Why George Osborne must be removed
Retiring Bank of England Governor, Mervyn King got in a lethal perting shot at Chancellor George Osborne in a farewell interview on the Sky News Murhnaghan Show this morning. For more background on how Michael Howard came to appoint Osborne read Teetering Tories archives for late 2005 and early 2006.
To understand the scale of the mistake on North Sea Tax made by Osborne in his first budget, since corrected, which the retiring Governor blamed for the disastrous state of Britain's economy last year, see this link or the post to which it directs, quoted in full below as it today also seems so relevant:
To understand the scale of the mistake on North Sea Tax made by Osborne in his first budget, since corrected, which the retiring Governor blamed for the disastrous state of Britain's economy last year, see this link or the post to which it directs, quoted in full below as it today also seems so relevant:
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Gormless Governance by Milksop Ministers!
Fittingly George (née Gideon) Osborne had a recurrance of what
appeared to me to be teenage acne for his appearence before the Commons
Finance Committee yesterday. The spectacular blunder over the two
billion pound tax grab against the North Sea oil and gas industry was
covered on Channel Four TV News, last evening as may be read about and
viewed from this link, amusingly titled, "Crude awakening for Osborne's refuelling of the economy". More from Aberdeen on that topic this morning from here.
This blog immediately pointed out the grossness of Osborne's budget misjudgement, read here, when the details were known. Many years spent analysing the feasibility of commercialising North Sea oil fields allowed me to immediately recognise the potential and pointless disaster Osborne had created. Obtaining an acceptable annual average rate of return on such huge investments is always stunningly adversely affected by apparently small changes to tax legislation. All such tax regimes result in percentage returns based on the realised hydrocarbons sales price, it is therefore completely disingenuous of Osborne to argue, as he did yesterday, that changing the tax regime was the only means the government (not necessarily synonymous with the people of the country) would gain its share of rising market prices. As I stated in my posting of last Thursday in the link above:
Furthermore and even more critically at present, North Sea energy (is) in a declining phase (and) thus needs extra tax incentives as it provides a protection against the ever growing middle-east chaos.
Is immaturity sufficient excuse for Britain's milksop ministers getting everything so clearly wrong, read this on the RAF pilot shortage for example? Is David Cameron as big a moron as his daily actions now increasingly indicate and can Nick Clegg really be as cretinous as he is allowing himself to appear?
Whatever the answer, as set out in my posting of yesterday immediately beneath this, it is clear that with Gordon Brown these two set out to deliberately bankrupt our country in a vain and hopeless bid to save the doomed Euro, immediately following the last General Election. It has since appeared that action might well prove to be be the worst they could achieve, however, daily growing evidence now throws even that assumption into doubt!
WHY DID THE THREE MAIN PARTY LEADERS AUTHORISE ALISTAIR DARLING TO SIGN UP FOR THE EFSF, KNOWING THE PROCEDURE WAS ILLEGAL, THE UK LACKED ANY GOVERNMENT WITH THE POWER SO TO DO AND THAT IT WOULD MERELY WASTE BILLIONS TO DELAY THE INEVITABLE?
This blog immediately pointed out the grossness of Osborne's budget misjudgement, read here, when the details were known. Many years spent analysing the feasibility of commercialising North Sea oil fields allowed me to immediately recognise the potential and pointless disaster Osborne had created. Obtaining an acceptable annual average rate of return on such huge investments is always stunningly adversely affected by apparently small changes to tax legislation. All such tax regimes result in percentage returns based on the realised hydrocarbons sales price, it is therefore completely disingenuous of Osborne to argue, as he did yesterday, that changing the tax regime was the only means the government (not necessarily synonymous with the people of the country) would gain its share of rising market prices. As I stated in my posting of last Thursday in the link above:
Furthermore and even more critically at present, North Sea energy (is) in a declining phase (and) thus needs extra tax incentives as it provides a protection against the ever growing middle-east chaos.
Is immaturity sufficient excuse for Britain's milksop ministers getting everything so clearly wrong, read this on the RAF pilot shortage for example? Is David Cameron as big a moron as his daily actions now increasingly indicate and can Nick Clegg really be as cretinous as he is allowing himself to appear?
Whatever the answer, as set out in my posting of yesterday immediately beneath this, it is clear that with Gordon Brown these two set out to deliberately bankrupt our country in a vain and hopeless bid to save the doomed Euro, immediately following the last General Election. It has since appeared that action might well prove to be be the worst they could achieve, however, daily growing evidence now throws even that assumption into doubt!
WHY DID THE THREE MAIN PARTY LEADERS AUTHORISE ALISTAIR DARLING TO SIGN UP FOR THE EFSF, KNOWING THE PROCEDURE WAS ILLEGAL, THE UK LACKED ANY GOVERNMENT WITH THE POWER SO TO DO AND THAT IT WOULD MERELY WASTE BILLIONS TO DELAY THE INEVITABLE?
Labels: EFSF, Osborne's budget
posted by Martin at 11:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home