Posts Tagged ‘government’
Many older people don’t bother with new pension schemes, thinking that they’re too old to get the benefits. But new pension reforms mean that they can up their contributions by 258% in just a few years and take out all their money without paying any tax. Woohoo!
Here’s how it works. In the last 2 years companies started automatically putting their employees on a pension scheme. Once you’re enrolled, your contributions are deducted from your payslip, your employer contributes something and you get tax relief from the government.
But people who were over 50 tended not to bother with it. WRONG.
If you do it, under the new reforms you can take all your wonga out of these schemes when you retire, rather than bothering with boring, stifling annuities.
Here’s the maths. (Theoretically.)
If you earn £24,000 a year this year, make an increase in contributions in 2018, and get a small pay rise every year – and there is a rate of 5 per cent annual growth – a 55-year-old could make £14,134 by the age of 65.
So get on it, silver foxes! That cruise ship buffet is waiting…
The mucky-minded of Britain were asked if they wanted the government to introduce porn filters to the internet. An overwhelming majority laughed in the face of such an idea, with a take-up for Sky, BT and Virgin Media all below 10%.
Ofcom have done a report on such a thing, and found that most people chose not to block porn from their internet connections, telling ISPs to stick their adult content filters up their holes. Yeah. Like that. Oh yeah. Einfach so, mein kleines Kaninchen.
This is bad news for the Govt because they shouted loudly about all this and made BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin Media all contact their customers to force them to turn the modesty filters on or off. It is a weird notion. Imagine a Government official popping their head around your door and saying “watching any dirty films any time soon?”
You’d throw a shoe at them.
Ofcom found that 5% of new BT customers turned the filters on, with 8% of Sky customers and a measly 4% of Virgin Media users. The fusty sorts at TalkTalk already have the Homesafe parental controls system. 36% of those guys wanted to get it turned on. Oooh yeah.
Now, all ISPs are required to ‘pre-tick’ the box that sees adult content filters switched to ‘on’, which means new customers have to actively say they want it switched off during the installation process.
Naturally, the whole thing has already been a farce, with non-bongo sites being blocked by these clunky modesty wrappers. People found that they were denied access to sites which offer help about domestic violence and sexual health.
Either way, it seems like Britain is all for a dirtier internet, which is to be applauded. So the chastity belt wearing simpletons at Westminster.
Sounds dodgy doesn’t it? How can a government do something like that? Well, Cameron & Co. have wheeled out the usual excuse of terrorism. See, if the government can snoop on everyone, that’ll stop someone from listening to God and blowing themselves up.
According to Cameron, these fast-tracked measures are absolutely necessary to defend our national security against the threat from Iraq and Syria. If we don’t, the consequences are “grave.” This move is a response to a ruling by the European Court of Justice which struck down regulations that allowed communications companies from storing data for police use for a year. Downing Street reckons that we’re all doomed if phone and internet companies start deleting these records.
“It is the first duty of government to protect our national security and to act quickly when that security is compromised,” David Cameron said. “As events in Iraq and Syria demonstrate, now is not the time to be scaling back on our ability to keep our people safe. The ability to access information about communications and intercept the communications of dangerous individuals is essential to fight the threat from criminals and terrorists targeting the UK. No government introduces fast track legislation lightly. But the consequences of not acting are grave.”
“I want to be very clear that we are not introducing new powers or capabilities – that is not for this Parliament. This is about restoring two vital measures ensuring that our law enforcement and intelligence agencies maintain the right tools to keep us all safe.”
Nick Clegg, a man hired to wander around Whitehall to say ‘does anything need doing? No? Okay. Fancy a pint after? You’re busy? Never mind then’, said these emergency laws “will not be used as an excuse for more powers, or for a ‘snooper’s charter’.”
“Liberty and security must go hand in hand. We can’t enjoy our freedom if we’re unable to keep ourselves safe.”
Tom Watson, meanwhile, isn’t impressed and said on the radio this morning that this is a “stitch up” that denies MPs the chance to be able to scrutinise the legislation: ”This is a secret deal between party leaders. There hasn’t been a bill published, we find out this morning when Parliament is on a one-line whip and MPs are in their constituencies that next week they will railroad through emergency legislation.”
“If you are an MP, you probably shouldn’t bother turning up for work next week because what you think doesn’t really matter. They are ramping up the rhetoric on it but no one in civic society has a chance to form a view on this or lobby their MP or talk to them about it. I understand that Labour’s shadow cabinet is seeing it this morning. They’ve not had a chance to think about it yet.”
Cue: If you’re not doing anything wrong, it doesn’t matter arguments.
Savvy web users might be able to spot a rubbish fake crown logo or a web address called ‘giveusyourdetails.gov.passport.’ But others are regularly being led down the garden path, according to research by the Advertising Standards Authority.
The ASA is so concerned about this that it’s launching a new awareness campaign, which will lead people to official government web pages and away from the dodgy ones.
It’s also considering tougher enforcement of fake sites and advertisers, pledging to work with Google and Bing to weed out the infiltrators.
Although 8 out of 10 people surveyed could spot the official passport application site, some of the other sites posing as government sites are quite convincing. Only half guessed that a site replacing Births, Deaths and Marriage certificates was actually a commercial website.
‘We’re focused on tackling any sites that continue to mislead, in support of other enforcement activity.’ Said Miles Lockwood from the ASA. ‘We’re also working with search engines and government to ensure the public are protected. In the meantime, always start at gov.uk to access a government service.’
This time, it’s the UK government online filters, which are a little bit ENTHUSIASTIC. They wrongly block one in five websites, creating the kind of internet censorship you might expect to find in China.
The Open Rights Group Project has been investigating the amount of websites that our overzealous filters are blocking, and it found that out of 101,008 sites, about 19% of websites are blocked by UK ISPs for no particular reason.
One of the blocked websites is the political blog Guido Fawkes’ Order Order. The editor Paul Staines said: ‘We would really appreciate it if TalkTalk would remove us from their block list. The only people who block us are them and the Chinese government.’
TalkTalk say they haven’t blocked them, no not at all, free speech is important etc. But the Open Rights Group ‘Blocked’ Project offers a free checking tool, which gives you information about which sites are blocked by UK filters.
After all, it’s a free country, innit?
OR IS IT?
Most people don’t pay by cheque any more, but even so, they often show up, as if BACS was never invented. And it’s a drag to go into branches to cash them.
Soon, though, you’ll be able to take a picture of your cheque on your smartphone and pay it in either via email or your mobile banking app. It’s called ‘cheque imaging’ and next week the government is expected to give the go-ahead for legislation allowing banks and building societies to use it.
It’s great news for us, because electronic cheques will speed up the interminable clearing process involved with all those bits of paper. At the moment you have to wait up to a week for a cheque to clear because it has to go from your bank to a clearing centre. But cheque imaging bypasses all that antiquated messing around, and it will only take 2 working days for your money to appear in your account.
However, it’s bad news for branches. Take away the need to cash a cheque, and you could see nothing but tumbleweed and unemployment. But, the hardy paper cheque might not be phased out entirely. Even if the legislation goes ahead, the Cheque and Credit Clearing Company says: ‘Customers wouldn’t have to do anything different if they don’t want to. They would still be able to pay cheques into their accounts at branches.’
But if it only takes 2 working days to clear a photo of your cheque, what’s the betting that we’ll all be doing it via email instead?
Health minister Jeremy C…Hunt is under pressure to introduce a 20% health tax on pop and biscuits, in a new (and probably hopelessly clumsy) strategy to reduce the nation’s dependency on lovely, life-giving sugar.
A report written by Public Health England, which includes advice from doctors, health experts and cardiologists (huh, what do THEY know?) has been leaked to The Grocer magazine.
It says that there are six possible ways to reduce the UK’s sugar intake, but fizzy drinks are the easiest target. They propose that a 20% tax would reduce obesity rates by 1.3%.
This report – which was commissioned by the government – is apparently the basis of another report which will be published on June 26th. The Department of Health, however, says it has no plans yet for a sugar tax.
Hmmm. You can tax fizzy drinks all you like, but you can’t take our BISCUUUUUUUUUUITS! Not if you don’t want a vicious Hob Nob black market on your hands.
This means war.
Public health experts have advised the government to pull their finger out over plain cigarette packaging, because they think that getting rid of branded packaging would have a positive effect on the nation’s health.
Public Health Minister Jane Ellison, who may or may not have been smoking a Marlboro Light at the time, said that she would bring forward draft regulations by the end of April, but two months have now passed and she’s done bugger all.
A letter to the British Medical Journal, signed by 600 doctors and health professionals, asked the government to confirm that the new regulations be published in the next two weeks.
Plain packaging on cigarettes doesn’t exactly mean that they’ll be sold in brown paper bags. Instead of nice curly fonts saying things like ‘Chesterfield’ and ‘Marlboro’, there will be a picture of a withered lung or an amputated stump, with the words ‘DON’T SMOKE OR YOU’LL DIE’ (or similar).
There has already been a public consultation on plain packaging, but things were delayed to gather evidence from Australia, which introduced packets with health warnings on them in 2012.
Labour says that the letter was ‘an extraordinary step for hundreds of concerned health professionals to take.’
Meanwhile, the Department of Health say they’re on it – they just need to do one more public consultation – and finish this lovely fag.
‘Best before’ labels on food were always a strange and nebulous idea. If you ate the food after that date, what would happen? Did it just mean that it wouldn’t be in the prime of life, or that it was covered in green fur and you should ask a pest control expert to get rid of it? And…couldn’t we decide whether it was ok just by trying it?
Well, the European Commission plan to scrap Best Before labels entirely, in a bid to halt the 100 million tons of food waste we generate every year.
‘Best before’ usually applies to store cupboard food with a long sell by date, like rice, flour, pasta and tea/coffee. Sharon Dijksma, the Dutch Agriculture secretary said, with a refreshing directness:
‘The labels have nothing to do with safety but with quality. We think citizens can make sure themselves if, for instance, rice is still usable.’
Because Best Before labels are advisory, the EU is happy to get rid of them and only have sell by dates on fresh foods that are more likely to kill you outright, like eggs and meat.
But the UK government aren’t backing it at the moment, despite saying they’re open to a dialogue. A spokesman said:
‘We believe the connection between these labels and food waste requires further investigation to ensure the removal of date marks doesn’t have the opposite effect to that intended.’
*eats slightly out of date Sarson’s vinegar. Nothing happens*
Despite the government saying that the retired can delay any decisions about their pension until after big changes are introduced next year, pension companies are still forcing people to buy annuities if they withdraw a lump sum.
At the moment, when you retire, you can withdraw a quarter of your pension tax free, so you can buy a caravan, or nipple clamps, or start a new life onboard a Saga cruise ship, wearing lemon coloured casual wear and goosing waiters at the buffet.
You used to be given a period of six months to figure out what to do with the rest of it, so you were either offered a choice of buying an annuity, or leaving the fund alone and drawing an income. The government has extended that period to 18 months, to make sure people can get the most of new rules which remove restrictions on pension funds.
But the big pension companies are giving retirees a hard time and persuading people to take on annuities when they withdraw their first quarter. And apparently this is because – although government rules have changed – it failed to actually consult the industry, who are struggling to play catch up.
Tom McPhail, head of pensions at Hargreaves Lansdown said: ‘Just because the chancellor tells investors that they can take their tax-free lump sum and defer doing anything with the rest of the money, it doesn’t necessarily mean that pension companies can actually accommodate such requests when investors ring up and ask to be able to do this.’
So if you’re about to retire – maybe don’t put a down payment on your Harley Davidson just yet.
The Government have hit on this idea and it is proving to be controversial. Basically, it would allow HM Revenue & Customs to go straight into your bank account and take what they want. No, we’re not talking about tax. We’re talking about money on top of taxes.
Gideon Osborne has come up with this plan and fellow MPs aren’t impressed, with the cross-party Treasury Committee showing “considerable concern” and want more scrutiny over his proposals.
In their evaluation of the Budget, the MPs point out that these new powers could mean a sly reintroduction of the discredited Crown Preference rule, which gave the HMRC priority access to assets when firms went under.
“The proposal to grant HMRC the power to recover money directly from taxpayers’ bank accounts is of considerable concern to the committee,” the report said. “The committee considers a lengthy and full consultation to be essential.”
“Giving HMRC this power without some form of prior independent oversight -for example by a new ombudsman or tribunal, or through the courts – would be wholly unacceptable.”
They went on to dismiss the Chancellor’s idea that, which is based on the way the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) currently has similar authority to collect child maintenance, because the “parallel is not exact”.
“In those cases, DWP is acting as an intermediary between two individuals,” the MPs said. “HMRC would be acting not as an intermediary between two individuals but rather in pursuit of its own objective of bringing in revenue for the Exchequer.”
Not to mention the opportunity for fraud and cock-ups. “This policy is highly dependent on HMRC’s ability accurately to determine which taxpayers owe money and what amounts they owe, an ability not always demonstrated in the past. Incorrectly collecting money will result in serious detriment to taxpayers.”
“The Government must consider safeguards, in addition to those set out in the consultation document, to ensure that HMRC cannot act erroneously with impunity. These might include the award of damages in addition to compensation, and disciplinary action in cases of abuse of the power.”
The government are revamping the Green Deal, and new homeowners can get 75% towards the cost of energy efficient improvements like insulation, solid wall insulation, and double glazing.
Unlike the last Green Deal, which just took money off your energy bills, after an assessment you receive a voucher from the government to give to the installers.
And with savings of around £100 off an annual bill, it’s not bad, really. Especially if you’ve got your eye on a new Everest conservatory.
The government will issue a list of approved energy saving measures, and if you tick off two of them, they’ll give you up to £1000. Or if you decide on solid wall insulation, which is pricey, they’ll give you up to £6000. You can also qualify for an extra £500 if you carry out other improvements that’ll boost your home’s energy efficiency.
While it’s probably too late to do anything about climate change, this token effort will hit a few EU targets and make our homes a little bit cosier, which is nice.
So, er, thanks for helping us to save energy and reduce our bills. Now if you really want to help, can you have a word with the energy companies and tell them to stop charging us an effing fortune? Thanks.
Sales of petrol fell to a record low in March, as drivers abandoned their cars to do other things, like pay energy bills, feed their children and buy scratch cards in the vain hope that they’ll win £2.
Government figures showed that 1.367 billion litres of petrol were bought in March – a fall in demand of 24.7%. The only similar low figure in recent years was 1.376 bn litres last March. Back then, though, you could see the reason – March 2013 was freezing cold with petrol prices at a sky high £1.40 a litre. But this year was warm, with prices at a steady £1.30 a litre.
So what’s causing us to ditch the car? Well, AA boss Edmund King blames our boilers. He said (well, to be honest, he waffled):
‘Either the fear or reality of gas and electricity price surges has triggered an avoid-the-petrol-pump backlash to balance family spending, or the trauma of speculator-driven road fuel price spikes over more than three years has seared into the psyche of the UK driving consumer.’
We may find out in the next couple of months as the boilers and heaters are turned off – and drivers look forward to summer motoring and trips out.’
Ah, yes, summer motoring….with the hood down and a flagon of ginger beer in the picnic hamper.
Marvellous. (Oh, wait, we can’t do that, because the bailiffs repossessed the car. Oops.)
Hey look, here’s Nick Clegg pretending to be a human in an electric car! That’s going to make us all want to get one, isn’t it? Well, the government seem to think this will be the case – they’re ploughing £500m into a campaign to encourage people to buy glorified milk floats.
The cash will provide personal grants of up to £5,000 towards an electric car, and is intended to boost the ultra low emission vehicle (ULEV) industry.
Clegg said: ‘Owning an electric car is no longer a dream or an inconvenience. Manufacturers are turning to this new technology to help motorists make their every day journeys green and clean.”
“This major investment is there to make driving an electric car affordable, convenient and free from anxiety about the battery running out. But it’s also about creating a culture change in our towns and cities so that driving a greener vehicle is a no-brainer for most drivers.”
Between 2015 and 2020, grants will be given to cities who can offer incentives to drivers of electric vehicles, by providing free parking or access to bus lanes. Boris Johnson, smoking a cigar on the top deck of a London omnibus, welcomed the move, tediously and meaninglessly calling it ‘a green game changer.’
All very nice in theory, but where are we going to plug them in?
And a survey by PwC has revealed that older people are sick of the ‘one size fits all’ pension age. Instead we’d wholeheartedly prefer a more flexible ‘state pension window’, which would allow you to choose which age you’d like to knock off work and start your new career of complaining about dog poo and power hosing your patio.
The idea of this ‘window’ would mean that you can select when your pension should start, and will receive an adjusted amount depending on when you would like to retire. Analysts PwC, who asked 2000 people their views on pensions, argue that it’s actually a really great idea, and would fit in well with recent government reforms that aim to give people more pension flexibility.
Half of the people surveyed said they were happy to take a pension cut of up to £450 a year if it meant they could sack the dismal misery of going to work every day a few years earlier. Many people said that they were keen to ‘spend more time with their families’, (ie: watch more daytime TV) and said that their jobs were ‘too demanding’ (ie: not as much fun as watching back-to-back Poirot).
Raj Mody from PwC said: ‘We need to create a state pensions system which is fairer, more stable and sustainable in the long term. Scrapping the state pension age and replacing it with a state pension window will produce better outcomes for people, companies and the Government.’
But with the pension age being ramped up to 66 by 2020, are the government actually going to listen?