But he is incapable of ever doing so. It is sad that a Labour leader can find nothing better to say than U turn and Hammond should have spent more time working out what he wanted to do than worry about reciting a few stale jokes. Watching it last week, I was struck by the grim sullen faces on the Labour front bench - they really do believe they are waging a class war. Ridicule, sarcasm and humour seem to have bypassed them completely. It is a sad day when a Tory Chancellor can make soundbites and policies to redress the balance in favour of the working man and the Labour leader's only retort is that he has committed a U turn.
Personally I don't think much of the notion that politicians can never change their mind and must always run the gauntlet of cries of U-turn. Blair for all of his sins or rather crimes against humanity at least knew the value in owning up to a mistake. However was it on this occasion?
There is undoubtedly a lot of abuse of self-employed status simply for the tax perks. If most of them were real entrepeneurs fair enough but they are not. For someone to work for one employer for several years and work as an employee (by doing what he is told while subject to discipline) but be called a consultant and get his money by way of daily fees to his limited company and then draw dividends form the company instead of receiving salary with tax and NI deducted at a higher rate thus lessening his tax bill is not in my view such an entrepreneur. The test always comes when the employer sacks him and then, hey presto, the contractor suddenly claims that he was an employee all the time so that he can bring a claim of Unfair Dismissal. IR 35 has a lot to answer for and the tax authorities have been trying to do something about it for years. IR 35 companies always consist of a man his wife and, if so desired, the dog as well being sole shareholders with the registered office being the home address. They hardly ever produce accounts, often fail to insure themselves and work on the production line and submit invoices to ensure that they can then be paid on payday without any tax or NI contributions being paid. The reason being that they are supposed to do that themselves.
It is a scam under which they get more and the more unscrupulous never pay their tax closing the company and setting up under a different name if they can. Employers go along with it because they believe that it is to their benefit to have a worker who does not have employment protection. The benefits are minimal. Both also benefit from reduced NICs
So my friends, I think Hammond was probably right first time around. His only error was to spring a surprise in the way he did it and misjudge the mood of his party.
