[Birchington]

(Original post by toronto353)
So actually achieving nothing on the ground is progressive. Interesting to see what the Lib Dem's definition of progresssive is then.

Certainly more progressive than the government's breaking of international and European laws designed to prevent torture.

[toronto353]

(Original post by Birchington)
Certainly more progressive than the government's breaking of international and European laws designed to prevent torture.

Yes because I've forgot that the Liberal Democrat output this term has been groundbreaking....

[Birchington]

(Original post by toronto353)
Yes because I've forgot that the Liberal Democrat output this term has been groundbreaking....

It depends how you define "groundbreaking" - the government's pointless Jubilee motion and Qatada hissy fit can't be defined as such.

[toronto353]

(Original post by Birchington)
It depends how you define "groundbreaking" - the government's pointless Jubilee motion and Qatada hissy fit can't be defined as such.

I think that you mean protecting this country and encouraging social cohesion, but since this is derailing the debate, I think we'll leave it here.

[internetguru]

Distortion of the free market it is lower VAT for all items or nothing.

[Birchington]

(Original post by internetguru)
Distortion of the free market it is lower VAT for all items or nothing.

Why is it fair that women are charged VAT on products they need for biological reasons? Your slavish devotion to the free market clearly does not take into account matters of fairness like this.

[Keckers]

(Original post by Birchington)
Why is it fair that women are charged VAT on products they need for biological reasons? Your slavish devotion to the free market clearly does not take into account matters of fairness like this.

Life isn't fair. And it isn't the job of government to make it so.

[Birchington]

(Original post by Keckers)
Life isn't fair. And it isn't the job of government to make it so.

Explain to me, the House and every woman in Britain why you think it is justified that females should be charged VAT for products that their biology cannot avoid.

[Morgsie]

(Original post by Keckers)
Life isn't fair. And it isn't the job of government to make it so.

In some cases the Government has to intervene and create level playing field

[toronto353]

(Original post by Birchington)
Explain to me, the House and every woman in Britain why you think it is justified that females should be charged VAT for products that their biology cannot avoid.

This House doesn't stop the retailer actually keeping the price at the same level though so I don't know why you keep going on about women being charged VAT for these products when it isn't the VAT matters because this Bill does nothing more than politely asked that VAT isn't added any more.

(Original post by Morgsie)
In some cases the Government has to intervene and create level playing field

See my various posts as to why your Bill just doesn't do this.

[Rakas21]

A no from me.

Demand for these products is largely inelastic and as such retailers will not pass on a small price reduction to the consumer.

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by Keckers)
Life isn't fair. And it isn't the job of government to make it so.

Um actually it kinda is.

[CyclopsRock]

(Original post by Birchington)
Explain to me, the House and every woman in Britain why you think it is justified that females should be charged VAT for products that their biology cannot avoid.

Such a bizarre argument, with a terrifying logical conclusion.

[internetguru]

(Original post by Birchington)
Explain to me, the House and every woman in Britain why you think it is justified that females should be charged VAT for products that their biology cannot avoid.

Explain to me why consumers of any products in Britain should be charged to spend their own money that they earned?

[Jarred]

The people who wrote this do not understand business basics in the slightest, I am afraid to say.

If VAT is removed, then retailers will just jack the prices right back up to their previous sale price. Why will they do this I hear you cry? Well, because people right now buy the products at the current price in droves. Thus, people are happy to pay the current price, so no sane business is ever gonna give up on the chance to increase their margins and will thus just jack the price back up to its previous level. Just look at what happened when VAT was cut to 15% a few years ago; it is a cold hard proof that what I'm saying is gonna happen. Women are willing to pay the current price, so a business will not encounter any problems if they charge the same price as they do now.
They have an opportunity; earn the same as they do right now by not absorbing the reduction. Or earn a higher margin by putting the price at its previous levels. Every business will choose the latter option, its just common sense if you're trying to make money, which is naturally going to be their goal. Thus, consumers will not feel the reduction at all. It will all be absorbed.

So, this bill boils down to being a mere government subsidisation of feminine hygiene product retailers. And that is a completely unnecessary measure. Its not progressive, its the opposite; putting the money into the pockets of successful retailers whilst women pay the same prices as they do now.

[Metrobeans]

This is in cessation.

[Metrobeans]

This has been withdrawn.