Wealth Tax is Overdue.
Neil Kinnock in Conversation with Trevor Philips.
Neil Kinnock has been a Labour Peer in the House of Lords since 2005, and was once Leader of the Labour Party. He jousted with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher at PMQs (Prime Minister's Questions) many a time. He opposed much of what Thatcher did and clashed with her over the closure of mines, particularly in the North and Midlands. He reigned as Labour Leader from 1983 to 1992. Son of a miner, he knew what it was to rise through the ranks. When first elected as Leader of the Labour Party, he had a left-wing agenda. He backed 'Ban the bomb' and 'CND' and the Women of Greenham Common, who camped and demonstrated against nukes being stored by the USAF at an RAF base.
After losing the first general election in the 80s, he realised that many voters were not happy with the policies he espoused. Kinnock did a U-turn, something Thatcher never did when she famously said: "The Lady's not for turning, U-turn if you want to"!
Kinnock dragged his party to the centre ground. However, even that was not enough, as unlike his campaign poster at the time, "Britain Can Win", he didn't win the 1992 election.
After that, with the coming to power of Conservative John Major (who, for a Tory, I didn't mind and, like Kinnock, was from a working-class background), Kinnock stepped down as Labour Leader. Later, he worked in the EU, and in 2005, he became a Peer in the House of Lords under Tony Blair.
His son is currently a serving minister in Sir Keir's government, finally a Kinnock, Stephen Kinnock, serving in a Labour government. Unlike the Welsh accent of his Father, Stephen talks a little posher. If I am incorrect in my assumption that Stephen Kinnock is a minister in Sir Keir's government, please correct me. Either way, Stephen has succeeded where his father failed to be part of a Labour administration.
Lord Kinnock was speaking about the current Labour government. Lord Kinnock outlined the fact that it was time for a wealth tax. It wasn't the ultimate cure for the government's financial woes, but it would help. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is losing £9.9 billion thanks to the multiple U-turns. A wealth tax on the wealthiest should be imposed. Sir Keir hasn't said he would introduce it, but he hasn't said he wouldn't either.
When asked by Trevor Philips to explain further, Lord Kinnock said that imposing a 2% tax on assets valued above £10 million would bring in £11 billion a year.
Lord Kinnock in his talk with Philips said this seemed to be a reminder to the government that: "The PM has repeatedly said those with the broadest shoulders should carry the largest burden". He added that the government has closed loopholes for non-doms, taxes on private jets, etc.
Did Neil Kinnock present the government as being bogged down in their financial policies? Sticking to Rachel Reeves' strict policy to control finances. In other words, are they inflexible in revising their financial ideas?
Well, the government have been forced to do some U-turns. Many of their fellow MPs, mainly Labour but not all, were uncomfortable with cutting Winter Fuel Payments for pensioners. So, the government had to climb down on that one. Also, they had to make changes to their welfare cuts. That said, it will still leave those unable to work with a shortfall in their income.
Neil Kinnock said: "This is a country which is very subsequently fed up with the fact that whatever happens in the world, whatever happens in the UK, the same interests come out on top all the time while everybody else is paying more for services". And in a nutshell, that statement from Lord Kinnock says it all.
on
However,
About the Creator
Nicholas Bishop
I am a freelance writer currently writing for Blasting News and HubPages. I mainly write about politics. But have and will cover all subjects when the need arises.
Keep reading
More stories from Nicholas Bishop and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
Corbyn: The Second Coming?
When Mr. Corbyn lost the general election against Bojo and the Tories, many thought Jeremy Corbyn's bid for leadership and power was over. Mr. Corbyn stayed on as the leader of the Labour Party until a new leader was chosen. Sir Keir Starmer, once an ally of Corbyn in his shadow cabinet, booted the veteran left-winger out of the party once he became leader. He sought to eliminate alleged anti-Semites from the party that had allegedly had their moment in the sun under Jeremy Corbyn.
By Nicholas Bishop6 months ago in The Swamp
By Dumping Tonnes of Sand Into the Ocean for 12 Years, China Has Created Brand-New Islands From Scratch
Over the past twelve years, China has quietly carried out one of the most ambitious and controversial engineering projects in modern history: the creation of entirely new islands by dumping millions of tonnes of sand into the ocean. What began as small-scale land reclamation has evolved into a sweeping transformation of the South China Sea, reshaping geography, geopolitics, and international relations. How Artificial Islands Are Created The process behind these artificial islands is deceptively simple but technically complex. Specialized dredging ships extract sand from the seabed and pump it onto shallow reefs and submerged rocks. Over time, layer upon layer of sand is deposited, gradually rising above sea level. Once land emerges, it is reinforced with concrete, rock barriers, and infrastructure to prevent erosion. China has used this method extensively, particularly on disputed reefs and shoals. What were once barely visible features at low tide have become full-fledged islands, complete with runways, ports, radar systems, and buildings. Why the South China Sea Matters The South China Sea is one of the world’s most strategically important waterways. An estimated one-third of global maritime trade passes through it each year, carrying trillions of dollars’ worth of goods. The region is also believed to hold vast reserves of oil, natural gas, and rich fishing grounds. Multiple countries — including Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan — claim parts of the sea. China, however, asserts sweeping sovereignty over most of it, marked by its controversial “nine-dash line.” The creation of artificial islands has strengthened China’s physical presence and reinforced its territorial claims. From Sandbars to Strategic Strongholds What makes China’s island-building campaign particularly significant is how quickly reclaimed land has been militarized. Satellite imagery and independent analyses show airstrips long enough to handle military aircraft, deep-water harbors capable of hosting naval vessels, and advanced surveillance systems. These installations allow China to project power far beyond its mainland coast, extending its reach across Southeast Asia. Critics argue that these islands act as unsinkable aircraft carriers, altering the balance of power in the region. Environmental Consequences Beneath the Surface While the geopolitical implications are widely debated, the environmental cost is equally alarming. The dredging process destroys coral reefs, which are among the most biodiverse ecosystems on the planet. Sediment clouds generated during sand dumping smother marine life, disrupt fish breeding grounds, and permanently alter underwater landscapes. Marine scientists warn that damage to coral reefs can take decades — if it recovers at all. For coastal communities that rely on fishing, these changes threaten livelihoods and food security. International Law and Global Pushback China’s actions have drawn sharp criticism from the international community. In 2016, an international tribunal ruled that China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea had no legal basis under international law. The ruling also stated that artificial islands do not generate territorial waters or exclusive economic zones. China rejected the decision, calling it invalid and continuing its construction activities. Meanwhile, other nations have responded with diplomatic protests and increased naval patrols, including freedom-of-navigation operations by the United States and its allies. A New Kind of Territorial Expansion Historically, empires expanded by conquering land. China’s island-building represents a new model: creating territory where none existed before. This approach blurs the line between engineering achievement and strategic maneuvering, raising difficult questions about how international law should adapt to technological capabilities. If artificial islands become widely accepted as legitimate territory, it could set a precedent for other nations to reshape oceans for strategic advantage. The Broader Global Implications Beyond Asia, China’s actions have sparked global debate about maritime governance, environmental responsibility, and the future of territorial disputes. Smaller nations fear being sidelined, while major powers worry about the erosion of established international norms. At the same time, the sheer scale of the project highlights China’s engineering capacity and long-term planning. Turning submerged reefs into permanent landmass within just over a decade is a feat few countries could replicate. Conclusion: Engineering the Future of Power By dumping tonnes of sand into the ocean for over a decade, China has not merely created islands — it has reshaped the strategic landscape of an entire region. These artificial islands stand as symbols of ambition, controversy, and a shifting world order. As technology continues to expand what is physically possible, the challenge for the global community will be ensuring that innovation does not come at the cost of environmental destruction, regional stability, and international law. The islands may be made of sand, but their impact is anything but fragile.
By Fiazahmedbrohi 2 days ago in The Swamp
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.