Poor Ritchie

Devolving taxing power to cities is about breaking up the power of the state to manage the economy

What merit in being the Lord High Tax Denouncer if the devolution of power means that the centre cannot be the Curajus State?

19 comments on “Poor Ritchie

  1. “And at the same time the need for a theory of devolved power is pressing”

    And WTF does this mean? Presumably he will allow devolved power as long as the curajus state has control?

    There is only one thing to discuss with devolved taxes and spending, how to deal with the resultant bankruptcies in lefty areas when they finally prove that the magic money tree theory doesn’t work in practice.

  2. Is this a move towards getting Bjorns Beer Effect into play round here? Or are the areas involved still too big? Lots of Londoners never see Boris in the pub…

  3. During the referendum campaign there was a piece about Shetland and their windfall from oil in the 70s.

    Their negotiations were largely conducted by local residents and councillors, and they succeeded in getting a very good result. One of those involved was interviewed and said something along the lines of “I was negotiating on behalf of the guy who fixes my tractor and the woman who looks after my kids. I had to get a good result.”

  4. I note he is not against limited devolution. In fact he suggests regions for this: Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland. but NOT England. Why not England if Scotland does get devolution? Is it because you think England will voty Conservative Ritchie?

  5. A quick question: Are these devolved taxes going to be instead of the current central state taxes or on top off them?

    Sorry, silly question.

  6. Naked self-interest from a buffoon seeing his dreams of influence shattered – his retweets and shares continue to flatline. He is an object of ongoing derision on Twitter and now has a hotline to precisely 1 MP out of 651 – it couldn’t happen to a nastier, more spiteful or more stupid individual….

  7. @Ironman,

    Well he didn’t object to this statement from Seamus:

    “In respect of the Scottish/English question, an English parliament must be resisted at all costs, since the English do not vote progressively enough. This would upset the current devolutionary settlement designed to ensure Progressive control over as much of the UK as possible, irrespective of how the English vote. “

  8. Hoping that we dont have english regional parliaments. Just another layer of politicians and admin costs.

  9. Can we have more links to weepy losers, please? I know it’s wrong but my schadenfreude is not yet satiated.

  10. Thanks abacab. Only one so far, but it’s a good one. Even has a “Let me be clear” which is 2015 speak for in all honesty, on my mother’s grave, etc, i.e. a dead giveaway you’re being lied to.

  11. The “gerrymandering” bit was good, too. That’s Lefty-speak for “altering constituency boundaries so they have a nodding resemblance to the make-up of the country”. At one end you have Na h-Eileanan an Iar (that’s “Western Isles” to the uninitiated) with 22 thousand voters, now firmly in the DPW camp, and at the other end my native Isle of Wight with 111 thousand, but they elected a Tory with a good UKIP showing, so that doesn’t count.

  12. Un-Gerrymandering is gerrymandering when it doesn’t serve Progressive ends. Obviously.

  13. I thought ‘let me be clear…’ was the prelude to ‘… I’m not going to answer your question, I’m going to answer the one I’ve got a fully prepared, focus grouped, deeply thought through sounding but totally bland response to.’

  14. “the power of the state to manage the economy”

    The state has no such power – they can only mismanage the economy.

  15. “Why not England if Scotland does get devolution?”

    It’s because England is THE MAN. It’s analogous to the way that only white people can be racist.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.