Sharing Tax Benefits of Growth with « Squeezed Middle »

novembre 19th, 2013

Increasing income inequality in the UK, together with policies to protect low-income families and the lowering of tax rates on high earners to encourage less tax avoidance, have resulted in the top 50% of tax payers now contributing over 90% of total income tax collected. Indeed the top 1% (those earning over £160,000 per year) pay around 30% of total income tax and the top 10% almost 60%. These high earners are, therefore, funding by far the largest proportion of Britain?s public services.

Yet the opposition Labour party has threatened to return the top rate of income tax back to 50% (from the current 45%) should it be returned to power at the next General Election in May 2015. At the other end of the scale, the governing Coalition of the Conservative & Liberal Democrat parties is also progressively increasing the tax-free allowance to some £10,000 or more before 2015.

However, with the economy now finally developing a solid pattern of growth, in good time for the Conservative party to benefit at the 2015 election, where is the associated policy to demonstrate sharing the financial benefit of growth with a broader part of the electorate e.g. the ?squeezed middle? income earners? Raising the higher (40%) tax rate income threshold is one answer, if the projected overall increase in tax returns from growth will allow, although there is still the need to pay for the costs associated with any ?green? taxes diverted from the energy bills of hard-pressed British consumers.

Boris Johnson Backs UK Living Wage

novembre 7th, 2013

Having decided that it has lost the argument to the governing Coalition on competence in managing the British economy as it returns to growth, the opposition Labour party has switched its attack to the cost of living crisis for the ?many? who, unlike the rich in society, are not sharing the benefits of growth. The opposition leader?s charge is that the link is broken between growth and living standards in what he described as a Wonga (payday loan) economy, symbolizing a cost of living crisis for poorer families. This has received popular support and represents dangerous ground for the government which, in wanting to be seen to be doing something, is moving into an area where Labour is currently strong.

The government under opposition pressure had to respond to the freeze on energy (electricity) prices proposed by Labour e.g. by a planned review of ?green? energy subsidies included in the price to the consumer as well as the overall competitiveness of the energy market. The water companies have also been asked to review any price increases they might have been planning to implement.

Overall public perception that something is really being done about the cost of living remains important, however, and this is where the popularity of the charismatic Mayor of London Boris Johnson can play a major role e.g. in demonstrating his practical support for paying the living wage. It is appropriate that London which is experiencing first and disproportionately the benefits of growth in the economy, should be taking the lead (as demonstrated by the Mayor) in encouraging more and more employers to pay the living wage rate and help households cope with rising bills. Quoting Boris Johnson, paying the living wage makes ?pure economic common sense? (less staff turnover and more productive) although he does not think it should be compulsory.

Comparing the additional peer and customer pressures on employers to voluntarily pay the living wage when their business allows, with the more prescriptive policy of Labour to legislate through a tax credit, the latter would place an additional administrative burden on HMRC to ensure compliance. This Labour approach also brings to mind the tax credits of Labour Chancellor Gordon Brown which boost the wages of the lower paid but again effectively provide a subsidy for employers via the tax payer. Finally, making the payment of the living wage compulsory through legislation (as for the minimum wage) could lead to layoffs of workers by firms still not able to absorb the additional wage costs.

Why is inflation so much higher in Britain?

octobre 24th, 2013

Writing in his Economic Outlook column in The Sunday Times of 20th October 2013, David Smith posed the question: Why is inflation so much higher in Britain?

New Eurostat figures show that the UK inflation rate last month of 2.7% was the highest of all 28 EU member states and more than double the EU (1.3%) and Eurozone (1.1%) average. More than half of EU member states have annual inflation rates of 1% or less. This has been picked up by the opposition Labour party adding weight to their argument that there is a cost of living crisis in the UK which the government is failing to control.

Ruling out the effects of previous Sterling weakness pushing up import prices for globally-traded commodities such as food and energy, or pay increases (up by only 0.7% on a year earlier), the major problem for the UK appears to be domestically generated inflation and particularly in the service sector (3.4% last month). Over the past 6 years for example, food and drink prices in Britain have risen by 35.6% compared with only 1% in the Irish Republic! It would appear that companies can push through price rises in Britain more easily than in other countries or , put another way, perhaps up until now such price increases have been more culturally accepted (or expected) than in other EU countries, but not now with consumer incomes squeezed during a period of austerity.

Inflation is significantly too high for the current rate of earnings growth and, with so-called Green Taxes already 9% and rising to 14% of consumer energy bills, it is not so surprising that the Prime Minister has been forced by the Opposition in the Commons yesterday to announce a re-think on energy policy, pricing and the overall competitiveness of the UK energy market

Reference: Like it or not, Britain is hitched to high inflation, David Smith (david.smith@sunday-times.co.uk) , Economic Outlook, The Sunday Times, 20th October, 2013

An Economic Policy for the Many?

octobre 11th, 2013

Despite the negative « Flat-lining Economy? mantra of the Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls and the opposition Labour party over the past three years, the British economy finally seems to be increasingly on the mend with the return to growth. This has also now been accepted by Labour which has been forced to reposition its attack on the government?s record, by focusing on the increased cost of living for the many not yet sharing the benefits of growth and suffering on incomes which, in real terms, have not kept pace with inflation.

As a result, a populist commitment by Ed Miliband the opposition leader to freeze consumer energy prices should he be elected Prime Minister in 2015, has received a favourable response from voters to which the government has responded to a degree by a proposed cap on rail fare increases.

Opinion polls suggest that while the public still trusts the Conservative party on its competence with the economy by a wide margin over Labour, the latter are still favoured by the many struggling with significant price increases in e.g. Council tax, food and energy bills. On energy bills, the response from one of the major suppliers is that ?wholesale energy, the delivery to homes, and government-imposed levies ? endorsed by all the major parties ? all cost more than last year. » A serious policy response to this is required from the government rather than a populist reaction.

Perhaps the real question is what policy message would the centre-left, swing voters like to hear in the must-win, marginal constituencies currently held by Labour or the Liberal Democrats and targetted by the 40:40 campaign to win in 2015?

David Cameron: Green taxes review to help struggling families
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/10372413/David-Cameron-Green-taxes-review-to-help-struggling-families.html
Ed Miliband : This is my vision for building a new future for Britain
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/435972/This-is-my-vision-for-building-a-new-future-for-Britain

Winning in 2015?

septembre 27th, 2013

Lord Ashcroft’s analysis of his polling results in marginal seats described in the article below, reveals how defections to UKIP are increasing the current Labour party lead. This is not good news for the 40:40 campaign of the Conservative party, aimed at winning the 2015 election by concentrating resources on holding 40 currently marginal Conservative seats, as well as capturing 40 other marginals from Labour or the Liberal Democrats.

However, with the British economy seemingly on the mend and the Labour party at its recent conference signalling a strong movement to the socialist left, there is more room for the Conservatives to occupy the election-winning, centre-ground of the marginals, while still maintaining a clear distinction in policies compared with Labour. That said, for final success in these marginal seats the underlying critical requirements are to hang on to traditionally Conservative voters, to convince those who have currently « defected » to UKIP that this is effectively a vote for Labour and to maximise the Conservative voter turnout.

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/09/labour-still-on-course-in-the-marginals-but-its-not-over-yet/#more-2507

British Citizenship and Right to Vote

septembre 9th, 2013

The lack of a clear connection in law between British citizenship and the right to vote has permitted successive British governments to allow the following injustice.

Fellow but expatriate British citizens are rather arbitrarily in law deprived of their right to vote in UK elections after 15 years abroad but an estimated 1 million non-British citizens from 54 Commonwealth countries currently resident in the UK will be entitled to vote in , and possibly influence, the 2015 general election.

According to the press article referenced below, in 2007 the then Labour government ordered a review of British citizenship laws by Lord Goldsmith QC, the Attorney General, but did not act on his advice that it should make a ?clear connection between citizenship and the right to vote?. MigrationWatch, which campaigns for lower immigration, is also quoted in this article as suggesting that Labour refused to act because voters from black and minority ethnic communities were more likely to vote Labour than Liberal Democrat or Conservative.

Shouldn’t the Conservative party be pressing for a clearer connection in law between British citizenship and the right to vote in UK elections as part of its overall immigration policy?

Reference: Commonwealth citizens ‘should lose the right to vote’, The Times, 28th August, 2013

Chasing the Wrong Target – by Michael Webster

août 20th, 2013

Considerable efforts have been devoted in recent years to obtain the right to vote for those who have been expatriates for more than 15 years, although most of these may be thought to have lost their links with any constituency back home and the ability to choose between the candidates for election there.

A far more important problem is this. There are estimated to be about 5 – 6 million British citizens living abroad, of whom 1.5 million or 30% are not eligible to vote. Let us suppose that half a million are underage, leaving 1 million deprived by the 15-year-ruling.

According to a recent Parliamentary Commission, of the 3.5 million entitled to vote only 20,000, yes 20,000 , are registered to vote. Surely this is the real problem. How to get those who have already the right to do so to exercise that right rather than seek it for those who have been expatriates for countless years.

Michael Webster

Ethnic Minority Vote and 2015 Election

août 14th, 2013

The Conservative Party?s 40:40 campaign for success in the 2015 General Election, is focussed on the 40 marginal seats it needs to gain from Labour (19) and the Lib-Dems (21), as well as the 40 marginal Conservative seats it must hold.
Hopefully this focus on these 80 marginal seats has taken into account a study by the parliamentary cross-party group Operation Black Vote, which suggests that the number of seats where black and Asian votes could be decisive has increased by 70% since the 2010 election.
This research published in the Guardian shows that in 168 marginal seats, including constituencies beyond inner-city areas, the ethnic minority vote is now greater than the majority of the sitting MP.
These ethnic minority communities have traditionally represented an area of strength for the Labour Party which captured 68% of their vote in 2010, compared with 16% for the Conservatives, the latter support perhaps eroded further by the current government?s tough stance on uncontrolled immigration.
Jim Messina, the Conservatives? recruit from the Obama campaign which so successfully harvested the ethnic minority votes in the US Presidential Elections, should be well placed to provide some good advice on how to improve the appeal of the Conservatives in these communities.

Reference: The Times, Monday August 12, 2013, page 13: Ethnic vote may decide result of next election.

How to Widen Tory Appeal?

juillet 31st, 2013

Tim Montgomery writing in The Times July 29th 2013, proposes Five Ways to Widen the Tory Appeal and Win the next general election in 2015.

He assumes that by 2015, voters are likely to see the Tories as a party of deficit reduction, welfare control and Euro-scepticism. The party?s 2015 election campaign would then need to reinforce these strengths as well as counter an anticipated Liberal Democrat claim that, but for them in the Coalition, the Tories would have governed for the rich and powerful. Therefore, he suggests the five key pledges below for the next Tory manifesto which must also put concern for the lower-paid at its heart.

1. No more tax on petrol or home energy bills
2. A higher pension and a lower welfare cap.
3. Help for more first-time buyers to own their own home.
4. More apprenticeships for Britain?s youngest workers
5. A referendum on Britain?s membership of the EU.

These pledges are aimed at reaching more voters (e.g. private sector workers, home owners and the grey vote) than at the last election in 2010, while leaving the door open to the possibility of a second Lib-Dem Tory Coalition, instead of driving the Liberal Democrats into the arms of Labour.

The article also identifies other issues on which the Tories could still be vulnerable and which are generally the major concerns of voters such as the Economy, Health, Education and Immigration. However, on the major issue for the Conservative party itself (but not necessarily the voters) of an EU referendum , the author could be considered rather optimistic in suggesting that by 2015 it is likely that both Labour and the Liberal Democrats will have matched Mr Cameron?s EU referendum promise to ?trust the people?.

The risk still remains of the party descending into civil war over Europe e.g. if Mr Cameron has to compromise on his EU referendum pledge during Coalition negotiations in 2015. The Conservative party also needs to more clearly differentiate itself from UKIP by not linking the issue of uncontrolled immigration to membership of the EU.

Parliamentary Sovereignty versus Popular Referenda – by Michael Webster

juillet 17th, 2013

I have succeeded in trawling through Gregor Dallas?s article below (No effective Debate on Europe in Parliament) on the issue of whether we should leave the European Union, to fish for the numerous very good points he makes in it.

After our recent debate (scroll down to article on Referendums) on issues being decided by Parliament and not being put to referendum, I was very struck by the point he makes that the recently elected Young Turks in the Tory Party who strongly favour our quitting the Union, frustrated by the opposition of their Liberal Party allies, are the very ones pressing for resort to a popular referendum.

If this really is the case, it really is deplorable. They were elected to make decisions and not to delegate them to popular vote.

Michael Webster