RentingForever

Publishing: 0%, though they did pay a bonus (we exceeded all targets).

But it will be economic suicide to keep paying 80% of this many people's salaries indefinitely. They'll have to grasp the nettle at some point.

Quite possibly a Corbyn government would have done. Telling quote for me was the one about any system that offers up Johnson and Corbyn as the only choices for leader is a fundamentally broken system.

I think they ought to be more worried about the crumbling cliffs at the end of their gardens.

I'm guessing it becomes the property of the Queen.

(sorry - duplicate post)

I don't know anywhere where that VAT drop has been passed on to customers - most businesses have absorbed it. And when it is normalised back to 20% I predict we'll see a 15% price increase across the board.

Corrected for you. Many of us haven't had that luxury.

So nobody should have medical records? (which state what vaccinations you've had)

Friend of mine spends much of the year housesitting for boomers in the country. They get the chickens and then realise they're trapped and can't take holidays because the chickens need daily attention and can't be put in the equivalent of kennels. So enter my friend who gets a free week in a nice house in the country, while the owners get to go on their Saga cruise.

And don't get me started on Buffalo Wings.

I'm guessing that expense for the councils will be much lower after the Government let coronavirus run rampant through the care homes last year.

Except there will be a cap. 3000 mortgages supported per month. Not sure that will make a huge difference.

Sunak was looking into equalising tax on assets at the same rate as income tax. But, according to the Sunday Times a few weeks ago, the idea was dropped "because Tory donors didn't like it". The corruption in this country is now blatant.

Not sure it’s a case of rich vs poor. Better to use the current limited supply in the countries where the worst outbreaks are - which currently are Europe, America, some of S.America and S. africa. Little point using those doses in other countries where there is no outbreak at this stage.

I think that’s what is happening, in the UK at least. I got vaccinated this week (I’m on the clinically vulnerable list because of diabetes) and got the Pfizer one; most of the other people I have spoken to got it too. I suspect they’re leaving the AZ one to the next waves once the over 60s are done.

10% protection against mild and moderate cases, but still good protection against severe disease, hospitalisation and death. All the other vaccines are less effective against the SA variant too, albeit not to the same extent.

It exists. It's an international convention and associated court. Not part of the EU. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights

Completely bonkers. The ECHR pre-dates the EU, has zero links to the EU's institutions (it's a spin-off from the Council of Europe, which is entirely separate to the EU), and was instrumental in forcing a lot of changes for the good on many governments across Europe. As an example I remember that the UK government in the 90s was forced to reform laws discriminating against gay people because of ECHR judgements. Does Farage just want to abolish anything with "European" in its name?

Is that right? I remember the UK government saying they planned to donate surplus way back last year when it was first queried why they were buying up so much.

Jeez - £2000 for a month in the Algarve all-inclusive in Winter. Count me in!!!

Paying per property not per individual means single occupiers will be disproportionally affected compared to Council Tax. So no.

Assuming that nobody knowingly sold cladding that didn't meet statutory requirements the chain of responsibility (least responsible first) is probably: leaseholders < freeholders < builders < suppliers < developers < standard setters (industry bodies? government, ultimately?) Individual taxpayers who don't own one of these flats are the least responsible of all, but will probably end up paying for the bulk of the remediation because that's where government finds it easiest to get its money. Not entirely sure where the insurance companies fit into this.

Someone from the government said on TV last night (Newsnight? Peston?) that the "£50/month loan" would be set against the property, not the leaseholder "so that it doesn't affect their credit rating" and "it's just like another service charge". So given that these loans could be running for 25+ years, I guess people will have to be taking into account the 'cladding loan' they'll be taking on when they buy flats in future. Or just an assumption that any flat purchase will come with a £50/month charge.

How's that going at the moment?