Off Topic General Election Special

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Terrorism Act 2000
This legislation - introduced by the Labour government - gave a broad definition of terrorism for the first time. The Act also gave the police the power to detain terrorist suspects for up to seven days and created a list of proscribed terrorist organisations.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
This was passed after the 11 September attacks in New York. It allowed foreign terrorist suspects to be detained indefinitely.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Fourteen-day detention
This was a measure, contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allowed the police to question terrorist suspects for up to 14 days.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Control Orders
The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. A form of house arrest, control orders were replaced by Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures - or TPims - in 2012.

Corbyn: Voted against it

ID cards
Legislation which paved the way for the controversial introduction of ID cards, was introduced by the Labour government in 2006. The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Ninety-day detention
Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings, this legislation - part of the 2006 Terrorism Act - extended the detention-without-charge period from 14 to 28 days. The Labour government was forced to back down after trying to convince Parliament to back 90 days.

Corbyn: Voted against at every stage

Counter-terrorism Act 2008
This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days, but the Labour government abandoned this after being defeated in the House of Lords.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act
This was the 2011 legislation used to replace control orders with TPims.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Justice and Security Act 2013
This legislation granted controversial new powers to close court doors on the grounds of national security. It allowed ministers to ask for a "closed material procedure" - an order to bar the public, press and claimant in a case from court.

Corbyn: Voted against it

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016
Referred to as the "snooper's charter" by critics, this legislation allowed for the bulk interception of communications.

Corbyn: Absent from the vote

How many of those did May support?
 
Terrorism Act 2000
This legislation - introduced by the Labour government - gave a broad definition of terrorism for the first time. The Act also gave the police the power to detain terrorist suspects for up to seven days and created a list of proscribed terrorist organisations.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
This was passed after the 11 September attacks in New York. It allowed foreign terrorist suspects to be detained indefinitely.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Fourteen-day detention
This was a measure, contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allowed the police to question terrorist suspects for up to 14 days.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Control Orders
The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. A form of house arrest, control orders were replaced by Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures - or TPims - in 2012.

Corbyn: Voted against it

ID cards
Legislation which paved the way for the controversial introduction of ID cards, was introduced by the Labour government in 2006. The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Ninety-day detention
Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings, this legislation - part of the 2006 Terrorism Act - extended the detention-without-charge period from 14 to 28 days. The Labour government was forced to back down after trying to convince Parliament to back 90 days.

Corbyn: Voted against at every stage

Counter-terrorism Act 2008
This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days, but the Labour government abandoned this after being defeated in the House of Lords.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act
This was the 2011 legislation used to replace control orders with TPims.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Justice and Security Act 2013
This legislation granted controversial new powers to close court doors on the grounds of national security. It allowed ministers to ask for a "closed material procedure" - an order to bar the public, press and claimant in a case from court.

Corbyn: Voted against it

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016
Referred to as the "snooper's charter" by critics, this legislation allowed for the bulk interception of communications.

Corbyn: Absent from the vote

Are you going to list how May, Bozo etc voted?

Was interesting to see Bozo criticise Corbyn for the way he voted to then be told he voted the same way <laugh>
 
I think it's pretty good that Corbyn voted against most of that anti-terror stuff. Government shouldnt be allowed to spy on and detain anyone they want without charge. I'm still not voting labour mind.

Heh. I'm the opposite. I don't agree with him on the terror stuff and while pacifism is ideal, I'm not sure that you can always avoid conflict. But obviously I'm voting for him. Personally I don't think his views on this stuff will be that influential. Most people will want more to be done to prevent attacks and I think it'll happen whoever is in government.
 
My kids are privately educated.

That's 2 less children in the state system. A system that, unfortunately, was failing my eldest to the point where something drastic had to be done. Hence why he was taken out of mainstream eduction and sent private. I couldn't be happier with how he has progressed and flourished, not only educationally but as a young man.

I have made real sacrifices ( I'm not going into detail) to pay for their education and graft hard, my other half works even harder. The hours we both work are ridiculous.

Nothing has been handed to either of us on a plate.

We already pay a lot of tax but under Corbyn we'd have to find another £4000 per year, **** knows where that would come from.

Most of the parents I know, which is quite a lot, are in the same boat.

Not rich, not wealthy but have made the massive financial commitment and huge personal sacrifice to send their kids to a private school.

Never mind all that I'll fork out another £4000 a year, apparently I can afford it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Happy Tiger
My kids are privately educated.

That's 2 less children in the state system. A system that, unfortunately, was failing my eldest to the point where something drastic had to be done. Hence why he was taken out of mainstream eduction and sent private. I couldn't be happier with how he has progressed and flourished, not only educationally but as a young man.

I have made real sacrifices ( I'm not going into detail) to pay for their education and graft hard, my other half works even harder. The hours we both work are ridiculous.

Nothing has been handed to either of us on a plate.

We already pay a lot of tax but under Corbyn we'd have to find another £4000 per year, **** knows where that would come from.

Most of the parents I know, which is quite a lot, are in the same boat.

Not rich, not wealthy but have made the massive financial commitment and huge personal sacrifice to send their kids to a private school.

Never mind all that I'll fork out another £4000 a year, apparently I can afford it.

Is that £4k in VAT on the private school fees?

Do you really think they should be VAT exempt while basic food and clothing aren't?
 
But 'Austerity' has the nation bleeding to death.

It will have to happen at some point. If not now then in 10, 20, 30 years when the budget is even bigger and more people have to suffer.

Better to get things under control sooner rather then later wouldn't you say? Or maybe we can just pass the problems on to the next generations, **** them it's not our problem.
 
Yes it's 4K on top.

Have you read my post?

Thanks, I just wasn't sure if you meant income tax or VAT on the school fees at first.

I can't understand an argument where these fees should be VAT exempt. It's not additional VAT, it's the introduction of any at all. It can't be right that every adult pays VAT for stuff like food and clothing which are obviously essentials rather than luxuries while the very top percent get an exemption for their private school fees, an option which isn't available to most people no matter how hard they work. The very definition of a luxury. The exorbitant fees are down to the schools, and if they choose to pass on the VAT to you that's also down to them.

I know you've admitted you'll vote for what's best for you which is your choice, but I can't see how anyone could morally have an issue with the introduction of VAT on private school fees.

With respect, if only just being able to afford private school fees is your plight, then there are people far worse off and in far more unjust circumstances than you thanks to austerity.
 
My kids are privately educated.

That's 2 less children in the state system. A system that, unfortunately, was failing my eldest to the point where something drastic had to be done. Hence why he was taken out of mainstream eduction and sent private. I couldn't be happier with how he has progressed and flourished, not only educationally but as a young man.

I have made real sacrifices ( I'm not going into detail) to pay for their education and graft hard, my other half works even harder. The hours we both work are ridiculous.

Nothing has been handed to either of us on a plate.

We already pay a lot of tax but under Corbyn we'd have to find another £4000 per year, **** knows where that would come from.

Most of the parents I know, which is quite a lot, are in the same boat.

Not rich, not wealthy but have made the massive financial commitment and huge personal sacrifice to send their kids to a private school.

Never mind all that I'll fork out another £4000 a year, apparently I can afford it.

I'll chime in here, my 5 year old daughter is in a packed out EYFS class. 31 kids with one teacher. The next class will be the same. How many more will be squeezed in after VAT is charged on all private school fees?

I can see the sense in charging VAT on someone like Ehab sending his children to a school with stables, horse jumping tracks, a croquet course and a polo pitch. It's ridiculous to charge it to those just comfortable families who have worked very hard and made a lot of sacrifices to give their children the best possible chance. Because let's not forget, private schools are better. They consistently pull better grades, almost always have better facilities and a lot of them offer subjects/courses that state schools just don't.

They are not an evil, and attacking them is just spiteful.
 
Thanks, I just wasn't sure if you meant income tax or VAT on the school fees at first.

I can't understand an argument where these fees should be VAT exempt. It's not additional VAT, it's the introduction of any at all. It can't be right that every adult pays VAT for stuff like food and clothing which are obviously essentials rather than luxuries while the very top percent get an exemption for their private school fees, an option which isn't available to most people no matter how hard they work. The very definition of a luxury. The exorbitant fees are down to the schools, and if they choose to pass on the VAT to you that's also down to them.

I know you've admitted you'll vote for what's best for you which is your choice, but I can't see how anyone could morally have an issue with the introduction of VAT on private school fees.

With respect, if only just being able to afford private school fees is your plight, then there are people far worse off and in far more unjust circumstances than you thanks to austerity.

People paying to send their kids to public schools remove the burden on state schools (while still paying for those state schools).

People paying for private health care remove the burden on the NHS (while still paying for the NHS).

Penalising people for doing this would be a remarkably stupid thing to do, particularly as many can barely afford them as it is.

Particularly if they were also having to take an income tax hit as well.
 
I'll chime in here, my 5 year old daughter is in a packed out EYFS class. 31 kids with one teacher. The next class will be the same. How many more will be squeezed in after VAT is charged on all private school fees?

I can see the sense in charging VAT on someone like Ehab sending his children to a school with stables, horse jumping tracks, a croquet course and a polo pitch. It's ridiculous to charge it to those just comfortable families who have worked very hard and made a lot of sacrifices to give their children the best possible chance. Because let's not forget, private schools are better. They consistently pull better grades, almost always have better facilities and a lot of them offer subjects/courses that state schools just don't.

They are not an evil, and attacking them is just spiteful.

Am I missing something here?

VAT is paid on all luxuries, supposedly. How can it possibly be even considered that private school fees, of all things, should be VAT exempt. It's pretty much the best example of a luxury that only a select few can afford. Clothes aren't VAT exempt. Try and justify how everyone should pay VAT for clothes but not private school fees. The mere suggestion is just utterly baffling.

I get why these schools are good. I've done a bit of work in the ones round here and seen how nice they are. But they're as luxury as luxury gets. They should be one of the very first things to charge VAT on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TreeHugger
It's **** all to do with Tory cronies, many of us can just see that the numbers don't add up and the manifesto claims on what can be raised are complete bollocks.

So Labour's tax rises according to the Manifesto are not going to raise that much money? McDonnell and Corbyn must be right when they say their tax proposals are moderate, and people earning over £80,000 will be asked to pay a little extra.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.