Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Labour brands local income tax 'last thing' struggling Scottish economy needs

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 27 December 2008
THE Scottish Government faced fresh calls yesterday to ditch plans to introduce a local income tax.
Labour says the proposal, which would replace the council tax, is the "last thing" the country needs in the economic downturn.

The start up costs to employees for a nationally set tax were estimated at £55-60 million by the Burt committee on loc
al government finance in 2006, according to Labour, with £18 million in annual costs.

"The estimate of what the Nat Tax will cost to set up is a frightening prospect for business," Labour's finance spokesman David Whitton said.

"The policy is ill-thought out and this kind of burden should not be placed on employers.

"In these challenging economic times, the introduction of LIT will make Scotland the highest taxed part of the UK, and it will discourage companies from wanting to do business in Scotland."

The Nationalist government has the support of the Lib Dems at Holyrood for the local income tax, but the SNP want it set centrally set at three pence in the pound, while the Lib Dems local say councils should be able to vary the rate.

But an aide to finance secretary John Swinney said: "No-one is taking Labour seriously on local government taxation, as they have no policy and no ideas of their own, apart from defending the discredited council tax.

"Along with their friends in the Tory Party, it seems Labour will defend the council tax to the end."

The aide added: "The reality of local income tax is that the proposal contains key advantages for Scottish business.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 26 December 2008 6:26 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Council tax
 
1

webwise,

Scotland 26/12/2008 22:20:26
I'm surprised that this call from Labour has generated a headline, there is nothing fresh about Labour's constant attacks on LIT. What would be refreshing is if labour were to put forward an alternative to LIT. However, according to Iain Gray we will have to wait until 2011 before Labour will have one.

It is sad that Labour now seek to obstruct policies that so benefit those on low incomes, the very people Labour were set up to represent.

The statement from Labour that LIT is the "last thing" the country needs in the economic downturn is baffling. It was Labour who recently suggested that low income people could be the saviours of the economy as they tended to spend any extra money rather than save. LIT does exactly that by passing the burden onto those who earn more.

The start up costs to employees may or may not total £55 - £60 million, however the recent VAT reduction of 2.5% caused many of those those same businesses significant extra costs as they were forced into recalculating VAT on goods and services.

Labour and indeed the Scottish media must do more than simply regurgitating the same tired old scare stories time and again. The council tax is not just unpopular but is also unfair, let's see the media demand an alternative from Labour.
2

,

26/12/2008 22:25:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

webwise,

Scotland 26/12/2008 23:20:15
It seems that UK Labour do indeed have an alternative, or at least are seriously considering one as the article linked below shows.

tinyurl.com/9tzgf9

Labour's new idea is to base the council tax on property value and on area. So, if you live in a decent area then you could find yourself paying more in council tax.
4

Marga,

Edinburgh 27/12/2008 00:39:32
More on "nice neighbourhood tax":

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1101930/Middle-class-homeowners-face-nice-neighbourhood-tax-secret-Government-council-tax-plan.html
5

Padraig,

27/12/2008 00:44:46
No, the last thing we need is more of Labour at any level of government.

They have a breath-taking ability to lie and "spin" their inept policies, whether is their mismanagement of the economy or their lust for control-freakery that makes "1984" look positively cordial and paternal.

Unfortunately, the ability to make excuses at Olympic standard does nothing for the wellbeing of the country.

And their urge to lie to us in the belief that we will swallow it has done nothing but destroy faith ingovernment at any level. And that will take a long time for any party to recover.
6

Edward,

27/12/2008 00:49:11
Surely the headline is a mistake as it should actually read 'Labour 'last thing' struggling Scottish economy needs!'
7

Guga II,

Rockall 27/12/2008 01:00:28
Given that it is Scottish oil, in the main, the last thing a struggling Scottish economy needs is crippling fuel taxes.

The New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party have, however, no intention of lessening the burden of fuel or any other taxes on the Scottish people.

The Labour mantra has always been, and will always be, tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend; and the Quisling Maggie Broon is hell bent on taxing us all into the ground.
8

,

27/12/2008 03:07:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
9

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 27/12/2008 05:42:47
#7 Guga

I think the Labour Mantra needs updating, it should " tax, borrow(unsupportable levels of debt), hide (PFI and unfunded Pension Obligations) and spend, spend, spend.
10

morris,

edinburgh 27/12/2008 06:27:00
6 Edward

That was precisely word for word what I thought appropriate.
The real danger is that
(1)this tax would be so popular that Westminster would have to adopt it UK wide!

Heaven forbid that we should help the weak and vulnerable
(2) It was not a Labour or even Unionist party policy,and
(3)Instead of SCotlands purse strings held frimly in Westmonsters grasp,this would be the opposite with Westmonsters grip partly dictated to by Holyrood.

You cannot have a successful UK when parts of it get ideas above their station such as equality or self determination etc.
We must remember our priorities here
1) Labour Party/ MPS jobs survival
2) Union survival
3) Wealthy and middle classes benefit from a redistribution of wealth (taken from the weak and poorest)
REMEMBER you are guaranteed a Tory government when you vote Labour.

The debate is which one will you get !Cameron or big daft Maggie Broon ?
There is one danger however.A local/national Income Tax presumes enough people will be employed to pay it.
The United Kingdom is about to nose dive economocally and millions will join the unemployment ranks. Westminster knows this and its bad news for everybody.The middle classes will have to meet the tax burden or swing even further right than Broon is.
People of Scotland:

Why do you have to sink to understand the difference between a submarine and the Titanic?
11

Guga II,

Rockall 27/12/2008 06:34:39
#9 KampungHighlander.

I bow to your greater perspicacity.
12

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 06:41:41
All taxes should be stopped except income tax.

VAT, local taxation, corporation tax, fuel duty, capital gains tax, stamp duty, road tax, should all be transferred to our income tax. Now. It's fair.
13

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 06:43:59
#10 Morris

Didn't the SNP borrow the idea from the Lib Dems. who are not a nationalist party?
14

morris,

edinburgh 27/12/2008 06:44:31
9 and 11

Perspicacity: Wow !

Im glad I looked that up! I thought it had something to do with my deodorant.

Nobody can accuse Guga of knowing Rock all eh!
I blame George Galloway personally.
15

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 06:46:05
#10 Morris

Remember that a Scottish income tax could easily make the SNP unelectable for at least 15 years, just as the Poll Tax did for the Conservatives.
16

donald,

glasgow 27/12/2008 06:57:33
Numpties still support punishing Cooncil Tax.
17

Nikostratos,,

27/12/2008 07:12:45
Well done the Scotsman another Headline which gets the Nationalist extremists rolling around the floor foaming at the mouth all day long and keeps them away from decent law abiding peoples.
18

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 07:23:46
#17 Nikostratus

Now, now, if the discredited Scottish income tax rose from 3% to 5% to make it actually workable, it would still be fair.
19

morris,

edinburgh 27/12/2008 08:07:27
18 That is indeed the point.Well said.

Irrespective of what the percentage was it would still take account of ones ability to pay,and with looming unemployment it will quickly be seen as a necessity rather than detrimental.Those who continually suggest it would mean higher /extra taxes refer to wealthy people and families of course.Its surely not above the three income household to adjust their internal arrangements to take account of the council tax being removed from Dad and the burden shared by all the family. If it is they must be pretty dense!

Anyone who argues against the principle of fairer taxation is either disingenuous (for their own benefit presumably)or just plain incapable of simple arithmetic.

Poorer people will benefit and the majority will pay less and that is arithmetical fact.It cannot be otherwise!
You can argue against it but who wants to advertise their disingenuity or stupidity?
20

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 08:13:18
#20 Morris

True, but unfortunately the propoganda about the average taxpayer being better-off does fall-over, with LIT at realistic a rate. But of course, we would all be paying the same percentage, and we wouldn't get a nasty invoice from the council every year.

Shall we also strive to bundle VAT and fuel duty onto income tax?
21

morris,

edinburgh 27/12/2008 08:44:14
21

It would be difficult to oppose the transfer of other taxation to a direct ability to pay having argued in support of it. How far should it go? Thats a decision for the majority of course.

If anything the reason why we have seperate indirect taxation is so the poor can pay disproportionately more !
My neighbours will probably not agree,but I personally have no problem with looking to the wealthier people to take a greater slice of the tax burden.
I simply do not beleive in this Tory and Labour policy of everybody must contribute something,irrespective of whether they can afford to or not, when the principle only applies when the money travels out of our pockets but differentials must be maintained when it goes in the other direction. Double standard? No standard at all we mean!
What could possibly be fairer than PAYE? Its employed in one form or another in almost every western democracy with minor variations. The whole planet cannot be wrong!

It is the way forward but assumes you want to go forward of course! Many people do not and would happily live in a survival of the fattest society.
22

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 08:48:34
#23 morris

You are arguing in favour of changing taxation based on consumption, to taxation based on income. Does that stretch to care for the elderley, school meals, and prescription charges?

Remember that good old swadge of local taxation already comes out of our income taxes.
23

,

27/12/2008 08:52:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

Guga II,

Rockall 27/12/2008 08:54:58
#14 morris.

I blame global warming.
25

morris,

edinburgh 27/12/2008 09:01:49
24

I can only repeat that what level is adopted will be decided by the majority.If you are asking what would I personally favour,then the answer is as far toward a single taxation system as I can get,but what the majority want is surely what will be.
I am not indulging in a cop out here,simple stating a fact.
What I want does not matter in the grand scale of things, in that I am afforded a vote as is everybody and accept any democratically arrived at decision as being in order (but its not irreversible of course).
I do not debate what level should exist, so much as acknowledge that the majority view should prevail.I personally doubt that I am in the majority of course.
I hope that answers your question(I doubt that it will) but it is my honestly given response.I have no other.
26

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 09:15:37
#27 morris

Understood. The democratic mandate for the discredited Scottish income-tax in the Scot Parliament (or lack of it), will prevail.

27

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 09:17:07
#25 Sir Viv

Ahoy, shipmate. Unfortunately the agument aslo goes the other way in this instance...

LIT.

SNP: Gonnae do that.

Scotland: How?

SNP: Coz.
28

drunken proffet,

Tassy 27/12/2008 09:30:14
The real comparison is between the existing Labour established rate system which when you think about it, gutted the independent individual in favour of the Labour voters of that time. Times change and if they cannot, then just reserve a portion in the History of Scotland for their passing. Just after the beginning which describes the total mess at the turn of the century, but before the Golden Years.
29

Walter Ego,

Durness 27/12/2008 09:39:33
The poll tax brought down Thatcher and this version will bring down Salmond.
30

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 09:49:46
#32 MacGillicuddy

Whether dreaming, or not, a poorly thought-out, badly implemented Scottish income tax could easily loose the SNP protest vote from people who are uninterested in independence, but keen on hammering Labour.
31

TWC,

27/12/2008 10:04:07
Labour have nothing left but Mantra

Its been promises promises for 10 years now, but never any answers and that includes Council Tax.
Just like Calman keep it in the long grass then don't change anything.
32

Newton_Invented_Gravity,

27/12/2008 10:13:08
How do we know that the LIT will result in higher taxation than labours plans when they haven't revealed them yet?
33

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 27/12/2008 10:24:51
The last thing struggling Scotland needs is more Stalinist Gordon Brown stuff. The local income tax may or may not have merit but the people who have wrecked the economy deserve no say in how we tax and spend any more.
34

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 10:34:20
Your idea is interesting Tin Man (in a theoretical way) I assume you would also tax all unearned income too ?

But if you shifted the burden of tax to income tax only, and bearing in mind we don't actually pay that tax, our employers do (in most cases ) wouldn't that actually result in depressed wages ? But probably for the highest earners.

Anyway, it would shift more of a burden onto business than anything the SNP could come up with because we don't pay income tax, it is the employer who pays it.

35

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 10:35:47
I know the self employed are different, but I was thinking of people in employment.
36

Iain Ban,

Kinghorn 27/12/2008 10:35:48
This is geting tedious. This must be the millionth rehash of the same old story. Just because you repeat something over and over doesn't mean that people will believe the propaganda. I hope that The Scotsman will revert to publishing news in 2009 and give up on printing New Labour distortions of reality. Is there anybody left (apart from the insane trolls here)who takes this kind of "jourmalism" seriously.
37

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 10:42:45
#39 Iain

A 3% Scottish income tax rate is propoganda.

Basing arguments about who pays less and who pays more tax, based on a 3% rate, is propoganda.
38

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 10:45:00
#40 sm753

If the councils are not charging council tax, there is no mechanism in place to calculate council tax benefit.

That would be out the window.
39

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 10:51:06
42 That is the silly propoganda, the money for CTB comes from the grant from Westminster which is collected by general taxation. Councils are not allocated the precise sum in CTB paid by them on an annual basis. It is a notional grant from Westminster, which is adminstered to cover the cost, the same principle would apply exactly in the case of LIT. It's a nonsense to say that if you change how you collect the tax, Scottish tax payers would lose the revenue currently paid in CTB.

That would clearly be open to judicial review, which Westminster would lose, so they're bluffing.
40

Darien,

Panama 27/12/2008 10:52:40
I see our UK fundamentalist British Nationalist Brownshirt friends are out in force today.

"The estimate of what the Nat Tax will cost to set up is a frightening prospect for business," Labour's finance spokesman David Whitton said.

I suggest the likes of Whitton steer their attention to the real frightening prospect for business - that is the NewLab inspired total economic collapse we are all witnessing in Scotland and in the rest of the disunited Kingdoms.
41

Iain Ban,

Berlin 27/12/2008 10:53:42
# Tin Man
I take it you get paid by New Labour to post here? Present a decent alternative to LIT and then we can debate the issue. Until then, best to keep stumm.
42

Toast,

27/12/2008 11:06:59
Labour are just so totally out of touch with what people want,they spent their whole lives picking pathetic little arguements which are of no relivence [a bit like themselves]
43

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 27/12/2008 11:26:37
#42 The Tin Man

That is the most ridicules argument against, but idiot Labour continues to parrot that one.

If they wanted they could still use the same formulas to determine what council tax benefit Scotland would have received and then add that sum to the block grant or they could take the currents years figures and index it to inflation.

The fact is they don't want to so they throw this phony obstacle in the path, all that does is convince more people that what Scotland needs is Fiscal Autonomy as a minimum.
44

alanh,

ek 27/12/2008 11:31:47
and what would thus discreditted dishonest opposition replace the vastly unfair council tax , that they introduced and had 8 years to replace or reform, with???????????????????????????

answers on the back of a fag packet maybe?
45

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 11:50:33
43
I'd expect more from you than parroting silly SNP propaganda. You should know that the council tax benefit is part of the council tax system. They were both established by the 1992 Local Government Finance Act. You can't separate the two.
In fact the 2007 Lyons report in England said that the Government “would no longer have to pay council tax benefit in the case of a full replacement LIT”.
The 2006 Burt report on Scottish local government said that “if in Scotland the council tax were replaced by a local income tax, Council Tax Benefit would cease.”
John Hutton, then Work & Pensions Minister, said in April 2007: “Let us be clear, if there is no council tax in Scotland there will be no council tax benefit.”
So the SNP knew the score long before last May’s election, but argued contrary to the facts, even misrepresenting what the Burt report had actually said in order to set the stage for yet another opportunity to whip up grievances.....and you fell for it, hook, line and sinker.
46

TWC,

27/12/2008 12:13:50
49 Grahamski
This is not about the Nats most of us want rid of the Council Tax and Labour agreed it was unfair and said they would come up with an alternative now they say they don't want to rush.
They've had 10 years; absolutely pathetic.

Labour need to Put up or Shut up
47

,

27/12/2008 12:15:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
48

TWC,

27/12/2008 12:15:36
As for the CT benefit they need to pay that to Scotland and if they don't then we need to take control of our own money.
Another reason not to vote Labour
49

,

27/12/2008 12:25:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
50

,

27/12/2008 12:25:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
51

Hugh Roscombe,

27/12/2008 12:28:29
More p­ish from the Hootsman.
52

boaby swingin',

in the coontin'-hoose 27/12/2008 12:34:42
Holyrood Labour's (current) finance spokesman, deviously devilish dumpling-domed David Whitton, thundered, "SNP? LIT? He-he-he! It'll never work - Gordon told me so and he's the Master of the Universe!"
53

,

27/12/2008 12:40:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
54

,

27/12/2008 12:49:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
55

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 27/12/2008 13:08:43
If LIT is such a bad idea than it follows that Income Tax itself cannot be all that great.
What action is Labour proposing to move the whole tax system from income to the much better, fairer, etc property taxation ?
56

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 13:18:54
57
I see you continue to peddle the SNP propaganda which relies on the veracity of a March 2008 SNP press release which claimed that “Treasury documents show that £400 million of council tax benefit belongs to Scotland”.
The document in question is the October 2007 “Statement of Funding Policy” which in Appendix A, on page 41, provides the text of a document from December 1997 which lists council tax benefit under “Spending programmes forming part of the Scottish Block”.
However, the SNP’s press release singularly fails to mention that on page 17 of the same document, we find the following vital caveat:
This Statement is drafted on the assumption that current forms of local taxation continue.
But it's so much easier just to continue to pump out those grievances and SNP fibs, eh?
57

,

27/12/2008 13:26:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
58

,

27/12/2008 13:27:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
59

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 13:30:58
Unison:

The Liberal Democrats, SNP and SSP are all campaigning to move to a form of Local Income Tax. They claim this will be fairer. They claim that it will move the burden of paying from local government to the wealthy. UNISON believes that this will in fact move the burden to working families leaving many wealthy people no longer contributing. Only 60% of people in the UK pay income tax and so 40% of people would be exempt from paying for local council services.


Income is also only an indicator of ability to pay: the costs of bringing up children, paying a mortgage on a house caring for others mean that many on lower incomes have higher disposable incomes that those with higher gross incomes.

No taxes are popular but in order to fund our public services most people are willing to pay them, What is important is that taxes are fair ,hard to avoid and simple to collect. Currently in Britain we have different types of tax, on earnings, property on spending, on business. Moves away from taxing property to earning place more of the tax burden on hard working families not to the wealthy.

Like the Poll Tax every adult in the house will be paying tax on their earnings rather than one charge per household. So even those on average earnings could pay more under local income tax schemes if there are two (or more) full time workers in the house
60

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 13:31:25
The following examples show how public sector workers will be hit by a move to local income tax. The figures are based on the Lib Dem plan. But the SSP and SNP plans have similar outcomes. The Lib Dems propose a LIT rate of 3.75%, this rate assumes income from a 50% tax rate for top earners. The Scottish Executive has no powers to introduce this rate. The SNP plan allows councils to set the rate locally. Their proposals indicate that Glasgow would have to charge 4.8%. Assuming the families below pay average Council Tax (in Scotland £1094) Figures are for a year's bill.

Newly registered nurse (£16525) and a council auditor (£27000) £171 worse off per year




Newly qualified teacher ( starting salary £21588) and Community Education Worker (£19803) on average worse of by about £90 per year




Ward manager (£23110) and Sport Development Officer (£21000) £193 worse off per year


Sharing houses will no longer be so attractive for young workers as each individual rather than the household will be charged.

2 newly qualified teachers (£21588) and a newly registered nurse (£16525) would be £594 worse off per year


Families on low incomes will also suffer if their children stay at home once they start work.

Call centre team coach (£16500)

Experienced cook (£13500)

Personnel Assistant (£14872)

Apprentice plumber £7778)

£146 worse of under per yearLiberal Democrats Local income tax



Recycling operator (£14220)

Residential worker (£15722)

Cook (£10671)

Under 21 minimum wage (£9330)

£45 worse off per year

Students earning more than £5.50 per hour for a 20 hour week would pay £31more per year


61

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 13:37:42
61
Just like the SNP propaganda you are quoting you singularly fail to mention that on page 17 of the same document, we find the following vital caveat:
This Statement is drafted on the assumption that current forms of local taxation continue.
62

,

27/12/2008 13:47:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
63

,

27/12/2008 13:51:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
64

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 13:53:29
#47 Kampung

How would 'pretendy council-tax' be calculated if local government was entirely centrally funded?

Look at the 'historic concordat' - who is going to say how much local expenditure comes from Holyrood, and how much is raised from 'pretendy council tax'.

I understand that the Scot exec should be compensated for CTB. How that could be done is a mystery, though.
65

watcher,

Edinburgh 27/12/2008 13:54:57
It would be better to try and operate a fairer way of running the present Council Tax. To introduce a local income tax that is far worse than the Tories Poll Tax is not the answer. Young people of 16 who don`t even get the vote would be getting taxed at source. pensions getting taxed at source. It wont be popular.
66

,

27/12/2008 13:55:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
67

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 13:56:09
#71 watcher

Don't be so sensible.
68

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:01:26
65 You are wrong. There is a notional sum contained within the block grant which is dispersed. No one can predict entirely how much Council tax benefit will be paid, it is linked to Housing benefit, and much remains unclaimed. Councils also have the option of paying discretionary benefits too. Despite your and Grahamski's duplicitous subterfuge, it is quite clear that a proportion of the general taxation raised in Scotland is remitted back to provide a benefit for those people who can not afford their share of financing local government. That is a principle which applies just as well to LIT, and as I say if the Treasury atempts to withold that sum because the SNP changes the way they collect the tax, that will be a matter for judicial review, and the Treasuey will lose.

I see we are not allowed to comment on Israel bombing the hell out of the Palestinians again.
69

,

27/12/2008 14:02:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
70

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:05:46
75
A zealot writes............
71

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:05:58
Grahamski and sm thingy you can bore us all to death with the names of administrative procedures if you wish. It does not alter underlying principles. How do you think people in receipt of benefits continue to be in receipt of benefits when Westminster changes the system ? Procedures, rules, and names of things are changed. Big deal, it does not alter the fundamental system of relief for people who can't pay their own way.
72

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:07:52
74
Can we just take it as read that you condemn the actions of the state of Israel. They obviously have no right to protect their citizens from the indiscriminate rocket attacks perpetrated by the terrorists of Hamas.
73

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:08:56
77
OK, you're right of course. Let's not get the facts in the way of a right good moan, eh?
74

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:08:59
63 Tin Man if you are going to quote UNISON please do it properly, you are cherry picking. I'm not a 100% fan of LIT I can see flaws, not least of which is that a number of fellow UNISON members will be put out a job. That may colour their arguments somewhat, and quite rightly so.
75

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 14:09:47
#77 Observer

Obviously, people on income support would be paying zero income tax.

If you still want CTB, you will have to explain how anyone would work out the correct sum.
76

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:10:39
78 I condemn any state which uses simultaneous air attacks to allegedly target individuals, but cares not a jot about the innocents it slaughters in the process. Do you ?
77

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 14:12:13
#80 Observer

I think you have come to the wrong place if you really want fair and balanced argument.
78

,

27/12/2008 14:13:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
79

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:14:20
81 There will still be a notional figure to work from, based on what their contribution would be if they could make it. The money is there, it's not actually that hard to work out, that is what civil servants are for. LIT is cost neutral to the Treasury.
80

,

27/12/2008 14:15:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
81

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 14:16:04
#84 Sir Viv

What about the 3% Scottish income tax rate propoganda?
82

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 14:17:13
#86 Buster

Go somewhere else if you don't want to discuss tax.
83

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:20:51
79 You are not getting this. You act like change is insurmountable, how did we change from rates to the poll tax to council tax eh ? Benefit systems change all the time. Moses didn't bring down the rules on Council Tax Benefit down from the mountain on tablets of stone. The money in the block grant is assigned to CTB, it can be assigned to support LIT quite easily. It's the same principle.
84

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:20:59
84
What do you mean the only other person to use it verbatim? It's a direct quote from the document touted by the nationalist spin machine. For some reason the nats failed to mention it. Astounding really.
85

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:22:22
86
Go away, silly boy, and take your latent fascism with you.
86

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:23:06
89
The money isn't in the block grant, that's the point.
87

Boab1,

27/12/2008 14:23:46
I'm disappointed, but not surprised, that the article neglects to mention that the Council Tax costs £68 million pounds to administer annually. This figure is mentioned on the BBC website.
88

,

27/12/2008 14:24:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
89

Boab1,

27/12/2008 14:24:58
Grahamski, I'm sure it is. Even the Conservatives say they would not cut CTB money if they were in power.
90

TWC,

27/12/2008 14:24:59
Labour haven't got a single positive policy and all these People who will pay more under LIT can afford it.
The people who are on fixed income cannot affford the Council Tax

Put up or Shut up
91

Observer..,

27/12/2008 14:27:32
92 where do you think it is ?
92

,

27/12/2008 14:27:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
93

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:28:42
Where do you think the money for CTB comes from Grahamski ?
94

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:29:04
94
I'm quoting the same document as the SNP press release you are quoting. You strangely fail to acknowledge the rather important caveat on page 14 of this document, to whit: "This Statement is drafted on the assumption that current forms of local taxation continue.".
But we would expect no less from a slippery nat......
95

Boab1,

27/12/2008 14:29:55
Oh, you get to see what Labour are all about in Iain Gray. Say whatever it takes to get elected then resort to suiting yourself. Council tax reform was his highest priority if elected. Now he says it'll take him three years to come up with an alternative to something Labour agrees needs changing. Until they come up with some sort of alternative all they are doing by harping on about LIT is showing how devoid of a single idea they are.
96

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:30:20
Come on Grahamski, if it isn't from the block grant where do you think it originates ?
97

,

27/12/2008 14:34:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
98

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:35:41
97
The CTB is paid direct to the councils from our government in Westminster. It is there to make council tax fairer for the poorest in our society. It is part of the UK benefit system and is inextricably linked to council tax. If the SNP had been serious in bringing forward an alternative to the council tax they would have engineered a way to access these funds for Scotland within the existing guidelines.
This they singularly failed to do for the simple reason that they will always look for ways to exploit greivances against our Westminster government, even at the expense of the poorest in our communities. It's what they do, it's what they are for.
The people of this country are beginning to see them for what they are; petty narrow minded bigots. Please explain why the first minister of Scotland would sign a card congratulating Diego Maradona for cheating against England? What a prize buffoon we have shaming our nation......
99

,

27/12/2008 14:39:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
100

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:42:37
104 you are right that CTB is tied to DWP payments and therefore is funded by Westminster. But then again Grahamski, so is Housing Benefit - and we administer HB differently here than they do in England. There is a sum within the block grant which is assigned to CTB and that is calculable PRECISELY because it is linked into DWP Benefits. Do you get that ? But we don't get a grant which is linked to every single CTB claim, that is silly, it is calculated as a notional figure which is then administered here.

EXACTLY as we could do with LIT. Including people now on partial benefit.
101

alanh,

ek 27/12/2008 14:42:59
'64 tin man
you say
"The following examples show how public sector workers will be hit by a move to local income tax. The figures are based on the Lib Dem plan. But the SSP and SNP plans have similar outcomes. The Lib Dems propose a LIT rate of 3.75%, this rate assumes income from a 50% tax rate for top earners. The Scottish Executive has no powers to introduce this rate. The SNP plan allows councils to set the rate locally. Their proposals indicate that Glasgow would have to charge 4.8%. Assuming the families below pay average Council Tax (in Scotland £1094) Figures are for a year's bill.

Newly registered nurse (£16525) and a council auditor (£27000) £171 worse off per year




Newly qualified teacher ( starting salary £21588) and Community Education Worker (£19803) on average worse of by about £90 per year




Ward manager (£23110) and Sport Development Officer (£21000) £193 worse off per year


Sharing houses will no longer be so attractive for young workers as each individual rather than the household will be charged.

2 newly qualified teachers (£21588) and a newly registered nurse (£16525) would be £594 worse off per year


Families on low incomes will also suffer if their children stay at home once they start work.

Call centre team coach (£16500)

Experienced cook (£13500)

Personnel Assistant (£14872)

Apprentice plumber £7778)

£146 worse of under per yearLiberal Democrats Local income tax



Recycling operator (£14220)

Residential worker (£15722)

Cook (£10671)

Under 21 minimum wage (£9330)

£45 worse off per year

Students earning more than £5.50 per hour for a 20 hour week would pay £31more per year "

but where do you say, or even get, what they pay now, to give these joint high earners such a low council tax band means a good few of them live in a tiny wee flat/house? With an income of £43k+ coming into the house of couple one do you not think they may live in a slightly bigger house?

surely t
102

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:48:28
104 Are you doing a Gordon Brown impression ? I can't stand football myself, but even I appreciated the hand of god, it was hilariously funny. Lighten up.
103

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:49:02
106
The figure is linked to the variances between low income and high council tax demands and a rebate is calculated from that variance. As I understand LIT there will be no variance between low income and high tax demands therefore nobody will actually qualify for a rebate.
104

,

27/12/2008 14:49:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
105

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:50:14
108,
No I'm being an embarrassed Scot who sees his country traduced by the pathetic anti-English bigots of the SNP.
106

alanh,

ek 27/12/2008 14:51:54
107 should continue with

surely to be fair with your comparrison you should simply use average wages and give a few examples of single earning households or even low income households.
unless of course you are not trying to look at the case fairly and are simply parrotting party lines in which case just ignore that
107

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 14:51:56
If the discredited Scottish income tax was based on the 'ability to pay' it would be banded, as per income tax. The correct expression is 'equitable'.
108

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:53:30
110
I think you'll find the majority of our Holyrood parliament do not favour the SNP's LIT proposals. Now who exactly is trying to thwart democracy? A loud-mouthed minority perhaps?
109

Wisnaeme,

27/12/2008 14:56:11
Yet again we have New Labour's opinion on LIT.
They're against that sort of thing, apparently.
With regard to New Labour's past opinions, promises and their methods of implementing their opinions and promises; you will understand why I have no trust or confidence in themselves. In other words, I don't believe the scaremongering liars.
To be fair, some promises they did keep.
For instance, they promised Dubya and his warmongering Neo Cons that they would join in his great crusade or as others might perceive it, "Daddy's unfinished beezness". Perhaps it could even be described as acts of revenge. Against Saddam for not being co operative in engaging in round two of their unfinished mutual beezness with Iran for example. Whatever. New Labour kept it's promise,
...and discarded practically every vestige of their integrity both at home and in the world community at large in the process. Moral compass, indeed.
So when New Labour promises us that this LIT is a very bad idea. Then I would be inclined to take the opposite view on that premise alone. For what ever New Labour does, it does it in New Labour's interests first and foremost.
...and that, is not necessary in the best interests of
the country or the citizens therein; as events and circumstances have shown to our cost.
The question is do you trust and place faith in New Labour? Bearing in mind their past track record.
If you were honest with yourselves, perhaps despite reservations, you would seriously consider the alternative plans put forward by others not tainted by the New Labour mantra or their Westmidden derivatives.
...and have a fairer and more caring Scotland, in spite of New Labour's efforts for it to be otherwise.
They says and we pay is not always going to be a forgone conclusion. There are alternatives.

.

110

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 14:57:01
#112 alanh

It is a quote from Unison's website.

http://www.unison-scotland.org.uk/briefings/counciltax.html

If you want to do a comparison, don't base your calculations on the falacious 3% rate.

One minute the Scot exec are bragging about increasing local government funding, the next minute they are planning to slash the same funding, indication that the 3% rate is propoganda, pure and simple.

111

alanh,

ek 27/12/2008 14:57:36
tin man where do you find all these high earning families?
and do they not have any single earners or wageless families living nearby?
as a socialist, and ex-labour activist, I have NO problem with a household earning £40-£50k helping to pay a little, cos even in your worse cases its a little amount, for the council services of our lower earners. That , to me, is where nu liebour killed our party
112

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:57:58
109 I am not saying it is a like for like system. What would be the point of that. What I am saying is that the amount of CTB paid for by general taxation is easily identified within the block grant, and can easily be included in future block grants, as it is now, it would make precisely hee haw difference to the Treasury, and it's all electronic anyway, there is simply no need to withold the money, that would be narrow-minded, mean, petty, bigotted, and parochially- minded, all the things you accuse the SNP of.
113

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 14:58:09
115
Ah, the last refuge of a whipped nat: Iraq.
114

,

27/12/2008 14:59:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
115

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 14:59:28
11 Grow a sense of humour/perspective.
116

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:00:45
114 If the unionists use their majority to keep the Council Tax that is their perogative. He he he (evil laugh).
117

alanh,

ek 27/12/2008 15:01:58
#116 tin man

I aint basing any comparrisons with any %, if you look again I have not quoted one figure except the ones you have given us, but find your figures a wee bitty ludicrous and very one sided tbh.

How much of local govt funding comes from Council tax/'LIT? Would I be right in saying a small proportion
118

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:02:18
#118 Observer

You still have not explained how this CTB rebate would be calculated, when local government is centrally funded.
119

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:06:22
#123 alanh

As I explained, they are Unison's figures, not mine. I posted them to give a comparison with the Mickey Mouse figures quoted by the Scot exec.

It is being sold as a 'tax cut' for 'most people', but that is not the truth.

120

Bill_on_a_boat,

Docked for the Holidays 27/12/2008 15:06:22
Nice comment up above.

Perhaps here is what Scotland needs.

#1 - tinyurl.com/63wneh
#2 - Independence (& see #1)
#3 - Flat rate income tax
#4 - Government spending at set rate of GDP
#5 - Flat rate corporate tax.
#6 - ONLY public funding to be used for elections.

And in 2010 - at years end - lets sing Auld Lang Syne to the sun setting on the redundant Union.

Footnote: IF labour increase the housing tax - many more homes will be forced onto the market - this will no doubt help in Herr Broon's efforts to shore up the housing market?
121

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:06:31
118
If there is no need for benefit why pay it?
122

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:08:01
121
I take it you'll be saying the same to my local numpty MSP who was so outraged at the idea of football fans singing the hokey cokey......
123

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:09:47
120
CTB is a UK wide benefit paid to counteract the poorest paying high council tax charges. If there is no council tax there is no need for council tax benefit.
124

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:09:52
124 We know (approximately) what the CTB would be as it is linked to DWP payments. So that money contained within the block grant could be used to support LIT on a needs based dispersal formula which Holyrood already have.
125

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:10:00
#126 Bill

Unfortunately, there is no democratic mandate within the Scot parliament to even hold a referendum, never mind a public majority in favour of independence, so you will have to wait longer than 2010.
126

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:12:13
#130 Observer

It would have to be based on pretendy CT charges - how would they be calculated in 2020?
127

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:14:03
Grahamski you are struggling now.

127 Of course there is a need for benefit, your LIT will go towards funding local government exactly the same as Council Tax. If you can't pay your way the state pays for you, subject to means testing. Basic tenet of the Welfare State.

128 Numptyish behaviour, don't know if he's always a numpty.

128

alanh,

ek 27/12/2008 15:14:08
here's a real comparrison tin man.

I live with my wife and 2 small kids.
Our combined income is around £28k.

Next door we have 3 adults with a combined income of about £50k.

We both are on the same council tax band leaving me to pay a higher proportion of my income for council services than they do.

Is that fair?

When my 2 kids are older and earning while still at home, and next door are a couple of pensioners and their girl has moved out, then we will pay more for our council services than them

Thats where it evens up and shows the fairness of the proposed system imo and why I am firmly in favour of LIT ( whether its 3%, 5% or even a little more)
129

,

27/12/2008 15:16:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
130

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:17:49
132 - no, it's an income tax, it's not a set charge. The money would, as I seem to have been saying for hours now, be a notional figure based on what would have been allocated to those people who don't have the money to pay for their share of services. That's why I don't understand what the fuss is about it's completely cost neutral to the Treasuery.
131

alanh,

ek 27/12/2008 15:18:12
#125 tin man
"It is being sold as a 'tax cut' for 'most people', but that is not the truth. "

it may be for your purposes but it has been sold to me as a FAIRER system of local taxation which it is
132

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:19:00
#135

What, over 10 years? Don't be silly, there is no 'next time around'.
133

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:19:50
133
Are you suggesting that there will be a rebate under LIT? Why would you need a rebate?
134

,

27/12/2008 15:20:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
135

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:21:48
#137 alanh

Exactly. If most people end up paying more, the SNP will go the same way as the last Conservative gov. - whatever the merits and flaws of the poll tax, remember they were trying to introduce a 'fairer' tax system, as well.
136

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:23:07
#140 Buster

What on Earth has it to do with 'Labour'?
137

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:24:52
You are being purposefully daft. There is no rebate because it's not a set charge. You take the money, contained within the block grant, which was previously paid in CTB, and use that (to which we are entitled) to support the LIT on behalf of those people who, because they fall outwith the income tax schedule, don't pay LIT, but still use council services. It's so bleedin' obvious that I fail to see what the debate is about, unless it is deliberate nit picking pedantry.
138

Observer..,

27/12/2008 15:26:09
sorry 143 was for 139
139

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:28:09
143
So you think that it is fair that the UK benefits system should also pay for the super rich in Scoltand who won't be paying LIT too?
140

,

27/12/2008 15:28:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
141

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:31:20
145 Nope that's my major objection to LIT. But I think they are closing the loopholes now.
142

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:32:44
#143 Observer

Far more complicated than that, isn't it? If a LIT is set at 3% and local funding is slashed, wouldn't a CTB rebate have to be slashed, as well?
143

,

27/12/2008 15:33:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
144

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:37:00
149
What, the UK is to blame?
Really?
Well, there's a surprise............
145

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:37:02
148 Oh yes it is quite complicated. Far better if we were independent and ran the whole show ourselves, but until that day, it's better than the council tax and it's very do-able. I see it as an interim measure, and no, the notional CTB figure would not need to be slashed unless it was being slashed in other parts of the UK too. The Treasury have agreed to pay Scotland CTB. We just want to spend it in a different way - if it's voted for by the Parliament.
146

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:37:48
#147 Observer

As far as I am aware, they haven't even sat down with HMRC to hammer-out how a LIT would be collected, or even finalised whether it would be centrally-set or (seismic shift) locally-set.

But they are 'closing the loopholes'? Sheesh...
147

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:39:15
151
Pay Scotland CTB? I think you'll find that our UK government pays those UK citizens who need a council tax rebate the benefit throughout the UK, the payment isn't made to Scotland any more than it is Wales....
148

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:39:42
150 Own goal there Grahamski, LIT would be a mirror of UK taxation policy - if the super rich in Scotland were to be let off (which I don't think they will be) it's just because the UK system let's them off, and they do big time.

Well, if you are ''intensely relaxed about the filthy rich'' what can we expect ?
149

alanh,

ek 27/12/2008 15:41:24
#141 tin man
"Exactly. If most people end up paying more, the SNP will go the same way as the last Conservative gov. - whatever the merits and flaws of the poll tax, remember they were trying to introduce a 'fairer' tax system, as well."

I still haven't seen where you get the claim that MOST PEOPLE will be paying more.
Some high earning households will pay more than lower earning households but until the figures are actually finalised where can you get that claim from that they will pay more than they do now? That , to me, is fair and just

I also left unison because of their blind allegiance to new liebour so please dont quote their very blinkerred figures unless you balance it with how many of these fictitious families there are and why they should not pay their share
150

Bill_on_a_boat,

Docked for the Holidays 27/12/2008 15:41:56
OK- Income tax - best way to support a government and the most equitable perhaps.

For the naysayers and repeaters of dogma - who say also this financial crisis is "worldwide" - a quick look into REALITY of taxing systems by a similar split, where one is income based and one is property based - in the "same country" no less.

In the USA each state sets it's own taxation systems - we've just been in two - the difference is remarkable.

Florida:- No LIT - all property tax - SEVERE recession/depression - very bad foreclosure rate - horrible unemployment - town becomming ramshackle - property values down up to 70% in places - depression likely. The outlook is so bad because when incomes go down the portion of the tax take increases leaving yet less room for discretionary spending - creating more recession / depression. It spirals.

Missouri - LIT & very modest property tax - homes maintaining value for the most part - recession likely to end soon - federal bailout probably not needed - they actually have a law that says "if we collect too much tax we must give it back" - and do.
The outlook is better in great part because when incomes go down so does the tax take.

The right thinking human being will always want to contribute appropriately - the right thinking government will always adjust it's "take" accordingly. If we follow that thought - There is nothing right thinking about council tax or it's supporters.
151

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:42:53
152 I trust the SNP to bamboozle the Lib Dems on that one, well, it won't be hard. My own view is that collecting local taxation is not an issue,it's how it is spent that counts. As for talks with HMRC, that will depend on their political masters. LIT can be scuppered, that's a fact, but if I was a unionist I would be very wary of doing so.
152

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:44:56
153 yes exactly Grahamski, you have cottoned-on. The UK Govt pays on behalf of those of it's number who can't pay their own way. Surely they wouldn't stop doing that just because they were Scottish. As I have said, the principle is exactly the same.
153

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:45:50
154
Hmmm...let's think about this.
Currently the super-rich have to pay council tax for the simple reason they can't 'hide' their property. The SNP bring an alternative method of funding the 20% or so of local government finance which allows the super-rich to avoid payment.
And that's the UK's fault.
Aye, right.
154

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:48:00
158
You can't get a rebate for a tax you are not paying.
155

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:48:16
Sorry, I meant in 157 that local setting rates of collecting taxation isn't an issue.
156

The Tin Man,

27/12/2008 15:50:12
#151 Observer

Sorry, that is babble. Anyway, nice chatting with you. Moscow, as they say in Russia.
157

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:51:18
159 Stop being silly, the Queen pays as much in council Tax as someone with a fairly well to do house in Bearsden. That could actually be an old pensioner couple with hardly any money. Council Tax is a drop in the ocean, not even that, to the super rich. They should be taxed til their pips squeal but neither the SNP or Labour propose to do that.
158

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:51:58
157
This SNP administration is straight out of 'Blazing Saddles' isn't it?
So, we've got Mr Swinney holding a gun to his head and declaring 'Gie me the money or baldy gets it!'
Yup, that's the way to run a country.....
159

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 15:53:00
I am doing this and cooking dinner at the same time, it is beyond me. Have to go, adios.
160

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/12/2008 15:53:18
Anway, must fly.
Observer it's been a blast (as always)
Take care......
161

,

27/12/2008 15:58:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
162

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 16:39:48
No comment in the Herald either. At least 195 dead in Gaza, including women and children, and 300 injured. Very festive.
163

,

27/12/2008 16:45:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
164

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 17:01:53
''Israel launched air attacks across the BESIEGED Gaza strip on Saturday threatening that further operations would be carried out.''

Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister said that ''The operation will go on and be as intensified as long as necessary''.

Gaza fighters fired home-made rockets into Southern Israel. One Israeli was killed.

All violence is wrong, but apparently Israel does not ''do'' proportionate.

165

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 17:20:46
Islam Shaahwan, a Hamas police spokesman, said a police graduation ceremony was struck in Gaza by Israel. Among those killed was Tawfig Jabber, the Gaza Chief of Police.

The Hamas-run interior ministry said that all security compounds in the interior had been destroyed.

Gaza is densely populated. Its 1.5 million residents are already experiencing hardship, big time.

Mustafa Barghouthi, a former Palestinian Minister said ''It is an attack on the whole populatian and the free will of the people of Gaza''

Avi Benayahu has said that this is only a begining of the air raids.....

Apols, but there's no where else to post this worrying information.

166

,

27/12/2008 17:30:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
167

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 17:42:25
Yeah 172 but it doesn't actually mean we think Israelis should be knocked down like skittles. Those who have an avoidance to rationality always say that.
168

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 17:46:29
I gots to go bye
169

Wisnaeme,

27/12/2008 18:10:45
Grahamski wrote:

"Ah, the last refuge of the whipped nat."

Still dealing in suppositions and assumptions then, AM squared.

Actually, apart from a few hiccups; ah'm quite satisfied with the way things are going in Scotland.

That satisfaction was earned by the way.

Uh Huh, ah'm quite pleasantly surprised myself at how influential the outcome in matters that I've been involved in for many a year have become. Indeed and how that influence has benefited each and every person in Scotland to some degree or other.

Uh Huh, books have been written about it, ah believe.

Refugee eh? Aye, but might I suggest that there are a d@mn sight more Iraqi refugees than there are 'nat' ones in today's troubled times. Perhaps there might be a few more Scottish refugees in the future. Ones that are unable or unwilling to come to terms with change. So sad, when folk don't know or don't understand their place any more and find their position untenable, eh?

...and disposable packs of paper hankies for the use of, are available at half price in a Woolies near you.

For a limited period only, naturally.

.
170

lulach mac gille coemgain,

27/12/2008 18:16:43
There are a few to many words in that headline

Labour - 'last thing' struggling Scottish economy needs

there, that’s better
171

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 22:13:24
220 dead, 700 injured, but hey Palestinians are not raptures so we don't need a comments facility.
172

Conan the Librarian™,

27/12/2008 23:00:11
177

sm753, you do post in a similiar style...

...But you may have a slightly more honed sense of humour...

173

Wisnaeme,

27/12/2008 23:13:52
Uh Huh.

Did I mention AM2?


Nope.


Ho hum, as I wrote earlier:

"Suppositions and assumptions", right enough.

.
174

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 23:16:56
Look at this:

http://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Secret_gag_orders_undermine_core_Western_values

Used against Guido.
175

Observer..,

Glasgow 27/12/2008 23:24:53
Look at this too:

UK MOD Joint Publications 3-45: Media Operations, Sep 07

That's how they see us.
176

Marian,

28/12/2008 10:35:15
The deceit in the local income tax versus council tax argument rests solely with those who seek to perpetuate a regressive council tax that hits the poorest and most vulnerable hardest. The Council acts as an agent of central government for most services; education, social work, police, building control, etc with a little latitude for local views. Only planning, rubbish collection, street lighting, sports facilities and arts provision are wholly within its remit; and even then "guidance" is provided by the central authority. Roughly 80% of local councils' budgets come from central (Holyrood ) government with but 20% from the dreaded council tax.

Amongst the problems with the Council Tax are: (i) too many houses in the same band within any Council make it effectively a poll tax where everyone pays the same (ii) The relief to people on low incomes is far too low and (iii) Councils cannot vary non-domestic rates - another nationalised local tax - so that any changes in expenditure are borne disproportionately by the Council Tax payers. So as "he/she who pays the piper calls the tune", we should be looking at the whole idea of Council Tax with a view to removing it completely! Surely it is much fairer to have Tax for local services determined by income and not by the notional value of a house?

The Scottish National Party are proposing quite simply that the present Council tax based upon property “value” will be abolished and in its place there would be a local income tax for local authority services which would amount to adding a uniform nationwide rate of 3p on to the 20p basic rate of income tax. This would ensure for the first time that citizens would pay according to their income rather than paying based upon what kind of house they have and where they happen to live as is the case under the present Council Tax.

Council tax is especially unfair on pensioners because council tax as a share of the basic state pension is continually rising. The poorest 20
177

Marian,

28/12/2008 10:35:42
continued.....

Council tax is especially unfair on pensioners because council tax as a share of the basic state pension is continually rising. The poorest 20 per cent of pensioners pay nearly six times more in council tax than the richest 20 per cent of non-pensioners as a proportion of their income. Under local income tax, most pensioners would be better off. Pensioners who don't pay any income tax, won't pay any local income tax either. Not only would this proposed system based upon PAYE be fairer it would be far simpler and much less costly to collect than the existing bureaucratic nightmare that is required for the collection and administration of the Council Tax.

I would also point out that Sir Michael Lyon in his recent report to the Government on the Council Tax in England, said that future governments should consider introducing more radical reforms such as a local income tax as a fairer method of raising taxes for local services. The former Mayor of London Ken Livingstone has gone on record as stating he’d like to abolish the council tax and replace it with a local income tax, suggesting that with a 2p increase in the basic rate of income tax the Government could afford to get rid of the Council Tax on London. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies on average in Scotland a single person earning £33,270 and below in a Band D property and families living in a Band F property with an income of £64,440 and below will be better off under the Scottish National Party local income tax proposals.

You can check how the Scottish National Party proposed uniform local income tax of 3p on to the 20p basic rate of income tax would affect your personal circumstances by choosing an example via the following link http://paddington.snp.org/jthomas/savings.php

Cathy Jamieson in her infamous Newsnight Scotland interview claimed that Band A pensioner households will benefit by saving £180 per annum on their Council Tax under New Labour's proposal to tinker
178

Marian,

28/12/2008 10:36:04
continued.......

Cathy Jamieson in her infamous Newsnight Scotland interview claimed that Band A pensioner households will benefit by saving £180 per annum on their Council Tax under New Labour's proposal to tinker with the existing Council Tax but under the Scottish National Party's local Income Tax for example a pensioner household on a joint income of £9050.60 will pay absolutely NO local income tax whatsoever! Also New Labour's claim is based on their patently absurd assumption that everyone on low incomes lives in Band A households! In fact the New Labour proposal does nothing for the large number of people on low income who have the misfortune to pay a Council tax which is based upon the higher Bands! Also some Districts in Scotland have very few Band H households e.g Orkney where it is said there are only two. By far the greatest number and the highest proportion of the whole of Band H households are located in either Edinburgh or Glasgow so this must mean that New Labour are proposing to substantially increase the Band H tax on these households in Edinburgh and Glasgow not only to reduce the Council Tax for the lower proportion of Band A houses in Edinburgh and Glasgow but also more sinisterly in order to cross-subsidise the Council tax Band A households in the Districts elsewhere in Scotland that have few Band H households!
179

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 28/12/2008 21:38:27
So let me get this right. Labour are using their abject failure to manage the UK economy as a reason to abandon LIT.

What strange times we live in !
180

Walter Ego,

Durness 29/12/2008 07:29:31
LIT is a poll tax.
181

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 29/12/2008 09:19:28
#187 Walter

Clearly you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Eejit !
182

Brian Hill,

Edinburgh 30/12/2008 21:50:56
'last thing' struggling Scottish economy needs....

I would have thought that the 'last thing' Scotland needs is a return of a Labour Government in Holyrood.
183

,

01/01/2009 21:17:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.