Why should taxpayers
compensate cricketers who don't play in Zimbabwe? The government has rightly (there's a first) said that it is up to the sportsmen to decide whether to take part in the tournament. If the Tories want compensation for cricketers who may - rightly in my view - decide not to go to Zimbabwe, where do we draw the line?
Now I read that:
Scottish Tories appear set to go against the tax-cutting policies of Iain Duncan Smith by refusing to pledge reductions under the parliament’s "tartan tax" variation powers.
The Tories need to sort out their ideas soon. They are a tax-cutting party or nothing.