The Easter Act is there somewhere
I have previously written about having a fixed date for Easter. Parliament enacted the Easter Act 1928, but it has never been brought into effect because its commencement was based on the churches reaching agreement. Various readers identified problems with stipulating a fixed date, but I see no reason why we should not separate the date of Easter from a fixed date for the ‘Easter’ bank holidays.
We thus avoid the difficulties of trying to reach agreement on a fixed date for Easter, but have the advantage of knowing when the bank holidays will take place.
There is, of course, the separate issue – highlighted by the recent study of the cost of bank holidays – of the grouping of holidays and the case for spreading them a little more across the year. There is also the issue of the number itself. Germany has more public holidays but a better productivity rate than the UK. The correlation may, of course, be coincidental than causal. I’m not sure I would be more productive if I took more holidays…
I think it would be a good idea to at least look into the issue.
Maybe a commission can be set up to look into whether the current quantity of Bank Holidays suits modern desires – and when they take place.
Then the debate can be held in a formal setting, even if the government later rejects its findings.
I’m not sure I would be more productive if I took more holidays…
========
So how many days off do the Lords have?
Lets see. Sitting days about 143.
Working days in the year, 241.
Then there is the case do you actually do anything? That could be the explanation for the productivity. If you don’t produce anything, working more won’t make you more productive.
Lord Blagger: Days that the House is not sitting are not days that peers are not working. A great deal of parliamentary work gets done when Parliament is not sitting, even though peers receive no allowances for it.
Days that the House is not sitting are not days that peers are not working.
=========
I know that. You know that. The public doesn’t know that they are paying peers to attend when they aren’t working. 🙂
Nothing like a subsidised lunch, a couple of bottles, collecting the cash and going home.
Lord Blagger: Given the media coverage, the public I would have thought do ‘know’ that; it’s the amount of work that goes on, unpaid, that they are not aware of.
They would be more than interested in
2,700 pounds a day it costs to run one peer.
Your tax returns. After all its coming. Anyone working for the state is going to be forced to publish their tax returns.
Lord Blagger: Except it doesn’t. I have run your figures alongside the actual cost of the House and they make no sense. On your figures, that would make the cost about £2 million a day (790 x 2,700). Whether you take all calendar days or simply sitting days, the figures bear no relation to the annual cost of the House.
I am quite relaxed about tax returns.
Well post your calculations then. You haven’t.
Total cost of the Lords per year.
Number of sitting days * average attendance or total number of days attendance claimed.
Then divide the first by the second, to get the cost per day.
Very simple.
Over 2K or less than 2K?
Will be be over the income tax paid by someone on min wage or less?
Then we can work out how many British Standard Peasants (BSPs) it takes to keep one Lord going for a day.
Bluntly. You’re too expensive and causing real financial damage to lots of poor people in the UK.
You’re inefficient.
You’re not democratic.
Frauds were covered up.
Police investigations dropped because of interference.
…
Lord Blagger: Could you make up your mind as to the basis of your figures. You have already switched between your comments.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldresource/185/185.pdf are the accounts that you need.
The main point make sure you also include depreciation and the pension losses in your costings. I’ve just been through the accounts, and that part is horrendous.
So perhaps I’ll confess my figures are wrong. They are a huge understatement of your daily cost to us.
790 turn up each day?
Think again – its around the 400 mark (388).
Post your calculations for all to see.
Lord Blagger,
You have stated your intention to boycott a UK tax. Is this due to your tax status within or without the UK?
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2010/06/22/cgt/
Yep. I’ve no intention of paying CGT.
For the simple reason that I will make sure that I don’t have any capital gains that push me over the CGT limit.
As such, I will owe no CGT.
Understand?
Now, back to the Lords.
Are you going to dodge income tax on your expenses?
Ah yes, you are.
We get the ambiguous status where on one hand you claim that you are working hard in the lords, but you’re dodging income tax on your pay for that income.
That’s the difference. I play by the rules in the UK, you just change the rules for yourself to give you a tax perk that is denied to other people.
When the unelected rulers enrich themselves at the public expense, then the problem that you have created is that the public will start saying that they aren’t going to play by the rules.
Lord Blagger: The figure is now closer to 500 for daily attendance. And I don’t set the rules. I just abide by them.
Lord Blagger,
Your choice of tax to boycott is of interest since most in the UK will never be liable, even if they earn enough to pay income tax at the UK rate of 45%. (UK CGT rates, now and at the time you posted your original comment, vary between 10-28%, though more normally 18-28%.)
Further, most simply do not have the choice to arrange their incomes to duck under whatever limits are set by the UK government. However, I am aware that CGT rates, and how they apply, differ greatly between European countries. Are you a resident of the UK for tax purposes?
@LN:
Easter is a moveable feast. It is always held on the Sunday following the paschal full moon, which falls on or after the vernal equinox.
Sunday was the day of resurrection, the date of passover, in the Jewish calender. And the day of the last supper.
How can you even consider trying to make changes to it? And all for commercialism. When our ‘beloved leader’ tells us, only recently, we are indeed a Chrstian country.
My goodness me. What a cynical bunch we have in that place.
maude elwes: It is not a matter of commercialism, more a matter of common sense, not least for schools and families.
Schools, etc., have managed for, how many hundreds of years, just fine until this projected interference.
Ask the 90% of British people, who live and work here as its main tax paying public, if they want the ‘end your life work load’ the yanks are forced to bear. And look at the chaos they have with no family life and no quality of living. The average man that is, not the few families on the top who take everything that’s going.
Do you really want to import more of that horrendous way of life? The cost to the state is overwhelming in all ways not simply financial. If you do, then the best practice would be to do what those British councillors do, who live in the US and draw their tax payers wages whilst pretending to work on our behalf, as they do so. They get paid here and fly there to live.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2109941/Councillor-lives-5-000-miles-away–pockets-10K-sitting-British-council.html
We British are willing to stand for anything government wants to throw at us, according to this way of thinking.
We should have more bank holidays not fewer. You suggest we should be running to those the equivalent of China. I don’t think this is the way to get our nation to be productive, healthy and fulfilled.
http://www.mercer.com/press-releases/1360620
maude elwes: Except I am not aware that schools have managed ‘just fine’ and Jonathan’s suggestion would mark a notable improvement on the present situation.
The crucifixion/resurrection (if they took place) will have taken place on a single specific set of dates.
The idea that the anniversary should move around the place based on what the moon is doing seems rather odd to most people.
Would you shift the anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar around like that? Or the date of Christmas?
It’s time for a bit of common sense to be applied – and for the date to be fixed.
The dates are already fixed. 2013, Good Friday March 29th, Easter Monday, April 1st. 2014, Good Friday April 18, Easter Monday April 21st.
And so on. No, this is another lets play with the calender game. Government is in the control business and the fact that Easter is a Christian holiday means it holds too much significance to the majority of this country as Christian. So this is another way to attack this religion in order to reduce that sense of occasion it holds, to the chagrin of the PC brigade.
Then, of course, there are several Spring bank holidays close together. Don’t change these though, no, instead lets hit Easter on the head. It’s a family get together, another practice the PC lovers are against in practice. United families are not easy to manipulate.
maude elwes: This doesn’t quite deal with the point made by Ian Visits.
@Lord Norton:
Well, I’m sure you, who we know is endowed with the giant hat of cleverness, understand exactly why they don’t have a specific date for the the day Christ was betrayed in the garden of Gethsemane then crucified. Because no date is given.
However, history tells us that this was the time of Jewish Passover, which takes place, as already mentioned, according to the moon. No need to be repetitive. The significance being the resurrection on Palm Sunday.
So, this is a four day holiday. Whereas a run of the mill bank holiday is only a three day event.
And, yes, I know it has been squeezed by business to all but eliminate the Good Friday element, regardless it remains a four day family affair.
And this is what children and families so desperately need, time to be together. They have so little otherwise.
And as far as Ian and his thoughts are concerned. On that, all I can say is, if he truly doesn’t believe this event took place, which is what he writes, even though it is written of in many ancient histories, what can you add to his take. Not much.
He confuses the event of this particular crucifixion with belief in the man Jesus as the son of God. And because of what appears to be a lack of knowledge, negates the Easter holiday as a result of that confusion.
So, he therefore objects to the rest of the British people retaining their custom of a long family weekend called Easter. Even though the population of the UK is 72% Christian. This of course being confused with how many go to church. This is a game played by the pollsters. What doesn’t seem to compute is, you don’t have to go to Church to consider yourself Christian. Many are not interested in the Church as a body because it is, in part, un-Christian to them. Many devout are leaving in their droves to join another Christian congregation, so is it surprising not many attend as they used to?
On a personal level, I agree with you about scheduling Easter, but you should consult your Bede if you can’t see why it’s difficult to fiddle with the date.
As four holidays, I doubt it. For one thing, it depends on how you measure productivity. For another, the United States, which has far less time off for its workers, is more productive than either Britain or Germany. Back in the early 1990s, I seem to remember the US, Japan, and Germany being the most productive countries and least blessed with holidays.
maude and Rich: Isn’t Lord Norton’s suggestion not to move the date of Easter, but to move the Easter Bank Holidays?
I think there are good arguments for not having Bank Holidays, as long as there are safeguards ensuring employees get time off elsewhere. If you want to go anywhere, all attractions are crowded; roads are chaotic; public transport doesn’t run or is on reduced timetables; shops aren’t open or are open reduced hours; banks and post offices aren’t open (bad news for working people who can’t visit those places on normal weekdays). It’s much better to have an ordinary weekday off work as then you can do what you want any enjoy everywhere being nice and quiet.
I know the arguments for having Bank Holidays (families having the same days off, employers not letting people take holidays when they want otherwise, etc.) but given that there are already very many people (e.g. those working in shops, restaurants, visitor attractions, hospitals, power stations…) who don’t get Bank Holidays, it’s hard to see why there are good arguments for keeping them for those people who do currently get them.
Jonathan: There is great merit in what you suggest. It would also stop prices being put up during holidays. The only problem I foresee is for those with children at school.
I know parents who stagger most of their leave as it is the only way they can afford to look after their children during the school holidays. I’m sure they would appreciate not being forced to take all of those random days off and to have more leave to cover the long school holidays instead.
Yeah, Lord Norton, I saw that BBC TV News brief too,
about “Every British Bank Holiday loses the Country £2.6 billion” and
“other European countries are less wasteful”
—-
Listen:
the Banks only handle the Tokens representing the Lifesupports & Pseudo-Lifesupports themselves.
Bankers live in mind-bogglingly wasteful, hedonistic, and spendthrift luxury;
and bank-employees sit, similarly unhealthily in relative comfort, too.
Every day is a “Bankers’ Holiday” for them –
. . . . .
(and every day is a similar “Holiday” for other similarly “tokens-managing” Careerists, too) –
. . . . .
There is the Earth’s Lifeforms;
and there is the Human Race;
and i think you need to get their Longest-Term-Purpose(s)* right;
then get their Longest-Term Values right(especially the Values-System of the prevailing Human Civilisations around the face of the Earth.
———
* It is highly possible that even if such “world-saving” organisations as the L Ron Hubbard’s Worldwide Religion succeed in making Britain the “First Completely ‘Cleared’ Civilisation on Earth” (thus ensuring its place as No.! on the international Survival and Thrival Ladder)
that Humankind could, as things are and are further-planned to be, become Extinct;
whilst some remnant Other-Life on Earth survives, and continues within its Longest-Term Purpose.
Reja vu (sic).
http://lordsoftheblog.net/2009/04/05/a-new-holiday/
We’ll no doubt get the annual whingeing when the clocks go back in October, too, assuming we don’t decide to screw things even more and not do it.
Some things come up on an annual basis, and at least with computers and the wonders of cut-and-paste, everyone can repeat their arguments from last year with the minimum of effort.
Christians could get honest and not try to pretend that Xmas and Easter are anything other than man centred pagan festivals.
Arguing about the date of it,and not mentioning the spring equinox, is just another devious Christian ploy.
Spring Equinox, also called the Vernal Equinox, is the first day of spring. On this day, which falls on March 20th, 2012, there are exactly 12 hours of light and 12 hours of darkness. From this day on, the sun will continue to climb higher in the sky in the Northern Hemisphere, inching towards summer, and will sink lower in the sky in the Southern Hemisphere, inching towards winter.
Eostre (pronounced E-ostra)
Eostre is the Pagan holiday that celebrates the return of spring and the balance between light and dark on, or around, the Spring Equinox. Eostre was the Pagan goddess of dawn, fertility and new beginnings. The Christian celebration of Christ’s rebirth, Easter, is also celebrated around this time and got its name from Eostre.
Eostre
Fertility and thus the medical term eostrogen.
Birth of Christ. Saturnalia
Death of Christ. Spring equinox.
Considering that nearly all Christian practice was based in the northern hemisphere until about 400 years ago, and that th weather bands for the time of year stretch somewhat south of Gibraltar, it was not in the least bit difficult to ascribe
equinoxes and pagan festivals that go with them. to the Christian man/God.
They are also claimed by political sects like May day (between May1st-May 5th)
which is mid-spring, and is, or was, a communist day celebration. It is the pagan fest of Samhain.
Most people are unaware that more old people die towards the end of winter than at any other time of year in the northern hemisphere, so the death of Christ is convenient as well.
A good many babes are born as a consequence of the mid winter festivities in December, and the time chosen for childbirth by most people is from early/mid March onwards, tailing off towards October/November.
The mating season really gets going in mid June, or if you like,mid-year.
March 21st would be the obvious day for a different early spring holiday from the religious one, but it can be quite cold.
May2nd is the next most obvious one. (Mid spring technically).
That has problems in that it has been a political fest in recent years, but can be a good deal warmer than the 21st March!
In a national culture with diverse religious holidays it would seem very wise indeed to divorce the religious, from the state, holiday needs.
The Pagan dates are useful ones, March20th/21st and/or May2nd/5th.(Samhain)
but would you then be accused of giving religious rights to Pagan dates, which may well have been the purpose of concocting a moveable Easter?
Imbolc 1 Feb
Spring Equinox Tue Mar 20 5:14 GMT Wed Mar 20 11:02 GMT
Beltane 1 May
Summer Solstice Thu Jun 21 0:09 BST Fri Jun 21 6:04 BST
Lughnasadh 1 Aug
Autumn Equinox Sat Sep 22 15:49 BST Sun Sep 22 21:44 BST
Samhain 31 Oct
Winter Solstice Fri Dec 21 11:11 GMT Sat Dec 21 17:11 GMT
Sorry about that but you are really are stuck with a moveable Easter unless you give more thought to the seasons generally, which most townsmen do not!
They would understand the movement of their own souls a little better, if they did.
We have certainly rediscovered the meaning of winter in the last two or three years!
Lord Blagger: The figure is now closer to 500 for daily attendance. And I don’t set the rules. I just abide by them.
=========
You do set the rules. You vote on laws, something denied to us.
Now, what’s the total cost of the Lords?
1. Spending
2. Depreciation
3. Losses on the pension funds.
Care to total that up, with references to the last set of accounts.
Somehow I suspect that you won’t list the true over all cost.
Lord Blagger: We don’t set any rules as regards taxation, since that is reserved to the Commons.
Your list for some reason is solely concerned with cost and not the savings made as a result of changes achieved by the Lords.
There are no savings. That’s the problem.
Are you going to quantify the full costs?
Page 34 on the consolidated accounts if you want some details to go and dig into
Lord Blagger: You really don’t understand at all, do you? I’m not talking about savings in terms of running costs. I’m talking about the differences made by changes achieved by the Lords, persuading Government not to proceed with measures that would have a major effect and by so doing saving millions either in terms of the cost to the public purse or to industry. Some of the changes may be enormously beneficial even if difficult to cost.
We will come to that. I’ll show you then that the cost of the Lords is far greater than the running costs and losses on depreciation.
Now you’re very keen that I post links to my numbers.
However, so far over a considerable period of time you have never posted any reference or any calculation as to you argument that my numbers are wrong. You just state that my figure is too high.
So its time as the American’s say, to pony up the ante.
Put your numbers as to the cost to the taxpayer of running one Lord for a day.
Total cost of running the lords (depreciation and other costs included) divided by the number of days attended.
Then we will move on to your cost benefit analysis. However, don’t forget there that if there are benefits, we also have to include the damage caused by the Lords. All those extra regulations that have been passed, directly or indirectly. All those debts that haven’t been scrutinised and allowed to fester and build up. Or are you trying to claim that you should only get the credit and none of the blame for the mistakes?
One for Lady Tizzy.
Do you leave your house doors open for any toe rag to come in and rob you?
Or do you protect yourself by taking defensive actions such as locking windows and doors?
Just interested. After all, if you lock your doors, your preventing the toe rag from making a living.
Yes, I’m a uk resident. So I pay UK taxes on investments, PAYE, and CGT.
However, I arrange things to minimise my taxation.
I see no moral imperative to hand over more money than is necessary to a bunch of crooks.
I also see no moral imperative to pay for the debts run up by governments who have lied over their existence.
So back to you and my question that you haven’t answered. Do you leave you house open so people can enter and take what they want, or do you protect yourself?
Lets take just one example on the debt.
Do you think its right that you should pay huge amounts of tax and get no services in return? That after all is the effect of running up 7 trillion of debt, and hiding 6 trillion off the books.
Lord Blagger,
Thank you for answering the question and, since you did, I will reply to yours of me.
Generally, I have an open house but not “so that people can enter and take what they want”. I don’t know of anyone that does.
I certainly would not be happy to paying huge amounts of tax and get no service in return. However, we all get services of one kind or another. For example, you are a heavy user of the FOI system, and this blog. Whatever system is devised those with no moral imperatives will always abuse it.
First FOI requests.
Most of them are denied and David Beamish or his predecessor makes them a state secret. Why should I be blamed for the costs of state secrecy into non-state security matters?
Why would you want to blame the person asking the questions for the cost of keeping things secret?