“This week The Express and Echo went to East Devon MP Hugo Swire requesting answers to four questions sent out to each of the four MPs in the paper’s patch.
The questions put to the four Devon MPs were:
1. Have you used a tax haven, tax incentive or deliberate means of avoiding tax in the past to your knowledge?
2. To the best of your knowledge has anyone in your immediate family?
3. Have you ever benefited from any offshore investments?
4. Are you prepared to publish your tax return?
5. What are your thoughts on the PM and Chancellor’s connections to the tax havens in Panama?
Mr Swire chose not to answer the questions but instead asked us to print the following letter.”
“This media feeding frenzy is distasteful
I have found this media feeding frenzy around the personal tax affairs of the Prime Minister somewhat distasteful, writes East Devon MP Hugo Swire.
What exactly is the accusation? Has our PM done anything illegal? No. Immoral? I don’t think so. He has benefited from his late father’s will.
Is this not one of the most fundamental of human instincts, to help your children, whatever your income bracket? Was he even responsible for his father’s investments? Hardly. Yes, he did benefit from his father’s estate and yes it transpires that some of that money came from a perfectly legal overseas investment vehicle. Knowing the PM as I do, his entire approach to these ‘revelations’ will have been to protect his late father, his family (who have not chosen to be in the public eye) and importantly his widowed mother who is very much alive. We can all debate as to what he should have said and when but I think most of us would have had similar instincts.
Besides people who live in glass houses should be careful about throwing stones. When Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell called on the PM to answer if he had “benefitted directly or indirectly” from offshore funds he might have forgotten that £14,000 of his own pension, which he gets a year from his Westminster City Council, was in 2014 invested with Longview, an active global equity manager, that is based, yes, you have guessed it, offshore in Guernsey. McDonnell has been quoted as saying: “There has been one rule for the rich and another for the rest of us,” which is a bit rich coming from him!
Now as a reaction – I would argue an overreaction – the PM has published his Tax Return, and the Chancellor has followed suit. I think this creates a difficult precedent. Is this the moment that people with private means, self made or otherwise, turn their backs on public life? And where does it stop? Do we finally get to see the tax returns of local councillors, BBC presenters, doctors even, after all they are funded by the taxpayer as well? And while we are at it why don’t we demand to see the tax affairs of those who influence public life, journalists, multi millionaire newspaper editors like Paul Dacre of the Mail, and newspaper proprietors like the Barclay brothers and Lord Rothermere.
The hypocrisy of the Guardian, the BBC and the Mirror Group (owners of the Express & Echo) is also worth noting, all of whom have used elaborate measures to minimise their tax liabilities, as have the unions. Can we see their tax returns? If we are going to have them then let’s have them all. And then no doubt in a sanctimonious way we can all condemn those with an income or savings or investments worth over a certain amount and ‘celebrate’ those who earn far less.
Because the logical extension of this argument is that by definition there is something wrong with the rich. Why don’t we conveniently forget – as some do – that the richest 1 per cent in Britain today pay 27 per cent of all income tax, while the top 10 per cent pay well over half, at 55 per cent. Without their effort and enterprise of course, a huge burden would fall on the 12 percent of workers who pay no income tax at all, while the welfare state would collapse.
But let’s anyway smash the wealth creators who employ us all and fund our public services. Let’s drop this terrible idea that we want to give a leg up in life to our children after we die and take away a key driving force of wealth creation. Let’s all join Momentum and ride with the hounds of class warfare and demonstrate against globalisation, GM crops and Trident while we are at it. Let’s make sure that the likes of Jeremy Corbyn achieve the highest office in the land and squander all our hard earned cash. Wouldn’t we all feel smug and so much better as a result?”
So, Hugo, back to the four questions ….
If he didn’t benefit from offshore investments, he would almost certainly have answered “No”. So that’s effectively a “Yes” then from Hugo. Effectively he is telling us that he has avoided tax, and he has had offshore investments. No surprise there.
But when (or to be generous, if) the Panama papers eventually name Hugo Swire, he is going to look like an upper-class, ex-Eton, toffey-nosed twit (again).
LikeLike
Hugo claims here that the Camerons’ investment in his fathers offshore fund is a part of his inheritance, when we know from Cameron’s own statements that he in fact made the investment himself and sold it at a profit. Is Hugo making a deliberate attempt to mislead us in order to garner sympathy for his mate Dodgy Dave, or has he been lazy and inattentive? Either way he is disrespectful of his electorate by presenting this untruth and should clear up whether his comment is either a lie or just a poor reflection on his expensive education.
LikeLike