Lib Dems demand recall of parliament for vote on ‘deceitful’ and ‘botched’ vaccine passports plan

Published

4 years ago

July 30, 2021

admin

The Liberal Democrats are campaigning for parliament to be recalled from summer recess to debate proposals to introduce the use of vaccine passports.

The party’s leader Sir Ed Davey has written a letter to Prime Minister Boris Johnson accusing his government of “committing to vaccine passports by stealth” which he warned was “a recipe for chaos and dissent”.

Sir Ed added that the use of such a scheme would be “a grotesque misuse of government diktat” and said MPs must be brought back from their summer holidays immediately to vote on the matter.

Live COVID updates from the UK and around the world

The PM has said individuals will need to be fully vaccinated to go to nightclubs from the end of September and that proof of a negative COVID test will no longer be sufficient.

And the prospect of people having to prove their COVID-19 status to access a range of other venues has been raised in recent weeks with universities, music events and sporting fixtures all having been mentioned as possible other settings for certification.

Sir Ed said businesses will suffer greatly under the proposals.

“It is deeply unsettling to see you and your government committing to vaccine passports by stealth. This goes against all our country’s traditions and is utterly deceitful,” his letter published on Friday states.

“Parliament must be recalled immediately.

“How businesses or indeed even churches will be expected to decide who can or cannot pass through their doors has not been made clear.

“This is a recipe for chaos and dissent on many doorsteps throughout England.

“It would be a grotesque misuse of government diktat to introduce ID cards without any scrutiny, let alone a vote of MPs.

“The government owes this to all those individuals and businesses who will suffer as a result of your rushed and botched scheme.

“The nation is calling out for leadership, not deception. It is time to step up, to own your decision on COVID ID cards and put it to a vote to parliament. You must recall parliament now.”

A number of Conservative MPs have told Sky News they do not think the government will follow through and actually introduce domestic vaccine passports.

More than 40 Conservatives recently signed a declaration from the campaign group Big Brother Watch expressing opposition to the idea.

Sir Graham Brady, chairman of the 1922 Committee of backbench Tories, told Sky News that vaccine passports for domestic use would be a “massive step and a misguided one”.

Some Tory MPs contacted by Sky News say they think the prime minister is bluffing in a bid to increase vaccine uptake, while others expressed their belief that the government would pull any vote on the matter if there is a realistic prospect of them losing.

“I don’t think they will,” Wellingborough MP Peter Bone said when asked if he thinks the government will follow through and introduce vaccine passports.

He added that he was against vaccine passports because they are “identity papers by the back door” and risked creating a “two class society”.

Fellow Conservative Craig Mackinlay, meanwhile, said he thinks the government is adopting a “carrot and stick approach” to increase vaccine take-up.

“I hope that is as far as these plans go,” the MP for South Thanet said.

And Andrew Bridgen described vaccine passports as “completely unnecessary, bureaucratic and unworkable”, adding that they would “create a divided society”.

The Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire accused the government of engaging in “sabre-rattling” as part of a “crude attempt to coerce young people to take the vaccine”.

Meanwhile, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has said he “can see a case for vaccine passports” for mass events, but not for “day-to-day routine”.

Asked whether people should have to prove they have had two vaccine doses before returning to the office, Sir Keir told reporters: “I don’t agree with that.

“I can see a case for vaccine passports, alongside testing, when it comes to big sporting events or mass events, certainly for international travel.

“But for day-to-day routine – access to the office, access to health services or dentistry or even food – I don’t agree with vaccine passports for day-to-day access.”

Subscribe to the All Out Politics podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker

He added: “We can’t have a situation where someone can’t have access to a health service or dentistry or supermarkets – that is something I don’t think anybody could seriously countenance, so we have to make this distinction.

“But we need to be pragmatic, we need to look at whatever the government puts on the table when it comes to longer term events, mass events etcetera.”

A government spokesperson told Sky News on Thursday: “There has been no change to our plans to introduce vaccine certification in September.

“The government is focussed on protecting the public and reducing the impact of the virus, including mandating COVID certification in certain settings.

“Vaccines are the best possible way to protect you and your family against the virus and we strongly encourage people to come forward.”

Politics

What is a wealth tax, how would it work in the UK and where else has one?

Published

23 mins ago

July 9, 2025

admin

What is a wealth tax, how would it work in the UK and where else has one?

The idea of a wealth tax has raised its head – yet again – as the government attempts to balance its books.

Downing Street refused to rule out a wealth tax after former Labour leader Lord Kinnock told Sky News he thinks the government should introduce one.

Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesman said: “The prime minister has repeatedly said those with the broadest shoulders should carry the largest burden.”

While there has never been a wealth tax in the UK, the notion was raised under Rishi Sunak after the COVID years – and rejected – and both Harold Wilson’s and James Callaghan’s Labour governments in the 1970s seriously considered implementing one.

Sky News looks at what a wealth tax is, how it could work in the UK, and which countries already have one.

What is a wealth tax?

A wealth tax is aimed at reducing economic inequality to redistribute wealth and to raise revenue.

It is a direct levy on all, or most of, an individual’s, household’s or business’s total net wealth, rather than their income.

The tax typically includes the total market value of assets, including savings, investments, property and other forms of wealth – minus a person’s debts.

Unlike capital gains tax, which is paid when an asset is sold at a profit, a wealth tax is normally an annual charge based on the value of assets owned, even if they are not sold.

A one-off wealth tax, often used after major crises, could also be an option to raise a substantial amount of revenue in one go.

How could it work in the UK?

Advocates of a UK wealth tax, including Lord Kinnock, have proposed an annual 2% tax on wealth above £10m.

Wealth tax campaign group Tax Justice UK has calculated this would affect about 20,000 people – fewer than 0.04% of the population – and raise £24bn a year.

Because of how few people would pay it, Tax Justice says that would make it easy for HMRC to collect the tax.

The group proposes people self-declare asset values, backed up by a compliance team at HMRC who could have a register of assets.

Which countries have or have had a wealth tax?

In 1990, 12 OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries had a net wealth tax, but just four have one now: Colombia, Norway, Spain and Switzerland.

France and Italy levy wealth taxes on selected assets.

Colombia

Since 2023, residents in the South American country are subject to tax on their worldwide wealth, but can exclude the value of their household up to 509m pesos (£92,500).

The tax is progressive, ranging from a 0.5% rate to 1.5% for the most wealthy until next year, then 1% for the wealthiest from 2027.

Norway

There is a 0.525% municipal wealth tax for individuals with net wealth exceeding 1.7m kroner (about £125,000) or 3.52m kroner (£256,000) for spouses.

Norway also has a state wealth tax of 0.475% based on assets exceeding a net capital tax basis of 1.7m kroner (£125,000) or 3.52m kroner (£256,000) for spouses, and 0.575% for net wealth in excess of 20.7m kroner (£1.5m).

The maximum combined wealth tax rate is 1.1%.

The Norwegian Labour coalition government also increased dividend tax to 20% in 2023, and with the wealth tax, it prompted about 80 affluent business owners, with an estimated net worth of £40bn, to leave Norway.

Spain

Residents in Spain have to pay a progressive wealth tax on worldwide assets, with a €700,000 (£600,000) tax free allowance per person in most areas and homes up to €300,000 (£250,000) tax exempt.

The progressive rate goes from 0.2% for taxable income for assets of €167,129 (£144,000) up to 3.5% for taxable income of €10.6m (£9.146m) and above.

It has been reported that more than 12,000 multimillionaires have left Spain since the government introduced the higher levy at the end of 2022.

Switzerland

All of the country’s cantons (districts) have a net wealth tax based on a person’s taxable net worth – different to total net worth.

It takes into account the balance of an individual’s worldwide gross assets, including bank account balances, bonds, shares, life insurances, cars, boats, properties, paintings, jewellery – minus debts.

Switzerland also works on a progressive rate, ranging from 0.3% to 0.5%, with a relatively low starting point at which people are taxed on their wealth, such as 50,000 CHF (£46,200) in several cantons.

Politics

Jingye and Whitehall officials hold talks over British Steel future

Published

3 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

Jingye and Whitehall officials hold talks over British Steel future

The Chinese owner of British Steel has held fresh talks with government officials in a bid to break the impasse over ministers’ determination not to compensate it for seizing control of the company.

Sky News has learnt that executives from Jingye Group met senior civil servants from the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) late last week to discuss ways to resolve the standoff.

Whitehall sources said the talks had been cordial, but that no meaningful progress had been made towards a resolution.

Money blog: €1 home goes on sale – but there are T&Cs

Jingye wants the government to agree to pay it hundreds of millions of pounds for taking control of British Steel in April – a move triggered by the Chinese group’s preparations for the permanent closure of its blast furnaces in Scunthorpe.

Such a move would have cost thousands of jobs and ended Britain’s centuries-old ability to produce virgin steel.

Jingye had been in talks for months to seek £1bn in state aid to facilitate the Scunthorpe plant’s transition to greener steelmaking, but was offered just half that sum by ministers.

British Steel has not yet been formally nationalised, although that remains a probable outcome.

Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, has previously dismissed the idea of compensating Jingye, saying British Steel’s equity was essentially worthless.

Last month, he met his Chinese counterpart, where the issue of British Steel was discussed between the two governments in person for the first time.

Jingye has hired the leading City law firm Linklaters to explore the recovery of hundreds of millions of pounds it invested in the Scunthorpe-based company before the government seized control of it.

News of last week’s meeting comes as British steelmakers face an anxious wait to learn whether their exports to the US face swingeing tariffs as part of US President Donald Trump’s trade war.

Sky News’s economics and data editor, Ed Conway, revealed this week that the UK would miss a White House-imposed deadline to agree a trade deal on steel and aluminium this week.

Jingye declined to comment, while a spokesman for the Department for Business and Trade said: “We acted quickly to ensure the continued operations of the blast furnaces but recognise that securing British Steel’s long-term future requires private sector investment.

“We have not nationalised British Steel and are working closely with Jingye on options for the future, and we will continue work on determining the best long-term sustainable future for the site.”