LDVideo: Mark Pack gets Paxo’d over the autumn statement

Voice co-editor Mark Pack made his debut on Newsnight’s political panel last night, discussing the politics of the autumn statement. You can watch his thoughts below, or on YouTube here.

* Nick Thornsby is Thursday Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs here.

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in News.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/31985 for Twitter and emails.
Advert

7 Comments

  • Did Mark Pack really think the Lords were going to vote on the Autumn Statement?

  • But surely the Lords won’t vote on it, as it’s a money bill?

  • Richard Dean 6th Dec '12 - 10:40pm

    I think Mark definitely passed the Paxo test. Survived with dignity, and got some good points across. Well done!

  • Malcolm Todd 6th Dec '12 - 11:36pm

    I don’t think welfare bills are classed as “money bills” — I think that just refers to measures for raising money rather than spending it.

  • Malcolm Todd 6th Dec '12 - 11:38pm

    In fact, having posted that, I thought “Don’t be so lazy” and went and looked it up:
    “A Money Bill is a Bill that deals with national taxation, public money or loans and their management. It is only considered to be a Money Bill if the Speaker of the House of Commons agrees that it is. The Speaker signs a certificate to indicate this. The most important Money Bills are those that deal with taxation bills or the Consolidated Fund Bills that formally vote money to the government.”

    So, yes I think the Lords will get a vote (especially as it’s up to Speaker Berkow to decide whether to give it a free ride!).

  • “A Money Bill is a Bill that deals with national taxation, public money or loans …”

    It would deal with “public money”, wouldn’t it? More specifically “the appropriation, receipt, custody, issue or audit of accounts of public money” (my emphasis):
    http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-information-office/p05.pdf

    We’ll see, but I wonder if Osborne is really so wise to emphasise the fact that the measures in this statement primarily penalise those on the lowest incomes. It’s certainly not much help to the Lib Dem narrative about the raising of the tax threshold.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarEddie Sammon 31st Oct - 10:44pm
    On the subject of George Osborne. He's gone up in my estimations. It's not really political, more personal. All politicians are human and if you...
  • User AvatarMeral Hussein Ece 31st Oct - 9:32pm
    A truly terrible inhumane decision . The increased numbers are due to the fact, as Sarah Teather rightly says, the Middle East is burning. How...
  • User AvatarPaul in Wokingham 31st Oct - 9:24pm
    A little detail on that Rochester poll mentioned by malc: the sample size was 1012. The total number of people who said they intended to...
  • User AvatarMalcolm Todd 31st Oct - 9:14pm
    Indeed, people should keep their comments short if they want to be read. I often skim past very long comments, especially if they seem particularly...
  • User AvatarCaron Lindsay 31st Oct - 9:02pm
    Fraser, people can't help their voices, and if you are going to dismiss her like that, then you are the one who is missing out....
  • User AvatarEddie Sammon 31st Oct - 9:01pm
    I don't agree with word limits, but Sara makes a decent point: long posts can be counter-productive. I think they are less likely to be...