Stephen Tall

Labour U-turns on non-doms as Lib Dem’s Oakeshott wins battle

By | Mon 1st February 2010 - 6:55 pm

Glad tidings from the House of Lords today, where Labour has – at long, long last – bowed to Lib Dem pressure and announced that non-doms will no longer be able to sit in Parliament.

The party’s terrier-like Treasury spokesman Lord (Matthew) Oakeshott has welcomed the Government’s announcement:

I have introduced 4 bills over the last 5 years to ban non-doms from the House of Lords with no support from the Government and with serious obstruction from the Conservatives.

“Now, with an election looming, I am delighted that the Government has had this last-minute conversion and adopted my Bill almost to the letter in their amendment.

“It’s outrageous if people who sit in our Parliament do not pay full British taxes like everyone else. They must pay up or pack up.”

The Government, in the person of the almost-tautologically named Baroness Royall, has sent a letter to all peers today explaining how the new law will affect them:

20100102 All Peers Letter

Well done to Matthew for his perseverance.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

One Comment

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.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

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

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarPeter Hirst 16th Jan - 3:06pm
    A wise politician, especially a Westminster one might say that (s)he is not the wisest person to make these constitutional decision, being too easily influenced...
  • User Avatarnvelope2003 16th Jan - 3:05pm
    David Raw: The point I was trying to make was that restoring a railway can be cheaper than widening a road but it might not...
  • User AvatarNigel Jones 16th Jan - 3:04pm
    The two Davids are thinking in one of the right lines, but we need both their suggested policy action approach AND a positive vision for...
  • User AvatarJoe Bourke 16th Jan - 3:00pm
    Peter Martin, Jennie's comment is on her own lived personal experiences: "It’s not metropolitan elitist to say that many leave voters voted the way they...
  • User AvatarJenny Barnes 16th Jan - 2:59pm
    This here people's vote. What's the question? You can hardly put TM's annihilated deal on the ballot, after what happened to it in Parliament. And...
  • User AvatarSean Hagan 16th Jan - 2:43pm
    Thank you, David Raw, for reminding us about the Jenkins Commission and the other political realities which made it impossible to extract a commitment from...