***
The media is full of frothing indignation about Michael Ashcroft's tax status - lots of the self-righteous and politically opportunitistic folk littering that media world are sounding off about the terrible nature of his crimes.
Which are precisely what? As far as I can tell, Ashcroft's crimes are twofold and only apply when combined:
1. Being Rich
2. Being a Tory
Now I know that is enough for some people (funnily being a filthy rich socialist - Benn, Foot, Harman, Toynbee - makes you loved and regarded, something I've never understood)but I see it as an affront. Ashcroft has given large sums to a political party that until the past two of three years has seemed rather a long way from getting power. Unlike Ecclestone, Mittal and Drayson who made very large donations to Labour, Ashcroft's donations have done him no good at all. Indeed, the endless media curiosity, the investigations, the accusations are all things most of us would want to avoid. And have probably damaged Ashcroft's business interests.
Finally, I see no reason why a British citizen - whatever their tax status - shouldn't be allowed to give freely to support whatever causes they wish. I reckon, Ashcroft probsbly pays more into the UK Government's coffers each year than most of us pay in a lifetime. And if he doesn't pay taxes here on money he earns in some foreign place, so what.
....
1 comment:
Ashcroft gave an assurance re. tax before he took up his seat in the Lords. It appears that even by Hague's standards, this didn't actually happen.
Were similar assurances requested of Labour non-dom donors/peers, and did they fulfill them?
-ajb
Post a Comment