« Conservative vice-chairman in Northern Ireland quits Tory-UUP joint committee | Main | Pauline Neville-Jones analyses the foreign policy implications of a prolonged global recession »


"Conservatives would ensure that small firms automatically receive rate relief, cutting their paperwork and their tax bills and giving many of them a fighting chance to stay afloat.”

Who could disagree with that?"

I certainly wouldn't - in this climate small businesses need all the help they can get!

Oh I'm sure somebody will Jonathan. On this board they always do.

"Who could disagree with that?"

I do. If business rates are too high (and I suspect they are) then they should be just cut without any bureaucracy to worry about.

But the real killer for businesses, both small and large, it that notorious tax on jobs known as employers' National insurance; this too should be cut to zero!

Jobs are more important than benefits so there could be balancing cuts in benefits and tax credits should go.

How dare Caroline Spelman seek to further reduce the flow to Govt coffers when the Govt is doing so much to help the country out of the mess America has got us into to? Just how dare she? Those small companies will just waste it on trivial extras.

"Oh I'm sure somebody will...."

Always happy to oblige, Malcolm!

How dare Caroline Spelman seek to further reduce the flow to Govt coffers

Because it's not the bloody government's money. It belongs to the people who've earned it.

The "Do nothing" tag is irritating but initiatives from our side just trickle out without much publicity and so make less impact than they should.

Is there not a case for summarising such announcements under the relevant headings, so that, even if the document does not lead the BBC news, at least all MPs will be able to quote it to rebut Labour critiscisms?

There will be far fewer firms left to help by the time the Tories gain power.

Never understood how anyone can justify the NI employers contributions to me its always seemed like a disincentive to employ people. Abolishing it should be a priority if you want to cut unemployment.

There is no "do-nothing-party" web site - or if there is it doesn't google.

Perhaps Tim or Jonathan or somebody suitably web savvy can collect all the ideas we have set out and pull them together on a new site so every time Labour say we are the do-nothing party we can direct people to it?

While I've never considered "the do-nothing party" to be an insult, this is a good proposal.

John Moss 19.38 - go to:

This is a summary of Conservative policy on the economy.


"Never understood how anyone can justify the NI employers contributions to me its always seemed like a disincentive to employ people. Abolishing it should be a priority if you want to cut unemployment.

Posted by: Jack Stone | March 06, 2009 at 18:53 "

Please tell me you attached this post to the wrong name - it is positive, makes sense and has no misspellings.

>>Those small companies will just waste it on trivial extras.<<

Yeah. Trivial extras like "not going broke." Nice one, Troll.

I suspect Snegchui's comment was intended to be satire but people on this forum always fall for that. Too busy defending Tory spokespersons.

The best way of helping small, medium-sized and large businesses (and we need them all) is to cut various taxes, not least NI. All else is piffle. Any proposal that involves relief, rebate re-whatever simply adds to the bureaucracy. Just do it - start talking about tax cuts.

Oh, look at Malcolm Dunn's statement above my first post.
Dear God.
I have spent the evening asking small businesses locally what they knew about this. I had a small result some weeks back about the rebates on no smoking in pubs.
I like this site and I do appreciate the wide knowledge that comes through,. I have been guilty myself myself of missing the odd irony (well it was too subtle wannit), but I thougt I laid with a heavy trowel here.

Without any reference to parliament and in effect ripping up the European Directive which dictates no state interference, the British Government has today nationalised Lloyds TSB with a 63% controlling share in the mighty bank which has mighty problems. The significance of this decision has many political overtones and questions, which need answers from government. What is the new relationship between government and the bank. Does it intend to exercise control of its board. Who will head the bank to ensure the taxpayers interests are put first. How does this affect our relationship with the European Union. Under what authority did the government give itself the power to nationalise the banking industry. Who will pay for this and how. Will the government now say the Bank of England is independent. Will the government now use its muscle as state sponsor of this bank to make it lend to businesses and to individuals or will it continue to say we're in a global free market and that the market will decide. Will the British Govt now take responsibility for failure of the banking industry and henceforth for its further decision making and will it still say "We saved the banks"?

"tax relief"

It is a good policy, but I would like to see it in slightly different language.

It is 'reliefs' and 'credits' that make up much of the time consuming, wasteful paper work that gets dumped on the small business and citizen.

Instead of seeing it as a relief, it should just be seen as a lower rate, and it should be for the collectors to inform businesses of, and to collect from business the correct rate.

It is the mentality and language of 'allowances', 'reliefs', 'credits' (so beloved of Brown) that really needs changing.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker