Spring budget 2022
Discussion
It's not officially a Budget. Parliamentary rules only allow an annual Budget - unless the Chancellor requests a supplementary Budget (usually referred to as a Mini or Emergency Budget). What the Chancellor is delivering today is called "The Spring Statement".
The normal procedure has always been an Annual Budget and an Annual Chancellor's Statement. The Statement was for announcing government spending plans and the Budget was for tax and other revenue collection plans.
The timings of these two events have varied over the decades. For many years, we had an Autumn Statement and a Spring Budget. Gordon Brown started messing around with these timings and they have now become quite movable. This time round we had an Autumn Budget in October 2021 followedf by a Spring Statement (today).
The normal procedure has always been an Annual Budget and an Annual Chancellor's Statement. The Statement was for announcing government spending plans and the Budget was for tax and other revenue collection plans.
The timings of these two events have varied over the decades. For many years, we had an Autumn Statement and a Spring Budget. Gordon Brown started messing around with these timings and they have now become quite movable. This time round we had an Autumn Budget in October 2021 followedf by a Spring Statement (today).
Rufus Stone said:
I would be very surprised if he does anything with NI rates or the thresholds. Payroll programs have already been updated for 2022-23 and I seriously doubt there is time to alter them before 06/04/2022.
Showing my total ignorance of payroll processes here, but couldn’t Sunak just bring in the rules from May instead of April?Edited by Jawls on Wednesday 23 March 10:21
Jawls said:
Showing my total ignorance of payroll processes here, but couldn’t Sunak just bring in the rules from May instead of April?
Possibly I guess, but NI is not accumulative like income tax. I cannot recall rates or thresholds ever changing within the tax year so it would probably be unique.Edited by Jawls on Wednesday 23 March 10:21
This jumped up little twit needs to get his act together. We dont all exist to make energy companies and his pals in finance rich.
If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)
Then all that money saved by the public would be spent in other areas and you have real prosperity.
In any case was anything ever cheap? or was it just deferred till now due to incompetence and trying to look like a
successful government. Just like all those s
tty energy providers that sprang up and the rest of us are paying for now.
Stop pretending its capitalism as it looks like socializing losses to me.
If all we do is work to pay for heating I would imagine eventually the the energy companies would just have to be taxed 99% to support us all as nobody will be able to pay.
If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)
Then all that money saved by the public would be spent in other areas and you have real prosperity.
In any case was anything ever cheap? or was it just deferred till now due to incompetence and trying to look like a
successful government. Just like all those s
tty energy providers that sprang up and the rest of us are paying for now.Stop pretending its capitalism as it looks like socializing losses to me.
If all we do is work to pay for heating I would imagine eventually the the energy companies would just have to be taxed 99% to support us all as nobody will be able to pay.
Fundoreen said:
...
If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)...
I'm no fan of Sunak. But energy security has been an issue building for over 3 decades. And it will take a long time to solve (IIRC they're meant to be releasing their energy strategy soon? That will be a pretty key cornerstone if they are to secure another term IMO).If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)...
Murph7355 said:
Fundoreen said:
...
If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)...
I'm no fan of Sunak. But energy security has been an issue building for over 3 decades. And it will take a long time to solve (IIRC they're meant to be releasing their energy strategy soon? That will be a pretty key cornerstone if they are to secure another term IMO).If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)...
Fundoreen said:
This jumped up little twit needs to get his act together. We dont all exist to make energy companies and his pals in finance rich.
If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)
Then all that money saved by the public would be spent in other areas and you have real prosperity.
In any case was anything ever cheap? or was it just deferred till now due to incompetence and trying to look like a
successful government. Just like all those s
tty energy providers that sprang up and the rest of us are paying for now.
Stop pretending its capitalism as it looks like socializing losses to me.
If all we do is work to pay for heating I would imagine eventually the the energy companies would just have to be taxed 99% to support us all as nobody will be able to pay.
Not wishing to let government(s) off the hook, but in part we're essentially paying the price for banning fracking, pursuing the net zero agenda, etc.; things which we the public apparently demanded they do.If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)
Then all that money saved by the public would be spent in other areas and you have real prosperity.
In any case was anything ever cheap? or was it just deferred till now due to incompetence and trying to look like a
successful government. Just like all those s
tty energy providers that sprang up and the rest of us are paying for now.Stop pretending its capitalism as it looks like socializing losses to me.
If all we do is work to pay for heating I would imagine eventually the the energy companies would just have to be taxed 99% to support us all as nobody will be able to pay.
As a population we can have cheaper energy (gas and electricity) bills. Or we can have no fracking and make steady progress towards reducing climate change.
Decisions have to be made and those decisions have consequences.
sugerbear said:
Murph7355 said:
Fundoreen said:
...
If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)...
I'm no fan of Sunak. But energy security has been an issue building for over 3 decades. And it will take a long time to solve (IIRC they're meant to be releasing their energy strategy soon? That will be a pretty key cornerstone if they are to secure another term IMO).If the goverernment invested properly in the areas they should we could have cheap and stable energy prices in years to come
not just yoyo trusting the markets (his pals)...
t as each other.So for this particular problem, they are all culpable. We could start to argue the %age splits if you like, accounting for all sorts of other s
te each govt has had to deal with. But fundamentally they are all to blame. We'll see if the energy strategy we've been promised is worth the paper it's written on. Hopefully "green" and "renewable" won't be the primary words in it and that "security", "pragmatism" and "affordability" are. I somehow doubt it.
chemistry said:
Not wishing to let government(s) off the hook, but in part we're essentially paying the price for banning fracking, pursuing the net zero agenda, etc.; things which we the public apparently demanded they do.
As a population we can have cheaper energy (gas and electricity) bills. Or we can have no fracking and make steady progress towards reducing climate change.
Decisions have to be made and those decisions have consequences.
The problem is we are never asked that directly there is no party out there that has proposed spending on nuclear for exampleAs a population we can have cheaper energy (gas and electricity) bills. Or we can have no fracking and make steady progress towards reducing climate change.
Decisions have to be made and those decisions have consequences.
We're told the 5p reduction is the biggest fuel duty cut ever. But as a % of the current price is this really correct?
With prices around 165.9/litre on average we're looking at a 3% price cut.
Either way, the cut will be gobbled up in a week or so with retailers increasing their prices.
With prices around 165.9/litre on average we're looking at a 3% price cut.
Either way, the cut will be gobbled up in a week or so with retailers increasing their prices.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff




