baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Jan 1, 2013 17:31:38 GMT
I believe you are wrong again Ian, if a baby has a source of income, i.e. interest on an account in their name, they would pay tax.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 1, 2013 17:32:07 GMT
last time I looked babies did not have to pay tax if earning enough, Babies do not have legal sex, babies can not drive and pay tax, babies do not join the army etc. A child of any age is liable to pay income tax if their income is over the personal allowance. They can't buy alcohol, cigarettes, or drive a car for a start. |
|
cibwr
Plaid Cymru
Posts: 3,589 
|
Post by cibwr on Jan 1, 2013 18:09:02 GMT
- probably mid 1020's).... As long ago as that? Absolutely and corrected :-) |
|
cibwr
Plaid Cymru
Posts: 3,589
|
Post by cibwr on Jan 1, 2013 18:12:21 GMT
1918, 1928, 1948, 1949 or 1969? excellent point, I would say 1918 of course .. but maybe when 16 year olds are finally given the chance to vote on how their life is determined ... I would support the franchise at 16, but retain membership of elected bodies at 16 (other than statutory youth councils).... But I would say that it would have to be at the point at which Men and Women got the vote equally, I'd say that the university vote was a minor issue, but democracy only stated with an equal male and female franchise. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2013 18:27:06 GMT
last time I looked babies did not have to pay tax if earning enough, Babies do not have legal sex, babies can not drive and pay tax, babies do not join the army etc. A child of any age is liable to pay income tax if their income is over the personal allowance. They can't buy alcohol, cigarettes, or drive a car for a start. well they should on the first two at 16 ... it is daft to say you can have sex at 16 but not a fag after it As for car I would actually raise it to 18 TBH but why people would want to stop 16 year olds voting totally bemuses me. I asked my MP about our position and it does seem that it is seriously been discussed as a policy. |
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Jan 2, 2013 14:16:50 GMT
Of course there was universal male suffrage in Germany before Britain, but no one could seriously argue that the Kaiserreich was more democratic than Edwardian Britain. Well, particularly not with some of the odder franchises in the constituent Kingdoms. Mecklenb urg-Schwerin's made the Prussian three-class franchise look simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 2, 2013 15:16:24 GMT
The Chancellor of the Exchequer has this day appointed James Martin Pacelli McGuinness to be Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead.
|
|
|
|
Post by erlend on Jan 2, 2013 15:30:59 GMT
Pacelli. That was a papal surname wasn't it? Pius the something 1939-59 ish
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Jan 2, 2013 15:43:49 GMT
Eugenio Marìa Giuseppe Giovanni Pacelli, Pope Pius XII 1939-1958 (i.e. when McGuinness was christened). Best known these days from a biography entitled "Hitler's Pope".
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,786
Member is Online
|
Post by john07 on Jan 2, 2013 15:56:38 GMT
But I would say that it would have to be at the point at which Men and Women got the vote equally, I'd say that the university vote was a minor issue, but democracy only stated with an equal male and female franchise. There was also the business vote for local elections. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jan 2, 2013 16:23:41 GMT
I would say that it would have to be at the point at which Men and Women got the vote equally, I'd say that the university vote was a minor issue, but democracy only stated with an equal male and female franchise. I'm not convinced that a dozen extra seats for the clergy/the social elite was necessarily a 'minor issue'. Votes for all adult women was a more important change, but the university votes was definitely a substantial form of malapportionment. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jan 13, 2013 2:12:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by erlend on Jan 13, 2013 15:18:11 GMT
I doubt they really care less.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 13, 2013 18:31:55 GMT
Does anyone know the exact procedure followed? Did McGuinness just write to the Speaker in the same manner as Gerry Adams or did he follow the normal process?
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 13, 2013 19:36:17 GMT
Does anyone know the exact procedure followed? Did McGuinness just write to the Speaker in the same manner as Gerry Adams or did he follow the normal process? He pretty much followed the Adams route, I understand. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Jan 13, 2013 19:40:44 GMT
No he wrote to the Chancellor ( a copy of his letter is here) but tried to both resign and refused to accept an office of profit. However he doesn't have to accept the post to be appointed to. |
|
|
|
Post by erlend on Jan 13, 2013 20:12:30 GMT
I read David's post as saying an MP cannot be appointed to an office that would disqualify them without their assent. Arguably if he specifically stated this even if privately turning a blind eye the appointment was illegal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 22:18:03 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2013 21:44:01 GMT
Candidates chosen so far
Willie FRAZER [Independent]
Michael McDONALD [Alliance]
Patsy McGLONE [SDLP]
Francie MOLLOY [Sinn Féin]
|
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Jan 28, 2013 23:45:44 GMT
Candidates chosen so far Willie FRAZER [Independent] Michael McDONALD [Alliance] Patsy McGLONE [SDLP] Francie MOLLOY [Sinn Féin] I understand that there was talk of a single unionist candidate. |
|
