mishal Husain and stated that economic growth would fund the NHS’ needs.  Husain was utterly determined to ignore that and dismiss it as worthless promises refusing to accept that economic growth was an acceptable measure to base any promise upon…..Dover Sentry in the comments spotted an almost exact replay of the interview later on in which the BBC interviewer later claimed that Hunt must be making it up as he went along…so no bias there…..Has the BBC got a script for ‘tackling’ Hunt?  It would seem so….the two interviews seem very much the same, almost word for word in many respects.

Whilst the BBC dismisses the basis for the Tory funding the NHS’ ‘Forward View’ report that argues the case for the extra £30 bn states…

Delivering on the transformational changes set out in this
Forward View and the resulting annual efficiencies could – if matched
by staged funding increases as the economy allows – close the £30
billion gap by 2020/21. Decisions on these options will be for the next
Parliament and government, and will need to be updated and adjusted
over the course of the five year period. However nothing in the
analysis above suggests that continuing with a comprehensive taxfunded
NHS is intrinsically un-doable.

So ‘as the economy allows’...sounds a lot like ‘if we have economic growth’ doesn’t it?

What does Sky News say?

Sky’s Health Correspondent Thomas Moore said the Conservative commitment to fund the NHS is no more or less unfunded than Labour’s.

What?  Never heard that on the BBC…can’t be true surely.  We’ll have to look at what Labour says to find out won’t we…and save the BBC the trouble of doing so.

First though let’s have a look at some of the BBC’s reporting on this…here’s Hugh Pym telling us about ‘The £8bn NHS political row’.

The LibDems seem to get a bye on their promise to fund the NHS mostly with the proceeds of that elusive ‘economic growth’…

The Liberal Democrats said a little while ago they would find the £8bn if they were in office.

Some of this would be funded by identified tax measures, but the bulk of it would, in the words of Nick Clegg, come from the “proceeds of growth”.

In other words the Lib Dems assume they will find the money if the economy is growing normally in the years leading up to 2020.

No arm waving denouncements and exclamations of incredulity from the BBC there.  But what of the Tories?…He says…

Now, after skirting around the subject and dropping various hints, the Conservatives say they will as a manifesto pledge commit to finding the £8bn in real terms in 2020.

Actually it will be “at least” £8bn and could be more, according to party sources.

There are no revenue-raising plans linked to this plan.

Er..hang on….the Tories have stated quite clearly that economic growth will fund the extra money for the NHS….here’s Osborne making the point about a strong economy paying for the NHS…

I can confirm that in the Conservative manifesto next week we will commit to a minimum real-terms increase in NHS funding of £8bn in the next five years.

We can make this commitment because we’ve got the track record and a plan to grow our economy.  In the next parliament we will continue with the same balanced approach.

Those who urged us to cut the NHS also fail to understand the most important thing of all – all of this is only possible because of a strong economy. Harm the economy with higher taxes and higher debts, and not only do you put millions of jobs at risk: you undermine the NHS and all the vital public services that a strong economy pays for.

Pym then gives us Labour’s promise…but does not expand on Labour’s  missing £5.5 bn needed to reach the required £8 bn to fund a quality NHS….

So where does that leave Labour? Unlike the other main parties it has not signed up to the Stevens financial numbers.

Labour points out it has specific tax-raising plans, including the mansion tax, which cover this spending commitment.

So whilst the Tories’ plans are ‘unfunded’ the BBC tells us that Labour’s are credible despite the fact that they don’t actually say how they will plug that spending gap.

In another BBC article there is the claim that..

Ed Miliband has resisted the temptation to say he would do whatever it takes to find the cash to match the Conservative’s £8bn NHS pledge, arguing that it is unfunded.

But that’s not true…as Sky reports Miliband said….

When pressed on whether he could commit Labour to matching the Tories’ £8bn figure, he appeared to decline to do so. “We will always do what is necessary for the NHS. We will never let the NHS down,” he said.

And that is backed up by a statement made by Labour’s Shadow Health Minister, Liz kendall, who stated on the Today programme that…

“We will do whatever it takes to get the NHS the money its needs”

…before adding…

 “We do not think it is right to make fantasy funding promises… from a Tory party that is quite frankly panicking at the moment because it’s not got any clear vision for the country or the NHS”.

‘Whatever it takes’ doesn’t sound too rigorously worked out does it?  Sounds sort of like a fantasy funding promise doesn’t it?  Still, the BBC didn’t notice and keep on reporting that Labour has solved the NHS funding problem.

Maybe they have solved it by actually deciding to cut funding….what did Burnham say in 2010 (along with promises to privatise the NHS when commercial services were more efficient than public ones)?….

Curb NHS spending pledge to save other services, says Andy Burnham

Burnham said: “I am putting the ball right back in [Osborne’s] court. It is irresponsible to increase NHS spending in real terms within the overall financial envelope that he, as chancellor, is setting.

Have a listen to the interview with Kendall, Justin Webb is feeding her cues to lay into the Coalition which she misses  repeatedly….it’s hilarious as he gets more and more exasperated at her stupidity.

Webb starts by making the claim that mid-wifery is in trouble because of the ‘growth in the birthrate’…no inkling as to the cause of that?

Webb doesn’t disagree with much, if anything, that Kendall says…she talks of the costs of medical negligence and Webb says that is a reasonable point to make, when she says the Tories haven’t said where they will get funding from Webb agrees.

He then tries to get her to say that it is irresponsible to promise more funding without saying where it will come from. …a cue to have another go at the Tories.  Kendall misses the point altogether and strangely claims she has never said that…having just lambasted the Tories for doing so allegedly.

Webb asks her if Labour will match the Tory pledge…she says no….the Tories are engaged in ‘fantasy funding’….and after much toing and froing Webb says ‘I’m not asking where the money would come from…’

er…isn’t that the whole point of the interview?  Isn’t that the whole basis of the attack on the Tories?  And yet Webb isn’t interested in where Labour will get its funding from!  Apparently the source will be ‘whatever it takes’…remind me…just which Bank is that?

Anyway…back to the real world…..

What was the King’s Fund response to Burnham’s more recent response to the NHS review that said it would need that extra £8 bn?…from the 27th January 2015…..

The elephant in the room is how this will be paid for. Labour has not yet committed to finding the additional £8 billion identified in the NHS five year forward view as being needed to close the NHS funding gap by 2020. While Burnham’s plans to improve social care and increase the pay of care workers are very welcome, they will come with a hefty price tag, which Labour will need to balance with its commitment to reduce the deficit.‘The challenge for the Labour Party is to demonstrate how it will provide the funding to implement such a positive vision of the future.’

So let’s get that clear….Burnham pledges to improve the NHS in line with an ‘ambitious’ 10 year plan that Labour hasn’t funded despite it necessarily having a ‘hefty price tag’, and Labour hasn’t come up with any plan to do so….that ‘elephant in the room’.

And yet the BBC are relentlessly attacking the Tories for making ‘unfunded’ promises.

What of  Labour’s actual funding sources…the Mansion Tax, a levy on tobacco and a crackdown on tax avoidance…just how credible are they?

Let’s start with tax avoidance, we can dismiss the tobacco levy as that will  raise a measily £150 million…the BBC is always quick to criticise the Coalition for making over ambitious claims about how much money it would raise from tackling tax avoiders with Swiss bank accounts and yet it accepts Labour’s claims that it will raise £1.1 bn from such measures…..what do the tax experts say?....

Doubt surrounds the funding of the Labour leader’s flagship NHS policy as finance experts question the lack of detail and potential “unintended consequences” in his plan to close tax loopholes to pay for it.

Regina Borromeo, a money manager at Brandywine Global Investment Management LLC, told Bloomberg it was difficult to know how to react to Miliband’s stance on Eurobonds as it “could be just political posturing”.

“With the UK elections approaching, this type of statement adds to concerns of more political headlines to come that could affect the bond market,” she added.

Miliband also plans to scrap a tax relief for hedge funds that exempts them from stamp duty when they transfer shares to an intermediary, such as a broker, as part of a financial transaction.

But it isn’t just hedge funds who use this exemption. Pension funds, financial institutions and ordinary investors also benefit from the relief, the abolition of which threatens to disrupt and penalise the savings of ordinary consumers.

“The real stinger is that it would indirectly hit UK pensioners whose pension funds invest into hedge funds.”

Not much confidence there….political posturing from Miliband that provides little detail and will have unintended consequences…and may well hit pensioners and the economy badly.

What of the Mansion Tax? It will possibly raise only £1.2 bn and again there’s not much confidence that it will work or that it is any where near the best scheme to raise money in that manner….the BBC report that the IFS said….

The idea was misdirected.

“Rather than adding a mansion tax on top of an unreformed and deficient council tax, it would be better to reform council tax itself to make it proportional to current property values,” the IFS report said.

Labour’s own Lord Mandelson doesn’t like it…

Lord Mandelson has launched a blistering attack on Labour’s flagship mansion tax policy, describing it as “crude” and “short-termist”.

In what will be seen as yet another criticism of Ed Miliband’s leadership by one of the architects of New Labour, he suggested the idea for a tax on properties worth more than £2m was not thought through and unsophisticated.

Legal and financial experts don’t like it and think it is far too complex and likely to lead to huge costs and delays.

The Spectator has a look and isn’t impressed…..

How mansion taxes will make us all poorer

 

So let’s recap….the tax avoidance measures are unlikely to raise anything like Labour promises, the tobacco levy is small beer and the Mansion Tax is probably unworkable and Labour has only promised to fund £2.5 bn of the necessary £8 bn to keep the NHS going….though Miliband makes the ‘unfunded’ promise that he will do whatever is necessary for the NHS….and the King’s Fund says Labour’s plans are themselves unfunded promises.

And yet the BBC still insists that Labour have provided us with a comprehensive funding solution that sets out how they will pay for their largesse despite, as the BBC’s Hugh Pym admits….

In the end £8bn could prove too small a government top-up for the NHS.

If £8 bn is too small what price £2.5 billion that Labour thinks is adequate?  Where is the BBC question mark over  that?

When there was some alleged ‘islamophobic’ daubings on an Islamic building and a supposed arson attack (any charges for the mysterious 5 who were arrested by police?) after the murder of Lee Rigby by Muslim terrorists the BBC wasn’t shy about reporting that the EDL may have been involved and that Muslims were in essence ‘under siege’….though the suspicion must be that the ‘vandalism’and ‘arson’ were done by Muslim activists in order to bolster their claim to be under siege.

Not so quick to report the ‘racist’ vandalism to Labour and Tory offices in Aberdeen which was reported early this morning by STV…

Police probe after Tory and Labour offices vandalised in Aberdeen

A swastika sign, the word “scum” and a letter Q standing for “quisling”, or traitor, were painted on the front of the Conservative offices in the city’s West Mount Street.

Tory councillor for Hazlehead Ross Thomson, who is also the party’s candidate for the Aberdeen South constituency, posted a picture of the graffiti on Twitter on Saturday morning.

Scottish Labour’s office in nearby Rosemount Place also had a large Q painted on the door.

Mr Thomson said: “Once again we see the ugly side of nationalism on display.

 

Why are the BBC so slow to report this appalling racist attack and attribute it to the SNP’s supporters as they did with the EDL, the EDL who apparently ‘pollute’ people’s minds according to the BBC?

Then again the BBC themselves are happy to slyly suggest the Tories and UKIP are racist…today we had the first episode of ‘Dead Ringers’ and heard that Cameron was on tour….might even have a few Black people along they joked…and UKIP liked to look smart in their coordinated ensemble of purple tie and brown shirt….get it?

Have to say Dead Ringers was more Dead Sheep than Dead Funny….very laboured and strained…..you could hear the cogs grinding as they ground out the jokes….and the David Cameron impression was abysmal…more like Prince Charles snogging MacMillan and both talking at once.

The BBC reports…

Man held over ‘US army base plot’

A 20-year-old US citizen has been charged with attempting to explode a car bomb at Fort Riley in Manhattan, Kansas.

John T Booker Jr was making final preparations to carry out the suicide attack on behalf of the Islamic State (IS), the FBI said.

Mr Booker previously had tried to join the US Army, but was denied entry because of internet posts about “jihad”.

Authorities say that US personnel were never in danger.

And that’s it from the BBC…..ah….the BBC has just updated….but not really…….still a ‘Mr Booker’ in the frame.

And yet there is so much more out there……

John T Booker, also known as Muhammed Abdullah Hassan…

He’d already been arrested by the security services in the US last year, put in  mental health facility and presumably released as he has been re-arrested today.

On 20 March 2014, the Kansas City Division FBI became aware of an individual named BOOKER aka Muhammad Abdullah Hassan who had publicly stated his intention to commit jihad, bidding farewell to his friends and making comments indicating his jihad was imminent. BOOKER had been recruited by the US Army in Kansas City, Mo., in February 2014 and was scheduled to report for Basic Training on 7 April 2014. Kansas City Division Agents interviewed BOOKER on 20 March 2014.

His YouTube site is still up offering us videos from the likes of Anwar Al Awlaki.

A much fuller report than the BBC’s is available from ‘Business Insider UK’.…very strange….are they the UK’s premier news gathering service with the largest number of journalists outside of China?

Why is it so many other people, including mere bloggers, report so much more than the BBC?

 The BBC is entirely corrupt…imagine if this were a UKIP candidate complaining about the number of ‘foreigners’ in his country……do you think the BBC would categorise it merely as a case of incitement to commit vandalism or would the UKIP candidate be hung out to dry as a ‘racist’?…..This isn’t from a BBC report….

‘Chavs and their sickening England flags’ Words of Labour candidate who called for resignation of Plaid rival over ‘outrageous’ remarks

“I agree that it’s completely sickening how many England flags are to be seen around Wales. It truly shows the degree our society has been infiltrated by incomers who are not ready to integrate.

But this is……