[Jarred]

(Original post by barnetlad)
Mr Speaker. does the Prime Minister feel that funding for sport in future should come with the condition of a fair and transparent ticketing system?

I think in general it should be handled on a case-by-case basis, but I think the ticketing system should certainly be taken into deep consideration if these events are going to be centrally funded.

[Jarred]

(Original post by Alofleicester)
For my follow-up question, I'm going to quote Reginald D Hunter

So, Mr Speaker, given this evidence, is the chancellor admitting that's he's actually a bit less of a conservative than he'd like us to think?

Haha I must admit I instantly thought of that quote the moment that Batman was mentioned in this session of PMQs.

Maybe it does indicate that. Though maybe it indicates that Bane is an even tougher conservative. It's symbolic I guess of American politics.

[Jarred]

(Original post by internetguru)
There seems to be a major shift in the Conservative party towards an anti EU stance yet your leader is very much in favour of political integration. Do you believe it is a big enough issue to cause an internal rift and a potential leadership challenge by a senior member of the party such as yourself?

An interesting question, though we here in the Tory Party are perfectly accepting of eachother's views regarding this kind of situation. It's much like the monarchy referendum. Rakas was a republican, I was a royalist, everyone was free to choose whatever side they wanted. It had the potential to cause a split, but both sides campaigned against eachother, and once it was all over, we got back together and things resumed as normal, no relationships between party members were severed in that referendum, and in a way you could even say they were strengthened. I think the EU situation is going to go forth in the exact same way, and thus I have no reason to suspect it will cause a split, and have no plans to launch a leadership challenge as I have a great deal of faith in Rakas's leadership ability, as much as I have ever done, and believe he has done a very good job. We have different views on a couple of issues, but I think that's actually pretty healthy for us, it means we're providing better representation of the party membership.

[Jarred]

(Original post by Lipvig)
I see.
Favorite vampire TV show/Film?

Buffy The Vampire Slayer

[Myotherone]

Mr Speaker, Could the honourable gentleman tell us whether he has ever paid cash in hand to lower the payment price

[Jarred]

(Original post by Myotherone)
Mr Speaker, Could the honourable gentleman tell us whether he has ever paid cash in hand to lower the payment price

As far as I can remember I haven't, but that's because I don't buy products and services face to face very often. When I buy stuff I buy it online.

[eff01]

Mr Speaker, if the Prime Minister thinks that Coca-Cola has been involved in carcinogenic activity and questions the company's sponsorship of sporting events, does the Prime Minister also then advocate a banning of the product in the United Kingdom? After all, if the Prime Minister wants to stop such brands being associated with sporting events, surely he would not want such brands being associated with the United Kingdom?

[Jarred]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, if the Prime Minister thinks that Coca-Cola has been involved in carcinogenic activity and questions the company's sponsorship of sporting events, does the Prime Minister also then advocate a banning of the product in the United Kingdom? After all, if the Prime Minister wants to stop such brands being associated with sporting events, surely he would not want such brands being associated with the United Kingdom?

I can't really answer on the Prime Minister's behalf on this one but will instead give my own view.

I've not heard about this story though perhaps you're referring to the one a few months ago where Coca Cola removed the carcinogenic ingredient to avoid a cancer warning? If so; seeing as the product has had it's carcinogen removed it seems to me that it no longer poses a significant risk to health and thus see no reason to ban it.

[tehFrance]

(Original post by Jarred)
I see no reason to ban it.

Well it being Coca Cola is reason enough for me... we need to buy a controlling stake of PepsiCo, relocate the headquarters to the UK and watch Coca Cola lose Europe (actually technically, it has lost Europe due to PepsiCo's diversification that Coca Cola is still in the early stages of) and the UK make a butt load of money

So Mr. Chancellor, a mass share buying programme is a good idea, no?

[jesusandtequila]

(Original post by JPKC)
Isn't dressage wonderful?

Pre-follow-up: And isn't it reprehensible that the local income tax leads to people in poorer areas (where services like child protection and social care are more in demand) being taxed more than in richer areas (that have less need for these vital services)?

Jumping in here, I know against protocol but whatever, reply to me in the Liber thread. It doesn't. That's what the £25bn distributed by central government is there for - to smooth out those areas with a lower tax base.

To make this a question: Isn't the above right, chancellor?

[Lipvig]

(Original post by Jarred)
Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the honourable Chancellor for giving the correct answer.

[Rakas21]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, if the Prime Minister thinks that Coca-Cola has been involved in carcinogenic activity and questions the company's sponsorship of sporting events, does the Prime Minister also then advocate a banning of the product in the United Kingdom? After all, if the Prime Minister wants to stop such brands being associated with sporting events, surely he would not want such brands being associated with the United Kingdom?

Just to jump in, in relation to the united kingdom as a whole the consumers are fully capable of deciding whether they wish to boycott Coca-cola. Though it does make me question there sponsorship of an event supposed to encourage health i think a financial penalty and a customer boy-cot is a penalty enough.

[Metrobeans]

PMQs is closed for new questions. This thread will remain open to allow Jarred to answer any outstanding questions.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Jarred]

(Original post by tehFrance)
Well it being Coca Cola is reason enough for me... we need to buy a controlling stake of PepsiCo, relocate the headquarters to the UK and watch Coca Cola lose Europe (actually technically, it has lost Europe due to PepsiCo's diversification that Coca Cola is still in the early stages of) and the UK make a butt load of money

So Mr. Chancellor, a mass share buying programme is a good idea, no?

I'm about to utter words which will be regarded as a gaffe so big that my political career as we know it will be over...

I've never been able to tell the difference between Coke and Pespi


For that reason I'm afraid we'll have to put your mass share buying programme on hold

[Jarred]

(Original post by jesusandtequila)
Jumping in here, I know against protocol but whatever, reply to me in the Liber thread. It doesn't. That's what the £25bn distributed by central government is there for - to smooth out those areas with a lower tax base.

To make this a question: Isn't the above right, chancellor?

It most certainly is.

[tehFrance]

(Original post by Jarred)
I've never been able to tell the difference between Coke and Pespi

In that case... Mr Speaker, I demand the chancellor resigns, instantly!