- BP profits demonstrate utter incompetence of government
- Hotels for migrants in non-Tory areas is “party first, country last” approach
- Matt Hancock should lose his MP salary while he’s in the jungle
BP profits demonstrate utter incompetence of government
Responding to the news this morning that BP has announced £7.1bn in underlying profit, Liberal Democrat Treasury Spokesperson Sarah Olney said:
These profits demonstrate the complete and utter incompetence of this Conservative government. As families and pensioners across the country struggle to pay their energy bills, BP are posting unimaginable profits raking off the backs of hard-working people.
Liberal Democrats proposed a strong windfall tax over a year ago, yet the Conservatives have only attempted an incredibly weak version. Clearly, they’ve been too busy with their own chaos to act.
Hotels for migrants in non-Tory areas is “party first, country last” approach
Commenting on the story that Suella Braverman allegedly refused hotel bookings for migrants because they were Conservative areas, Liberal Democrat Cabinet Office Spokesperson Christine Jardine MP said:
If this is true, it’s yet another example of the Conservatives putting their party’s interests ahead of the national interest and the rule of law.
Suella Braverman has yet more serious questions to answer about her conduct as Home Secretary.
Now more than ever there must be a Cabinet Office Inquiry, this is the final straw.
Matt Hancock should lose his MP salary while he’s in the jungle
Responding to the news that Matt Hancock has lost the Conservative whip because he is appearing on “I’m a Celebrity”, Liberal Democrat Treasury Spokesperson Sarah Olney MP said:
Yet again we see a Conservative MP taking voters for granted. At a time when MPs should be supporting their constituents with the cost of living crisis, Matt Hancock is choosing instead to go to the jungle to feed his own ego.
Matt Hancock should declare how much he is earning from appearing on the show, and forego his MP’s salary for the duration. The taxpayer should not pay him while he refuses to do his job.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
From Norman settlement to a civic square
Northern Ireland debates the future of its railways in 1957
Church Green video
Thinking of standing for election or re-election next year? Helpful questions to consider
Steve Trevethan
Kira Collins
Daniel Walker
Andrew Tampion
7 Comments
Matt Hancock should lose his job. Johnson did the same.
Rishi Sunak….There is no long-term prosperity without action on climate change..There is no energy security without investing in renewables…That is why I will attend @COP27P next week: to deliver on Glasgow’s legacy of building a secure and sustainable future……
Robert Jenrick…Manston…Thanks to the hard work and professionalism of Home Office and Border Force staff, military personnel and our contractors we have made good progress…
Both these U-turns are examples of the value and effectiveness of ‘shaming’ this weak government..Being ‘shamed’ into doing the right thing gives no credit to the shamed..
“[BP’s] profits demonstrate the complete and utter incompetence of this Conservative government ”
Not at all, this government is very competent at funnelling money to it’s rich backers
Making obscene profits while contributing to climate change is terrible. We should be transferring these sums to renewable energy and insulation projects. I’ts a no brainer to everyone except this government.
Oil companies currently pay a 65% tax on profits. The more profit they make the more tax at 65% they pay.
Oil exploration and extraction is a high risk and highly skilled industry. Leaving oil company owners with 35% of the profit already seems harsh without further levies.
David, It is interesting to see that you consider Oil companies currently pay 65% tax. I’m sure in some circumstances you are right, but I gather that many pay nothing like that much. For example Shell in 2020 say they paid UK Tax of -£106,582,465 in 2020.
Yes that’s MINUS £106 million.
Could you tell us where you get your 65% figure from and which companies pay it and in what circumstances?
Thanks,
David Evans
David (Evershed),
Apologies, it was MINUS 106 Million dollars.