I was assured last night by a former very senior member of staff at HMRC staff that he thought much of what I said was quite reasonable but that the way I say it alienates people.
I assured him that I have been told this often. Indeed, I told him that over the last decade or so I have lost count of the number of times I have been told that if only I was a more reasonable chap I could achieve so much more than I have.
And I also assured him that I was entirely sure that every single person telling me that was completely wrong. In doing so I told him the definition of the unreasonable man as noted by George Bernard Shaw more than a century ago (which explains the language used):
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
I assured the person that I was talking to that I had, in my opinion, only succeeded by being an unreasonable man.
What I did not add at the time, but should have done, was that in my view it was quite unreasonable for a former very senior member of staff at HMRC to to have moved directly to working for KPMG. I think we'd moved on before I had time to say so, so I'll make amends now.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Why should a person not be entitled to decide who he would like to work for? And you profess to be a democrat!
Perhaps you would like to give your views on the current head of the ATO Chris Jordan and whether it is appropriate for him to be in his job?
Next you will be complaining about barristers acting for the HMRC the one week and then acting for taxpayers the next.
Contractual constraints on who a person can work for are normal
HMRC should impose them to prevent abuse of their intellectual capital
I think that entirely reasonable
And Chris Jordan should emphatically not be head of the ATO. This is a prime example of corporate capture
Herein lies the problem. You take a view that tax policy concerns just governments and that taxpayers should (a) not be concerned with understanding and (b) certainly not be engaged in.
As for the intellectual capital of the HMRC employees, that certainly would appear to militate against transparency. Seems you want the taxpayer to be transparent and the state to be secretive. A bit USSR isn’t it.
As for the nonsense of corporate capture of the Australian revenue authorities, tell that to Australian taxpayers and tax collectors and receive total derision. Laughable.
These claims may be true in your fantasy but are about as far removed from the reality of what I promote
You need to get over the idea that anyone to the left of Nigel Farage is a red under your bed
If you don’t further comments will b deleted as offering nothing to debate
Why not respond instead of resorting to personal attacks.
For starters, where is the intellectual capital in applying the law correctly? And if there is such intellectual capital,which I dispute, please explain how exactly it can be abused by the private sector?
The law is accessible to all!
The tax system is being captured by appointments, secondments and consultation to suit the needs of large business
I have evidenced it often
Richard,
The notion that much of what you say is reasonable but that the way you say it alienates people is a nuanced form of shooting the messenger!
🙂
If employment within Government or regulators, or tax or duty collection agencies were subject to restrictive covenants on working in the private sector then this would act as a disincentive for senior, qualified staff to take employment in the Public Sector.
Of course restrictive covenants in employment contracts are seen as prima facie unfair, and can also be a breach of human rights.
What do you think is the best strategy for attracted the best of the best into public service?
Extended notice may be the price to pay
I accept the issue needs resolution
But that does not stop it being an issue
I totally agree its an issue, I was asking what you consider the solution to be.
I’m not the supplier of all solutions, I admit