Search results
an inquiry into the National Coal Board and to rescind cuts in the pensions of retired officers in the armed services. To counter the latter, both the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Foreign Secretary turned up to explain the Cabinet’s reasoning. 66 Churchill in December 1953 sought to use his address to the annual luncheon of the 1922 to reduce tensions over negotiations for
and the period required to assess whether a risk was safe. For the Chancellor and the Inland Revenue, the archaic practice deprived the Exchequer of receipts. Money held on account against potential losses deferred and, in inflationary times, eroded individuals’ tax liabilities. However, Lloyd’s argued that the conventional three-year accounting period was the optimum time to make provision for
asked whether he could confirm that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Nigel Lawson, had resigned, he stood up to confirm that he had. (Just before going into the meeting, Knight had been authorised by the Deputy Chief Whip to do so.) This was the first occasion, in an era before social media, that the news was known to MPs. Since 2007, the minutes and business statement have been
Committee in July 1952. It returned to the subject in two successive meetings in March 1954. The following month, the Chancellor of the Exchequer attended to open a discussion on the subject. The issue aroused such strong feelings that it was not just the Chancellor who spoke. The Prime Minister also addressed the meeting. At another meeting on 20 May, the Chancellor and Prime
ministers, led by Health Secretary Sajid Javid and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak, resigned, followed by other ministers. Following a record number of resignations, Graham Brady saw him to discuss his position. Brady told him that the executive had agreed to bring forward the annual election of officers and members of the executive to the following week so that it would
the Exchequer (“Policy towards Exchange Control”)’, 11 May 1979. 47 ‘Some in the City saw “Big Bang” as an act of betrayal by the Conservative government’, due to foreign takeovers, see Michie, ‘City of London and the British government’ p. 51; Michie, London Stock Exchange , pp. 593–5; Bellringer
, 15 December 1981. Hence there was no provision for the RPC to hear evidence from the Government on behalf of the public ‘as ultimate beneficiaries of government policies’. 111 TNA, T386/684, M. A. Hall, PS Chancellor Exchequer, to T. G. Harris, Department of Trade, ‘Restrictive Trade Practices Act: Stock Exchange’, 31 May 1979
Alarmed by the diversion of material and technological resources to military ends, politicians and scientists on the left warned that this new war economy could undermine the development of civil industry. When a £4.7 billion rearmament package was announced by Labour's Chancellor of the Exchequer, Hugh Gaitskell, in 1951, three ministers resigned in protest. As John Callaghan observed, the left felt that ‘costly overseas military commitments’ meant ‘that the future of the welfare state was jeopardised, let alone any further advances towards a socialist or social
awards (hitherto Wage Council awards had always been accepted by Ministers) – an action interpreted by the unions as a significant attack on established procedures. In May 1952 Butler, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, warned the National Joint Advisory Council (NJAC) that the room for wage increases was extremely limited, Prices cannot be kept down if
. (Gordon Brown, Chancellor of the Exchequer, speech given at Chatham House, London, October 10, 2006) The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) against the United States led to new waves of scholarship on the proliferation of terrorism and efforts to combat international terrorism groups, organizations, and networks. One of the arguments