Three things follow from that observation. The first is that the PAC needs a much bigger budget to do its work properly.
That bigger budget to employ one of the country’s leading tax experts no doubt.
Three things follow from that observation. The first is that the PAC needs a much bigger budget to do its work properly.
That bigger budget to employ one of the country’s leading tax experts no doubt.
Even better is today’s “Don’t tell me there is no money: there is. It’s just in the wrong hands”
The PAC needs a much smaller amount of Margaret “limelight” Hodge.
I’m fairly sure Richie has more money than at least 80% of the population. Let’s rob him and give it to the poor. Sorry, I meant “more fairly distribute wealth in society”.
Rob,
With his age, previous career and wife’s career, he should be one of the 1%.
So let’s follow that through:
A committee who’s remit is to scrutinise public accounts, to ensure acccountability and value for money for the public as it were, wants, no NEEDS, more public money.
Ritchienomics.
Whoever this quote is from is talking nonsense. They are suggesting that the PAC is not doing its work properly. Which of course it is.
The PAC’s job is to scrutinise public expenditure which is why it primarily investigates the tax affairs of private sector businesses.
If that’s not doing their job properly, I don’t know what is!
SE: yes, I agree he probably is. I was just being cautious.