|
|
Friday, July 2
Council Tax pays for Executives Bonuses
by
Christine
on Fri 02 Jul 2010 08:47 PM BST
I am a founder member and chairman of the Isitfair campaign and as a result I receive letters from all over the country from members telling me their stories regarding council tax, suggestions on how the tax could be made fairer and their difficulties in paying. I also receive a lot of information on how councils spend taxpayers’ money.
Firstly, a letter received this morning from an Isitfair supporterin the East Midlands has really made me see red. She asks how we can make the Government and the councils sit up and take notice of the predicament of some pensioners.
Both she and her husband are of pensionable age and receive no state benefits. She had since retirement taken on two cleaning jobs to help pay the £1,200 council tax due on their home. Recently due to the recession she has lost one of these jobs and the second has cut the hours. She has been unable to find other work.
Of course you will say that they should apply for benefits – but they have just too much in the way of savings. Like thousands of other across the country they are asset rich and income poor. Savings are required to pay for the upkeep on a property they have struggled to buy through their working years. It is their rainy day money, put by for emergencies. Unlike Governments, that is what they did, they spent according to their means and saved for those rainy days because, unlike people living in rented property, there is no one else who will pay for replacements and repairs. They are people living on the edge of the benefit system, financially worse off than those receiving all the state benefits.
Secondly, you can imagine my anger this morning when a reporter telephoned me to ask my opinion on the bonuses or emoluments being paid to the executive staff on councils throughout the country. People already receiving huge salaries and contributions to their pensions from the public purse, being paid bonuses larger than many of us (including council staff) receive each year to live on and even bring up a family. It seems that monetary restraint applies only to those in the lower echelons of public service.
So here we have, on the one hand, this lady of retirement age worrying about how to pay her council tax bill, and taking on cleaning jobs to do so and, on the other hand, people employed by the council receiving fivefigure bonuses on top of salaries so enormous they beggar belief. There is something very wrong here.
You may say that these high paid executives are responsible for huge budgets, but are they really? If they are, then why are we paying millions of pounds every year to councillors? Councillors, I would add, who are also receiving high salaries (or if you really want to be picky, allowances), can also join (and do) a very favourable Local Government Pension Scheme. You must remember that everything in the public sector is paid for by the private sector.
The world has gone mad.
Many councils have prepared themselves for shedding staff. They have continued to recruit and still recruit. Last in, first our Easy come, easy go.
The proposed £250 per annum pay rise for the lowest paid staff now seems to me to be more of an insult. I just hope that when the good times roll the flat monetary rise should apply across the board. The highly paid executives, living in there own little world of protected wealth and advantage, and thumbing their noses at their paymasters, must surely receive their comeuppance.
Friday, June 25
Council Tax stats and all that
by
Christine
on Fri 25 Jun 2010 06:03 PM BST
Local Government Financial Statistics England 20 2010 tells us that:
- In England, local authorities' total expenditure was £160 billion in 2008-09.
- In 2008-09 local authorities employed 1.8 million full-time employees (FTE) staff and nearly 50 per cent of service expenditure (gross of income) was spent on these employees.
- About 60 per cent of local authorities' gross income in 2008-09 came from central government (through grants or re-distributed non-domestic rates). Other income from local sources included council tax, sales, fees and charges, council rents and capital receipts.
- The largest share of net current expenditure in 2008-09 was on education services with 37 per cent of the total. Social services accounted for a further 17 per cent, housing (excluding Housing Revenue Account) 15 per cent and police 10 per cent.
- Average Band D council tax, for a two adult household, in 2008-09 was £1,414 an increase of 3 per cent on 2007-08.
- In the North East, 56 per cent of dwellings are in the lowest council tax band (Band A) compared to just 3 per cent in London.
- Average in year council tax collection rates in 2008-09 stood at 97 per cent compared with 92.6 per cent in 1993-94.
- The average in year council tax collection rate in Inner London Boroughs has risen from 76.0 per cent in 1993-94 to 94.6 per cent in 2008-09.
- Revenue expenditure has more than doubled in cash terms between 1993-94 and 2008-09. The corresponding increase in real terms was 58 per cent.
- About 25 per cent of revenue expenditure is funded through council tax.
- Revenue spending per head in 2008-09 was highest in London and the North East.
- Most shire counties spend £500m or more a year, while all shire districts spend less than £40m a year.
- Of the £62.9bn spent on pay in 2008-09, £20.4bn was used to pay teachers.
- Local authority capital expenditure has risen from £14.3 billion in 2004-05, to £19.8 billion in 2008-09.
- Capital spending per head in 2008-09 was highest in London and the North East.
- In 2008-09 capital expenditure of £4.2 billion was financed by unsupported borrowing, under the new prudential system in place since April 2004 (21 per cent of the total).
- About 58 per cent of all local authorities used the powers of self-financed borrowing to finance capital expenditure in 2008-09. However, use varied considerably between 97 per cent of metropolitan districts and 42 per cent of shire districts.
- The stock of capital receipts fell by 24 per cent between 31 March 2008 and 31 March 2009 following a steep fall in in-year receipts during 2008-09.
- The value of local authority fixed assets is estimated at £244 billion on 31 March 2009.
- Local authorities' gross outstanding debt at 31 March 2009 was £53.6 billion, the largest proportion of which is owed to the Public Works Loan Board (76 per cent).
- Local authorities' investments at 31 March 2009 were £26.8 billion following a fall of over £3 billion during 2008-09; nearly 70 per cent of these investments were deposits with banks or building societies.
- The Local Government Pension Scheme had around 3.9 million members at the end of March 2009 and had a fund value of £97 billion compared with £120 billion a year earlier.
Equivalent annual publications are available from the National Assembly for Wales at www.wales.gov.uk/statistics (external link) and from The Scottish Government at www.scotland.gov.uk/statistics (external link).
Monday, June 7
Council Tax Must be made fairer - Isitfair
by
Christine
on Mon 07 Jun 2010 09:09 PM BST
"Those in areas of high property values have no choice but to pay perhaps half as much again or maybe even double that paid in cheaper areas merely to get a roof over their heads. I say again, they have no choice if they want to stay in the area in which they work and where their families and friends live. They commit a far greater proportion of their income to servicing hefty mortgages. When the property is finally theirs, of course it is a valuable asset, but they have paid dearly for it. We have to remember that it is only an asset when sold – until then the value means little, one has to live somewhere. Why are they punished, then, by absurdly high council tax, both throughout their mortgage years and afterwards, totally out of proportion to that paid by those in similar properties elsewhere?
In his speech to the House of Commons on 21 March 1991 prior to the introduction of Council Tax in April 1993, Michael Heseltine said, "...the system should ensure that regional variations in property values do not lead to disproportionate bills in high price areas." Something has plainly gone badly wrong. What is the new government going to do to put this matter right?
Perhaps the place to start would be Formula Grant?
The grant system is due for a make-over. A manipulative Government has used this as a tool to tighten the screw on councils not flying their flag. Many areas of the country have been starved of funding while others are awash with cash. The system must be made fairer, and the sooner the better.
There is little to indicate that incomes, especially for pensioners, vary much across the country. Here is one example (and there are many). It may surprise you to know that the median income for Sunderland and for Eastbourne is about the same, but the average council tax per dwelling in Eastbourne is hundreds of pounds more."
Tuesday, April 13
Council Tax The effect on Parishes and Towns Isitfair
by
Christine
on Tue 13 Apr 2010 11:02 PM BST
Isitfair.co.uk
Town and Parish councils precepts
None of the parties has mentioned anything about correcting the anomaly that allows town and parish councils to increase their share of the council tax bill (their precept) by more than the cap that applies to other, higher authorities. Being well aware that the cap does not apply to town and parish councils, a growing number of higher-level councils (County/District/Borough/City) are starting to off-load some of their non-statutory duties onto town and parish councils in their area – but keeping the money that they would have had to spend on these duties. This off-loading has meant that many town and parish council precepts have rocketed such that, in a growing number of cases, the amount demanded by the town/parish is as much as, or even more than, the amount demanded by the district/borough council.
In a Green Paper way back in 2000, and in another document issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government in 2002, the current government has admitted that this off-loading can also lead to double taxation, in that householders can be charged twice for the same services. Even though the current government have been aware of this possible double-taxation business for 10 years, and have issued Green Papers and other reports about it, neither they, nor any of the other parties, has said anything about putting a stop to it.
Late news: Government figures released on 24 March reveal that the average Band D council tax set by local authorities in England for 2010-11 will be £1,439 compared with £1,414 in 2009-10. This equates to an average increase between 2009-10 and 2010-11 of 1.8%. The report goes on to say that parish precepts will rise by an average of 4.8%. Note – average! We have heard of a number of parish precepts rising by over 10% and a few by substantially more (well over 50% in some cases).
Sunday, January 31
Isitfair Council Tax Summary
by
Christine
on Sun 31 Jan 2010 01:06 PM GMT
Isitfair asks What will happen to Council Tax after the next general election?
Labour
Labour is still wedded to CT. If they get back in again it is probable - indeed likely - that there will be a property revaluation. This could be disastrous for CT payers. Rather than push general taxation higher (to try to sort out the mess they have got the country into), they will dump as much as possible onto local government and let them take the blame.
The revaluation in Wales was trumpeted as being "revenue-neutral" i.e. the revaluation would not result in any more, or any less, CT being collected: it would just be a redistribution to make the whole thing "fairer". What they said was that 25% of CT payers would see an increase; 25% would see a decrease and 50% would be unaffected.
What actually happened was that the revaluation ALONE resulted in 9% more CT being demanded. Only 8% ended up paying less, and 32% ended up having to pay more. Some had to pay a LOT more, which is why they also had to bring in a "transitional relief" scheme where people who were bumped up several bands were bumped up one CT band per year until they ended up in what was considered to be the correct band.
If the same revaluation exercise here in England goes the way the revaluation went in Wales - and bearing in mind this government has a record of not learning from past mistakes - the majority of us would end up out of pocket.
And would they also do away with the capping regime?
The Conservatives
The Conservatives also are still wedded to CT. They have said that if they end up with a majority and form the next government, any increase in CT - provided it is not more than 2.5% - will be reimbursed from general taxation for two years - meaning that CT payers will not see an increase in their bills for two years. They are selling this as a CT freeze for two years (which it really isn't) but - what happens in the third year? Will we see an increase in CT of 5% (actually 5.0625% compounded) - plus whatever the councils think they can get away with in year three?
And - unless we have missed it - the Conservatives have said nothing about how the 2.5% will be calculated, but we understand that this "freeze deal" will apply to each individual precept (County Council, District Council, Police and Fire Authorities).
The Conservatives have also said they would not go ahead with a property revaluation for council tax purposes - but that they would do away with the existing capping regime. They are in favour of the greater use of local referendums to help guide decisions. They claim they will make the local government funding settlement more transparent.
The Liberal Democrats
The Lib Dems still seem to favour a local income tax and/or a land-value tax. Even though they haven't any chance of becoming the party of government, they may have some influence if there is hung Parliament and if they cosy up to one or other of the two main parties in some cobbled-together coalition.
The others
And - the fringe parties (Greens, UKIP and others - even the BNP) - could have an influence on the make up of the next parliament if it is close-run thing between Labour and Conservative.
Town / Parish precepts
None of the parties has mentioned anything about correcting the anomaly that allows town / parish councils to increase their share of the council tax bill (their precept) by more than the cap that applies to other, higher, authorities.
Being well aware that the cap does not apply to towns and parishes, a growing number of higher-level councils (County/District/Borough/City) are starting to off-load some of their non-statutory duties onto towns and parishes in their area – but keeping the money that they would have had to spend on these duties.
This off-loading has meant that many town and parish precepts have rocketed such that, in a growing number of cases, the amount demanded by the town/parish is as much as, or even more than, the amount demanded by the district/borough council.
In a Green paper in 2000, and in another document issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government in 2002, the current government has admitted that this off-loading can also lead to double taxation, in that householders can be charged twice for the same services.
So - even though the current government have been aware of this possible double-taxation business for 10 years, and have issued Green Papers and other reports about it, neither they, nor any of the other parties, have said anything about putting a stop to it.
Visit www.isitfair.co.uk
Friday, November 27
Isitfair says 3% rise in council tax is unacceptable
by
Christine
on Fri 27 Nov 2009 11:32 PM GMT
So this Government thinks a 3% rise in council tax is OK.
Three percent is unacceptable for anyone this year when many are receiving no rise in their income whatsoever. The rise in state pensions does not cover this amount and the low paid will struggle to pay any rise. I know that the immediate response from the Government will be 'council tax benefit is available to those in need' - but it is not. The threshold for pension credit has been raised to £10,000 and opens the gateway for thousands to receive benefits of all kinds. The threshold for council tax benefit has remained the same £16,000. Sir Michael Lyons in his inquiry, which has been almost ignored by Government, said that this ceiling should be raised to £50,000 and eventually disappear - and that income should be the only criterion for assessing entitlement to council tax benefit. The Government should insist that there be no rises this year on a tax that has been continually inflated by their own stealth. They should also ensure that Government grant is distributed fairly to help all councils in these straightened times. As all averages, they do not often tell the full story ? 4% sounds very good but many councils will receive much less and many councils will receive much more than that figure ? depending very much on where you live.
Remember the treasurer of our council? He said that if he received the same grant as some councils, he would not have to levy any precept on the council tax payers of Hampshire. How can that be fair?
Isitfair is a non party political campaign calling for the reform of the council tax system. Please visit www.isitfair.co.uk
Monday, November 16
Isitfair calls on Government to fulfill Council Tax promises made by Hesletine
by
Christine
on Mon 16 Nov 2009 02:39 PM GMT
On 21 March 1991 Michael Heseltine, who was at that time the Secretary of State for the Environment, opened a debate in the House of Commons on the proposed review of local government in England. That speech outlined the principles which he believed should underpin any form of local tax. Council Tax was the result of the consultation that followed. The Hansard web link is as follows: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199091/cmhansrd/1991-03-21/Debate-1.html
He said:
· “We believe that councils should be accountable for their actions and that there should be a direct and visible relationship between the costs of services and the local bills to which they give rise. We believe that those bills should be spread widely and fairly throughout communities; that they should bear some relation to people’s ability to pay; and that it should be possible to levy and collect them without difficulty.”
· “…there will be a single bill for each household comprising two essential elements, the number of adults living there and the value of the property.”
· “… the system should ensure that regional variations in property values do not lead to disproportionate bills in high price areas.”
WHAT HAS GONE WRONG?
WHAT PLANS ARE THERE TO PUT MATTERS RIGHT?
Isitfair is an Independent, Non Party Political Campaign, Calling for the Reform of the Council Tax System
Please Visit www.isitfair.co.uk
Monday, September 21
Isitfair Council Tax Campaign, Curb salaries
by
Christine
on Mon 21 Sep 2009 04:35 PM BST
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED BY THE ISITFAIR COUNCIL TAX PROTEST GROUP
For further press information, please contact: Christine Melsom on 01428-712680 or E-mail c@isitfair.co.uk
21st September 2009
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
[start of press release]
The Isitfair Council Tax Reform Campaign asks “How can councils justify these gigantic salary rises?” Answer: Because no one seriously challenges them and their extravagance.
Many Local Government Chief Executives have recently been awarded unacceptable salary rises this year. How can any council justify an increase of as much as 45%? Who authorises and who approves pay rises of this magnitude? The tax payers have a right to know the answer to these questions.
There is little to choose between the reviled bankers, the cheating MPs, and the greedy chief executives employed by the councils and paid by the tax payer. Taking pension contributions and NIC into consideration, the cost of employing a chief executive on £200,000 a year is well over A QUARTER OF A MILLION POUNDS.
Restraint in public sector spending and public sector salaries must be a priority until this country is out of debt.
How can the foot soldiers in both the public and private sector be expected to accept a pay freeze when the management continues to receive these obscene increases? We should all be tightening our belts. All of us.
The council tax payer is already hard pressed to pay their bills and should not be asked to fund ANY increases at all this year.
[end of press release]
NOTES for Editors :-
Isitfair is a UK-wide, non party-political campaign for the reform of the existing property-value based system of Council Tax.
Isitfair wants a fairer system of taxation for local services that is related to everyone's ability to pay.
Isitfair represents people of all age groups (not only pensioners) who are unfairly affected by Council Tax.
For further press information, please contact: Christine Melsom on 01428-712680 or E-mail c@isitfair.co.uk
You can find more information about the Isitfair campaign at www.isitfair.co.uk
Isitfair The Nationwide Campaign Calling For The Reform Of The Council Tax System. Please visit www.isitfair.co.uk
Sunday, August 23
Isitfair Council Tax Reform Campaign tells you the true cost of public sector pensions
by
Christine
on Sun 23 Aug 2009 09:47 PM BST
The true cost of council employees
According to the council tax action group, Isitfair, (www.isitfair.co.uk) reports about the number of council employees being paid £50,000, or more, do not tell the full story with regard to the total, taxpayer-funded cost of employing these people.
This is because these reports were based only on the salaries paid and did not take into account other costs for which the taxpayer also has to foot the bill and in particular costs associated with employer (i.e. taxpayer) contributions to the employees’ pensions. These other costs add considerably to the total as shown in the table below.
Whether all this money – the salaries, the employer pension contributions, and the employer NIC - comes from council tax or from general taxation is neither here nor there. Whichever way you look at it - it is all OUR money – and, under threat of legal action, we are all forced to pay it from income on which we have already paid our own income tax, NIC, VAT, and other taxes.
And – to cap it all - from what is left of our income we are also expected to make our own pension arrangements.
This state of affairs cannot continue.
|
Employee |
Employer |
Total cost
to taxpayer |
|
Gross
Annual
Pay |
Pension contribution (Note 1) |
Tax relief
at 40%
(Note 2) |
Contribution to employee pension
(Note 3) |
NIC
(Note 4) |
|
£ |
£ |
£ |
£ |
£ |
£ |
|
50,000 |
3,600 (7.2%) |
1,440 |
9,050* |
4,396** |
64,886 |
|
100,000 |
7,500 (7.5%) |
3,000 |
18,100* |
10,796** |
131,896 |
|
200,000 |
15,000 (7.5%) |
6,000 |
36,200* |
23,596** |
265,796 |
|
*18.1% of pay (Hampshire County Council 2008-09) (See Note 3).
** Using HMRC calculator http://nicecalculator.hmrc.gov.uk/Class1NICs1.aspx (See Note 4). |
Notes
1. Employee pension contribution. In 2008-09, and depending on how much they were paid, council employees contributed between 5.5% and 7.5% of their gross annual pay into the Local Government Pension Scheme (the LGPS). The more a person was paid, the greater the percentage they contribute.
2. Tax relief on personal pension contributions. This relief is available, of course, to anyone who contributes to any pension scheme and is, in essence, funded from general taxation. It is perhaps worth noting the colossal benefit to the highest paid.
3. The employer’s contribution to the individual’s pension. The level of employer contributions is determined by individual pension fund actuaries and is recalculated every three years. The level of contribution varies across the country, and from authority to authority, but as an example, in 2008-09, the employer’s (i.e. taxpayer’s) contribution to the pension fund for each employee at Hampshire County Council was 18.1% of the employee’s gross pay. (The employer contribution increased to 18.6% in 2009-10 and will be 19.1% in 2010-11 and will then be reviewed to determine the rates for the following three years.)
4. The employer’s National Insurance Contribution (NIC). NIC is paid by most employed people and also by the employer. The amounts to be paid are determined based on current Government legislation. The LGPS is what is known as a contracted-out scheme meaning that members do not participate in the Second State Pension (S2P – previously known as the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme or SERPS). Because the LGPS is a contracted-out scheme, both the employee and employer pay lower amounts of NIC than would be the case if they were contracted-in.
Visit the Isitfair web site at www.isitfair.co.uk
Sunday, August 2
Isitfair calls on the Government for Counciltax reform
by
Christine
on Sun 02 Aug 2009 11:30 PM BST
It's time to resolve the council tax problem
Christine Melsom,
Our MPs’ abuses of their expenses system have been exposed, and radical reform is now on the cards. Desperate to try and save themselves and restore some level of confidence and trust, our MPs are now showing a more humbled manner. They need to remember that they are elected and to treat their position with respect. Attitudes must change. MPs can be deselected.
Knowing that a system is fundamentally wrong and open to abuse should always result in reform. Yet when it comes to council tax, our politicians shy away from it. Why though? Could it be that the problem is now so big that no politician or party has the strength of character required to undertake the reform so desperately needed.
But ignoring the problem won’t make it go away. Council tax payers have been abused with year on year inflation busting increases ever since Labour came to power in 1997 and Gordon Brown has ruthlessly exploited the weaknesses of the council tax system (but, of course, blamed the local authorities for the increases).
A tax based on the value of the property that you live in does not reflect your ability to pay that tax. Pensioners and the low paid are struggling to pay. Of course this wretched Government will say ‘that is why we have the benefit system’. But those of us who have managed to save a little towards a reasonable retirement will, of course, not be included because the formula used by this government to fix the savings ceiling has not been amended for years and does not reflect today’s poor returns on savings.
Council tax is now excessive and the system fundamentally flawed. Isitfair now calls on Parliament and the Government to take the tough decision to replace it with a fairer, more transparent system that takes into account ability to pay from income. If MPs are truly serious about restoring confidence and trust, resolving the council tax problem would be a step in the right direction.
www.isitfair.co.uk
Monday, June 29
Isitfair Council Tax Campaign, Press Release
by
Christine
on Mon 29 Jun 2009 08:24 PM BST
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED BY THE ISITFAIR COUNCIL TAX PROTEST GROUP
For further press information, please contact: Christine Melsom on 01428-712680 or E-mail c@isitfair.co.uk
27th June 2009
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
[start of press release]
ISITFAIR CAMPAIGN MP Expenses and Reform
There can be no doubt that the recent revelations of expenses abuses by our elected MPs is a shameful low point for Parliament. With the Metropolitan Police now launching their own investigations, the possibility of charges being brought against some MPs for fraud is a real possibility. No wonder the electorate in general view Parliament with complete and utter contempt. Seeing and hearing our MPs squeal and make excuses for their actions does nothing to restore any confidence in any of them. Coupled with the disastrous problems surrounding the Government's leadership, we have all seen the 'rats deserting the sinking ship'. Has the gravy train finally run out for many of them? Let's hope so.
Our MPs’ abuses have been exposed, and root and branch reform of the expenses system is now being looked at. Desperate to try and save themselves and restore some level of confidence and trust, our MPs are now showing a more humbled manner. They need to remember that they are elected and to treat their position with respect. Attitudes must change. MPs can be deselected.
Knowing that a system is fundamentally wrong and open to abuse should always result in reform. Yet when it comes to council tax, our politicians shy away from it. Why though? Could it be that for many of their members it has been a ‘nice little earner’? These people have a basic salary of nearly £65,000 each year and yet many of them not only claim back their council tax but also add on a bit more for the effort of making the claim. (To rub salt into the wound, in a number of cases where MPs have failed to pay their council tax, attempts have been made to recoup from their expenses the cost of the liability order issued by the Magistrates Courts!)
Or could it be that 'the problem' is now so big that no politician or party has the strength of character required to undertake the reform so desperately needed. The recent Lyons Inquiry which took three years to report was immediately shelved by Gordon Brown. When faced with a difficult decision, he 'bottled it'.
Ignoring 'the problem' won't make it go away. MPs have known since 2005 that hundreds of thousands of properties are in the wrong council tax band and are being overcharged. Their response is to do nothing. Just like the expenses abuses, it is OK to rip off the taxpayer one way or the other. Council tax payers have been abused with year on year inflation busting increases ever since Labour came to power in 1997 and Gordon Brown has ruthlessly exploited the weaknesses of the council tax system (but, of course, blamed the local authorities for the increases).
Council tax is now overly excessive. A tax based on the value of the property that you live in does not reflect your ability to pay that tax. Pensioners and the low paid are struggling to pay. Of course this wretched Government will say ‘that is why we have the benefit system’. Those of us who have managed to save a little towards a reasonable retirement will, of course, not be included – because – according to the formula used by this Government our savings are earning £1 per £100 per month. Those not yet retired but with savings are deemed to receive £2 per £100 per month. In fact, there is nothing. No interest, no income equals poverty for many and an ever lengthening line at the council offices to try to claim council tax benefit. What they are doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul, and Paul is already a wealthy MP!! And we maintain that a taxation system that has to have a benefit system to make it work is just wrong.
The system is fundamentally flawed. It needs to be replaced with a fairer, more transparent system that takes into account ability to pay.
Isitfair now calls on Parliament and the Government to take the tough decision to look at root and branch reform of the council tax system. If MPs are serious about restoring confidence and trust, resolving the council tax problem would be a step in the right direction.
[end of press release]
For further press information, please contact: Christine Melsom on 01428-712680 or E-mail c@isitfair.co.uk
Issued by Isitfair Campaign, Headley, Hampshire GU35 8PJ
ISITFAIR COUINCIL TAX CAMPAIGN PRESS RELEASE
by
Christine
on Mon 29 Jun 2009 08:18 PM BST
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED BY THE ISITFAIR COUNCIL TAX PROTEST GROUP
For further press information, please contact: Mrs. Christine Melsom on 01428-712680 or E-mail c@isitfair.co.uk
28th June 2009
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
[start of press release]
ISITFAIR CAMPAIGN MP Expenses and Reform
There can be no doubt that the recent revelations of expenses abuses by our elected MPs is a shameful low point for Parliament. With the Metropolitan Police now launching their own investigations, the possibility of charges being brought against some MPs for fraud is a real possibility. No wonder the electorate in general view Parliament with complete and utter contempt. Seeing and hearing our MPs squeal and make excuses for their actions does nothing to restore any confidence in any of them. Coupled with the disastrous problems surrounding the Government's leadership, we have all seen the 'rats deserting the sinking ship'. Has the gravy train finally run out for many of them? Let's hope so.
Our MPs’ abuses have been exposed, and root and branch reform of the expenses system is now being looked at. Desperate to try and save themselves and restore some level of confidence and trust, our MPs are now showing a more humbled manner. They need to remember that they are elected and to treat their position with respect. Attitudes must change. MPs can be deselected.
Knowing that a system is fundamentally wrong and open to abuse should always result in reform. Yet when it comes to council tax, our politicians shy away from it. Why though? Could it be that for many of their members it has been a ‘nice little earner’? These people have a basic salary of nearly £65,000 each year and yet many of them not only claim back their council tax but also add on a bit more for the effort of making the claim. (To rub salt into the wound, in a number of cases where MPs have failed to pay their council tax, attempts have been made to recoup from their expenses the cost of the liability order issued by the Magistrates Courts!)
Or could it be that 'the problem' is now so big that no politician or party has the strength of character required to undertake the reform so desperately needed. The recent Lyons Inquiry which took three years to report was immediately shelved by Gordon Brown. When faced with a difficult decision, he 'bottled it'.
Ignoring 'the problem' won't make it go away. MPs have known since 2005 that hundreds of thousands of properties are in the wrong council tax band and are being overcharged. Their response is to do nothing. Just like the expenses abuses, it is OK to rip off the taxpayer one way or the other. Council tax payers have been abused with year on year inflation busting increases ever since Labour came to power in 1997 and Gordon Brown has ruthlessly exploited the weaknesses of the council tax system (but, of course, blamed the local authorities for the increases).
Council tax is now overly excessive. A tax based on the value of the property that you live in does not reflect your ability to pay that tax. Pensioners and the low paid are struggling to pay. Of course this wretched Government will say ‘that is why we have the benefit system’. Those of us who have managed to save a little towards a reasonable retirement will, of course, not be included – because – according to the formula used by this Government our savings are earning £1 per £100 per month. Those not yet retired but with savings are deemed to receive £2 per £100 per month. In fact, there is nothing. No interest, no income equals poverty for many and an ever lengthening line at the council offices to try to claim council tax benefit. What they are doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul, and Paul is already a wealthy MP!! And we maintain that a taxation system that has to have a benefit system to make it work is just wrong.
The system is fundamentally flawed. It needs to be replaced with a fairer, more transparent system that takes into account ability to pay.
Isitfair now calls on Parliament and the Government to take the tough decision to look at root and branch reform of the council tax system. If MPs are serious about restoring confidence and trust, resolving the council tax problem would be a step in the right direction.
[end of press release]
For further press information, please contact: Christine Melsom on 01428-712680 or E-mail c@isitfair.co.uk
Issued by Isitfair Campaign, Headley, Hampshire GU35 8PJ
Monday, May 25
Council Tax Cover Up
by
Mole
on Mon 25 May 2009 06:53 PM BST
Council Tax Cover Up
Scrap this rotten system now
25 May 2009
Hundreds of thousands of properties are still in the wrong council tax band despite this problem being known about since at least 2005. This cover up was originally reported in February 2008:
Is your property in the wrong band? Up to 400,000 properties are possibly affected. This has been known about since 2005 but Ministers decided to do nothing. Read more...
New documents have shown that more than 700,000 households may have been overcharged to the tune of tens of millions. Yet again, council tax payers continue to be ripped off by this thoroughly discredited taxation system:
700,000 overcharged in the great council tax 'cover-up' Read more...
Knowingly overcharging council tax payers is surely theft? The current revelations about MP's expenses shows that this is a particular area of expertise for many of them. Ripping off the tax payer one way or the other seems to be of no concern to them. If these 700,000 properties were being under charged would they still turn a blind eye?
The council tax system is a thoroughly rotten system of taxation. It was rushed through as a replacement for the poll tax, another disastrous system. The system was not properly 'thought through' and its weaknesses have been ruthlessly exploited by Gordon Brown ever since Labour came to power in 1997.
The principle of the system is that the value of the property you happen to live in reflects your ability to pay the tax amount levied. This is complete and utter nonsense, the arguments of which are well documented. Council tax has to be paid from whatever means of income you may have. It does not take into account your ability to pay that tax from whatever means of income you may have.
The amount raised by each local authority does not bear any relationship to the amount of their budget that they are free to decide. For example, a local authority may raise 45% of its annual income via council tax but only have total discretion over say 6% of its budget. This is a very high price to pay for local democracy.
The Government has no intention of changing the system to make it fair or equitable. The annual tax amount is now £25bn. Each year this amount increases and with it the problem becomes even harder to resolve. The politicians of Government simply do not have the strength of character required to address this problem. Government cynically blames the local authorities for the year on year inflation busting increases. However, it is Central Government that is responsible for these increases through their manipulation of the grant system and unfunded additional responsibilities imposed on local authorities.
What to do now
We need a new system of local taxation that is fair to all. It is possible and many countries have such a system. Until this new system is implemented, we call for the current system to be scrapped. Everyone in the UK benefits from local services one way or another. Therefore, we believe that in the short term, IT and VAT should be raised to cover the cost of council tax. Everyone will make a contribution and that contribution will be based on their ability to pay.
What to do next
Over the years, Isitfair has met with all of the three main political parties and has put forward alternative suggestions for council tax. We also actively participated in the Lyons Inquiry. However, nothing has changed and that is why we now believe that 'the politicians simply do not have the strength of character required to address this problem.'
We therefore urge everyone who believes that the current system is unfair to write to their MP asking them to take up the cause. After all, MPs are supposed to represent their constituent’s views, aren't they? Perhaps after the next general election we will have some new MPs who aren't afraid to tackle this problem.
Tuesday, May 12
Isitfair rates MPs expenses
by
Christine
on Tue 12 May 2009 06:48 PM BST
Isitfair what do you think?
MPs' expenses furore. Why did they do it? Because they could, and because there were plenty more doing the same. It was there, so such a pity not to take it.
The system is wrong and the system should be blamed along with the MPs who agreed that system and then worked it. And if they felt no guilt, if in their consciences they truly believed that what they were doing was right, why did so many of them fight so hard to avoid publicity?
I despair of them. How long did they think they could get away with it? Presumably to have got that far, to have been elected Members of Parliament, they must be in possession of a modicum of common sense and intelligence. Surely in the back of their minds there must have been the question, "Is this right?", closely followed by, "What happens if it isn't and I am found out?" Paying back bits and pieces of the monies wrongly claimed is not the answer, the damage has already been done, they are only fanning the flames.
Benefits cheats, quite rightly, end up in court and are punished. Are they really any different?
Isitfair the independent campaign calling for the reform of the council tax system
www.isitfair.co.uk
Thursday, April 16
Isitfair Member in Court for withholding Council tax
by
Christine
on Thu 16 Apr 2009 06:44 PM BST
Council tax protester Terry Reilly, a long standing member of Isitfair, was in court again today - for non payment of part of his council tax. Below are his reasons. The magistrate awarded costs to the council and issued another liability order. Terry was well supported by a lusty band of fellow campaigners.
I plead not guilty under-paying £143.95 but I will admit to paying £450 more than I should have done.
As a lone pensioner I have paid £6000 to Mod Sussex District Council in the last 5 years in Council Tax. Whereas, a family in the average dwelling in Manchester have paid £3,800 . I am not a Council Tax rebel I am a Council Tax victim.
I attended this court in October last year and was given a number of assurances that were later denied. The assurances were given by Miss Cordery and Mrs Evans of Mid Sussex District Council and, because of them I was persuaded by them not to appear before the magistrates. My integrity was called into question by someone in Mid Sussex District Council who did not like the newspaper reports and I can no longer trust Mid Sussex District Council.
I wrote to this court to ascertain what judgment was held against me. I will read the response to you
“With reference to your letter dated 12/01/09 we would advise you that we have passed your letter on the Mid Sussex District Council for them to deal with . We do not keep a record of any individual council matters heard at court as the Council merely use the court as a venue to conduct their matters”
… I am concerned that a Court of Law does not keep records and I have to approach the prosecutors for such information.
I became aware of the seriousness of the situation in 2003-4 when Council Tax went up nationally by 12% but in Mid Sussex it went up by 18.4% repeat – 18.4%
I then realised this was unsustainable and would lead to problems for pensioners, and those of fixed incomes and the lower-paid. The Audit Commission report also read “A general pattern emerges which shows that regions in the South with lower grant increases had higher council tax increases and those in the midlands and the North with higher grant increases had lower council tax”
From time to time I have written to Central Government and the responses have been arrogant and patronising. For example, when I asked why Mid Sussex District Council had increased council tax by 154.4% in 11 years I was told that they had acted “within the rules” and the government would not defend me. I was also told that I could get free eye-tests, and council tax benefit was available when I had run out of money . I have also had meetings with my MP and have exhausted all the channels available to me.
Let me mention ‘Relative Resource Amount (RRA) . This allows central government to assume that in the South-East everyone is wealthy because property costs more. In 2008-9 West Sussex were surcharged £127 million whereas Durham were surcharged £40 million. Government grant /head was £124 in West Sussex but £300 in Durham.
Further examples:-
Council tax for ‘average dwellings were as follows:-
Elmbridge (Surrey) £1692
Mid Sussex £1444
Horsham £1488
Durham £1060
Manchester £768
This is the effect of political manipulation by central government by more than £600 per average dwelling
The government have decided that because I live in West Sussex I can pay more Council Tax than Jack Straw; Hazel Blears; John Prescott and Tony Blair
With a few exceptions (one being Westminster) the government have decided that if you live in a part of the country that does not have a Labour MP you will be punished financially .
If aid is required for some parts of the country let it be transparent and not from the pockets of pensioners in the South-East.
In 2004-5 when I first paid my council tax in line with the RPI the difference was £32.15, five years down the line it is now £143.95 which is more than 11/2 times the basic state pension, which., I remind you is the same amount nationwide. Mid Sussex District Council as agents of central government have attempted to rob me of 11/2 week’s state pension. This does not accord with pronouncements by government agencies and councils that we, the elderly should be cared for and respected.
AS at February 19th 2009 158 people owed £1000 or more council tax for 2007-8 Also, 459 owe over £1000 for 2008-9 This is in excess of £600,000 Where are these people?
I am a pensioner who has lived in this country since birth, and I am a law-abiding Christian. I do not own a baseball bat or a Rottweiler, and, I am therefore a soft target. I have to pay for all my needs including my own videos; bath-plugs and barbecues!
I have control over my water consumption by meter. I can turn down the thermostat and wear extra clothing to minimise my heating bills. There is no escape however from this iniquitous and regressive tax which is politically manipulated.
Perhaps an adjournment to call a representative from Mid Sussex District Council to confirm or deny the validity of my figures would be appropriate, also, to confirm or deny that we in West Sussex are being taken advantage of. If we look around, we do not see bankers, MP’s, Doctors accountants etc. We see retired people on fixed income and the lower paid. They have one thing in common – they are hurting.
I urge you to not only sympathise with the plight of thousands of pensioners but to make it clear that you will not tolerate the political and financial abuse that I have outlined and I plead with you to find in my favour
I thank you for your time and courtesy
Tuesday, April 14
Council Tax. Isitfair member calls up the big guns
by
Christine
on Tue 14 Apr 2009 03:20 PM BST
Council tax is already too high and unfair without being asked to pay more for a possible valuation office mistake.
Cyril Martin has been a member of the Isitfair campaign for some years. He has appeared in court on several occasions for non payment of part of his council tax bill. He thinks his house is in the wrong band and has fought long and hard for fourteen years to try to prove this.
At last a BIG GUN has decided to take up his cause and last week Cyril received a visit from Oliver Letwin his MP and a Shadow Cabinet Minister.
Mr. Letwin decided that he would see for himself if Cyrils complaint has any foundation. He came to the conclusion that it had. "It was an open and shut case". The two houses opposite Cyril are just the same as his, but are banded one band lower.
Mr. Letwin has now become very involved in this issue and will be fighting Cyrils corner. He has written to the Chief Executive Officer of the Valuation Office. He hopes that he will not receive a letter trying to explain why two identical houses can be treated so differently.
I will let you know of any developments. Let's hope that the Valuation Office sees sense and puts his and his neighbours properties in the correct band. Preferably DOWNWARDS.
Tuesday, March 31
Council Tax Isitfair says that the Government must change
by
Christine
on Tue 31 Mar 2009 10:40 AM BST
I am receiving e mails and telephone calls from our members regarding the payment of council tax over twelve months instead of ten. These members are people who usually pay their council tax regularly and on time.
Some pensioners and people on low incomes have asked Isitfair what they should do, having asked their councils to accept 12 instalments, and having been refused that option. Write to your council, or ask to see the head of benefits, please do not rely on the woman in reception to say that ‘it's not allowed’. If your paying record has been good in the past, there is no real reason to refuse your request. I would have thought that receipt over twelve months was a better option that taking another pensioner to court for non payment
I have to say that our council is very sympathetic and ‘providing they get the tax’ will help you as best they can. If they have no problem then why have others? Please don’t tell me it is a ‘jobsworth’.
The Local Government Act of 1992 states that councils can collect 10 or 12 instalments or even 52 – most of them insist on 10 payments. Time for them to show that they have a heart and to allow hard pressed council tax payers the choice in these unusually testing times
The present financial climate is putting a strain on many pockets where interest has been relied upon to produce a living income. The Government continues to use figures that are just a joke. One Pound per Hundred Per Month interest and if you are not a pensioner, that rises to Two Pounds Per Hundred Per Month for others. I wish!!! Savings over £16,000 do of course, prevent you from claiming Council Tax Benefit. This ridiculous perceived interest rate must be brought down to a figure matching those rates truly available. If there has to be a limit on savings, then Sir Michael Lyons suggestion of £50,000 or even more, should be introduced immediately to alleviate some of the pain - until a fairer system is introduced. Not that the income from that will be of much help. One thousand pounds left in a current account last month attracted six pence interest, this month it will be even less. None of us wants to fall into the pit of benefits, but if the present situation is not dealt with, I can see thousands more having to apply for help, having been forced to spend their meagre savings which they have relied upon to maintain their homes.
The Government continues to spend, spend, spend while the needy are faced with a bill that, no matter what they may say, for many has risen by nearly 5% this year. Not just this year, but year on year, on year. For some of us our council tax will have almost tripled since its inception in 1993
Monday, March 30
Isitfair Council Tax Benefit interest rates must be brought up-to-date
by
Christine
on Mon 30 Mar 2009 10:04 PM BST
Isitfair Council Tax Benefit interest rates must be brought up-to-date
by Christine on Mon 30 Mar 2009 14:42 BST
I am receiving e mails and telephone calls from our members regarding the payment of council tax over twelve months instead of ten. These members are people who usually pay their council tax regularly and on time.
Some pensioners and people on low incomes have asked Isitfair what they should do, having asked their councils to accept 12 instalments, and having been refused that option. Write to your council, or ask to see the head of benefits, please do not rely on the woman in reception to say that ‘it's not allowed’. If your paying record has been good in the past, there is no real reason to refuse your request. I would have thought that receipt over twelve months was a better option that taking another pensioner to court for non payment
I have to say that our council is very sympathetic and ‘providing they get the tax’ will help you as best they can. If they have no problem then why have others? Please don’t tell me it is a ‘jobsworth’.
The Local Government Act of 1992 states that councils can collect 10 or 12 instalments or even 52 – most of them insist on 10 payments. Time for them to show that they have a heart and to allow hard pressed council tax payers the choice in these unusually testing times
The present financial climate is putting a strain on many pockets where interest has been relied upon to produce a living income. The Government continues to use figures that are just a joke. One Pound per Hundred Per Month interest and if you are not a pensioner, that rises to Two Pounds Per Hundred Per Month for others. I wish!!! Savings over £16,000 do of course, prevent you from claiming Council Tax Benefit. This ridiculous perceived interest rate must be brought down to a figure matching those rates truly available. If there has to be a limit on savings, then Sir Michael Lyons suggestion of £50,000 or even more, should be introduced immediately to alleviate some of the pain - until a fairer system is introduced. Not that the income from that will be of much help. One thousand pounds left in a current account last month attracted six pence interest, this month it will be even less. None of us wants to fall into the pit of benefits, but if the present situation is not dealt with, I can see thousands more having to apply for help, having been forced to spend their meagre savings which they have relied upon to maintain their homes.
The Government continues to spend, spend, spend while the needy are faced with a bill that, no matter what they may say, for many has risen by nearly 5% this year. Not just this year, but year on year, on year. For some of us our council tax will have almost tripled since its inception in 1993.
Isitfair Council Tax Benefit interest rates must be brought up-to-date
by
Christine
on Mon 30 Mar 2009 02:42 PM BST
I am receiving e mails and telephone calls from our members regarding the payment of council tax over twelve months instead of ten. These members are people who usually pay their council tax regularly and on time.
Some pensioners and people on low incomes have asked Isitfair what they should do, having asked their councils to accept 12 instalments, and having been refused that option. Write to your council, or ask to see the head of benefits, please do not rely on the woman in reception to say that ‘it's not allowed’. If your paying record has been good in the past, there is no real reason to refuse your request. I would have thought that receipt over twelve months was a better option that taking another pensioner to court for non payment
I have to say that our council is very sympathetic and ‘providing they get the tax’ will help you as best they can. If they have no problem then why have others? Please don’t tell me it is a ‘jobsworth’.
The Local Government Act of 1992 states that councils can collect 10 or 12 instalments or even 52 – most of them insist on 10 payments. Time for them to show that they have a heart and to allow hard pressed council tax payers the choice in these unusually testing times
The present financial climate is putting a strain on many pockets where interest has been relied upon to produce a living income. The Government continues to use figures that are just a joke. One Pound per Hundred Per Month interest and if you are not a pensioner, that rises to Two Pounds Per Hundred Per Month for others. I wish!!! Savings over £16,000 do of course, prevent you from claiming Council Tax Benefit. This ridiculous perceived interest rate must be brought down to a figure matching those rates truly available. If there has to be a limit on savings, then Sir Michael Lyons suggestion of £50,000 or even more, should be introduced immediately to alleviate some of the pain - until a fairer system is introduced. Not that the income from that will be of much help. One thousand pounds left in a current account last month attracted six pence interest, this month it will be even less.
None of us wants to fall into the pit of benefits, but if the present situation is not dealt with, I can see thousands more having to apply for help, having been forced to spend their meagre savings which they have relied upon to maintain their homes.
The Government continues to spend, spend, spend while the needy are faced with a bill that, no matter what they may say, for many has risen by nearly 5% this year. Not just this year, but year on year, on year. For some of us our council tax will have almost tripled since its inception in 1993.
Sunday, March 1
Isitfair, Council Tax and the Elderly
by
Christine
on Sun 01 Mar 2009 10:23 AM GMT
Dear Dame Joan,
Council Tax and the elderly.
On behalf of Isitfair, the nationwide, non-Party political pressure group campaigning for the reform of Council Tax, congratulations on your appointment to the new and much needed rôle as the "Voice of Older People".
Much has been said recently about people, particularly the elderly, being in fuel poverty (i.e. spending more than 10% of their income on heating) but many are also suffering to an even greater extent from what can be termed Council Tax poverty in that their Council Tax bills are even higher than their energy bills.
Many older people (and some not so old) are seeing 15%; 20%, or more of their income gobbled up by Council Tax. And, Council Tax cannot be reduced by insulating the loft; fitting low-energy light bulbs, or turning the thermostat down a degree or two - and then "wearing two jumpers" - as recommended by Jake Ulrich, the managing director of Centrica in July 2008 as he pocketed his £1 million-plus salary.
Many people, particularly the elderly, are now dreading the arrival of their Council Tax bills for 2009/10, many of which will be increased by between 3% and 5% when compared to last year's bills.
I imagine that you will be aware of the cases where some pensioners, after exhausting all other means of trying to get the system of local authority funding changed, have, in protest, refused to pay just a fraction of their Council Tax - and been thrown in gaol for their efforts.
These protesters have been even more incensed when they see Council Tax fraudsters, who have cheated the system out of £ thousands in some cases, get off with no more than a community order or some other slap on the wrist. Many are also incredulous when they learn of the astronomical salaries paid to executive officers in their councils and the amount of taxpayers' money that goes towards their guaranteed, final-salary pensions.
It's not that we oldies don't want to contribute to the cost of local services - we just want a fairer system of charging. Isitfair and its supporters the length and breadth of the country would like to see this iniquitous and regressive tax replaced by a system of funding local government that is based on ability to pay and not on the estimated and forever fluctuating value of one's home.
The need for reform is even greater now in light of the credit crunch; falling interest rates, and the aforementioned sky-high energy prices.
The Council Tax Benefit (CTB) system is not the answer. The 40-page application form is far too complicated and, surely, it must be the case that any tax that, for a growing number of people, relies on a benefit to enable payment has to be seriously flawed?
Please take a look at our web site at www.isitfair.co.uk where you will see that we are a totally voluntary and non-party-political organisation. We depend entirely on voluntary donations - most of which are postage stamps. We have thousands of contacts on our email and postal mailing lists - many of whom are members of other like-minded groups across the country (Crawley Pensioners Group, Devon Pensioners Action Forum, to name but two) who distribute our newsletters to an even wider audience.
We have organised two well-attended marches in London. We have delivered an 80,000+ signature petition to 10 Downing Street. We persuaded some 60 MPs to present petitions from the floor of the House of Commons, and we have had meetings - in Westminster - with MPs from all three main political parties to get our points across. All to no avail. We are still being hammered by inflation-busting increases in Council Tax.
In the realisation that I will probably only get one chance to persuade you to take an interest in our campaign, I hope that this letter will encourage you to consider our plea and that you will, at the very least, spare some time to meet and talk with us.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
Mike Schofield
Isitfair committee member
Cc: Christine Melsom
Email: c@isitfair.co.uk
Web: www.isitfair.co.uk
If you have written to Dame Joan as suggested in our last newsletter, and received a reply, we would be interested to hear
Monday, February 9
Isitfair Council Tax Was this to be our election carrot?
by
Christine
on Mon 09 Feb 2009 10:10 AM GMT
Isitfair Council Tax Reform Campaign
Read the section Pensioners Rate Relief about half way down the page
http://www.lpsni.gov.uk/index/rating/billing/getting_help_with_your_rates/housing_benefit_and_rate_relief.htm
http://www.isitfair.co.uk/publicforum2/viewtopic.php?4650&sid=6486ae475b7546d92446ffe3eb3b2cb5
Rate Relief SchemeThe new Rate Relief Scheme helps you if you are
A pensioner and you have savings of less than £50,000
getting Housing Benefit for only part of your rate bill; or
just outside the income limit for receiving Housing Benefit.
Applying for Housing Benefit and Rate Relief[/b]
http://www.isitfair.co.uk/publicforum2/viewtopic.php?4650&sid=6486ae475b7546d92446ffe3eb3b2cb5
I understand that rate relief is the equivalent of council tax. The level of savings is £50,000 for rate relief - raised as per Sir Michaels suggestion in the Lyons Inquiry.
Why if this is the case has this been done in Northern Ireland? Is it because the people created such a fuss about revaluation? Did this Government think that Northern Ireland was far enough away from the mainland that we would miss it?
No such luck. Maybe, just maybe it is to be our election carrot.
Christine
Isitfair is an Independent Campaign Calling for the Reform of the Council Tax System Please visit www.isitfair.co.uk
Sunday, February 8
Council Tax and Interest rates
by
Christine
on Sun 08 Feb 2009 05:56 PM GMT
Council Tax Benefit.
Are you aware of the way this is worked out? I have checked the figures with a council tax benefit officer and they are as follows:
The first £6,000 of savings are ignored, thereafter the following rules apply:
Pensioners. For every £500 (over £6,000 and under £16,000) you are deemed to receive £1 income per week. So on £1,000 the interest is perceived to be £104 pa when in fact the interest rates have not produced that amount of cash for many years, and certainly now £10-20 pa is more the norm – and decreasing as I write.
Non Pensioners. For every £250 (over £6,000 and under £16,000) you are deemed to receive £1 income---- per week. So for every £1,000 the interest is perceived to be a stonking great £208 pa.
Anyone just over the limit might just as well take a holiday!!
And incidentally - if you know where we can get 10% interest on our savings - please, please let us in on your secret.
Council Tax Benefit
by
Christine
on Sun 08 Feb 2009 03:55 PM GMT
Council Tax Benefit.
Are you aware of the way this is worked out? I have checked the figures with a council tax benefit officer and they are as follows:
The first £6,000 of savings are ignored, thereafter the following rules apply:
Pensioners. For every £500 (over £6,000 and under £16,000) you are deemed to receive £1 income per week. So on £1,000 the interest is perceived to be £104 pa when in fact the interest rates have not produced that amount of cash for many years, and certainly now £10-20 pa is more the norm – and decreasing as I write.
Non Pensioners. For every £250 (over £6,000 and under £16,000) you are deemed to receive £1 income---- per week. So for every £1,000 the interest is perceived to be a stonking great £208 pa.
Anyone just over the limit might just as well take a holiday!!
And incidentally - if you know where we can get 10% interest on our savings - please, please let us in on your secret.
Sunday, January 18
Council Tax, Isitfair? I don't think so
by
Christine
on Sun 18 Jan 2009 11:46 PM GMT
Council tax, a fair tax? I don't think so
Some Random Thoughts by Janet Kelly
It has for some considerable time been a complete mystery to me how anyone can think council tax a fair tax. For example, the two council areas with respectively the highest and lowest average council tax per dwelling are two adjacent London boroughs. How can this be? And why is it that we, in our modest home in rural(ish) Hampshire, pay more for our local services than residents in similar properties in other areas of the country? Are our pensions higher because we live here? No, of course not. Are wages and salaries higher here? No, they are not. Why do we pay more for our local services than, for example, Mr and Mrs Tony Blair and their ilk in their palatial properties in Westminster? These are just a few examples; there must be thousands illustrating just how illogical, inconsistent and monumentally unfair council tax is.
The answer to these questions, of course, has rather less to do with the efficiency or otherwise of our local councils (although many of them, despite their squeals of protest, embrace with unseemly enthusiasm any new legislation which means they can employ more staff), than with the notoriously complicated and skewed grant system and a one size fits all (which it doesn’t) banding system.
Neither the Labour Party (who can see nothing at all wrong with council tax) nor the Conservative Party (who find nothing wrong with the principle – they invented it after all - but blame the current unfairness and inconsistencies on the government’s manipulation of the grant system) have any intention of getting rid of it. The Liberal Democrats would replace it with a local income tax, but a study of their policy papers reveals a rather unhealthy interest in land value tax, not only for business premises but also for domestic properties.
But it has to be faced. Politicians must accept it. Council tax in its present form is so flawed that it needs at the very least an urgent and truly radical overhaul. It was apparent from the responses to Isitfair’s recent survey that it is generally agreed that too much is expected of council tax, and that any tax raised locally should be used to fund only things which are decided locally. There perhaps is the starting point.
There was a time not so long ago when, deservedly or undeservedly, it was apparently estate agents who were the most despised in our society. Now – aside probably from the bankers and financiers – it must surely be the politicians. So, here is their chance to improve their image. They may feel that council tax reform, in the current financial climate, is not a high priority. They should remember that for many of us it is far and away the highest entry on our bank statement and for most others it is second only to their mortgage payment.
In my household one of us yells at the TV, the other hurls the newspaper in disgust. How can it have come to this? Why is the country in such a mess? The ruling party may well have led us here, but from where I’m sitting it looks as if Her Majesty’s Official Opposition has for quite a lot of the past ten years turned rolling over and playing dead into a fine art. Maybe that’s unfair, but if they have been opposing behind the scenes they need to learn to shout it from the rooftops. And get noticed. Well, now is their chance: impress us by leading the way with some meaningful proposals for council tax reform. That’ll be a start.
Note from Christine: Representatives of Isitfair met with Eric Pickles, Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, in the House of Commons for an hour on 10 November last. We felt it was a worthwhile meeting. We noted with some satisfaction his scathing comments on excessively high salaries paid to council chief executives; we were informed of Conservative proposals to encourage and enable cross boundary co-operation between councils for cost cutting and efficiency purposes; and that a Conservative Green Paper on Local Government is to be published shortly. Isitfair was promised a copy. We were also warned that any major reform in the council tax system would have to be phased – it could not be otherwise.
Thursday, December 11
Isitfair Council Tax Christmas Carol
by
Christine
on Thu 11 Dec 2008 09:47 AM GMT
www.isitfair.co.uk our Christmas Carol
While savers watched their stocks in fright,
All beaten to the ground,
An angle for our Gordon Brown,
To claim he'd pull things round.
Cheered not are we for nigh no bread,
Has left us in a bind,
Mad musings that from Gordon spring,
Are not for what we've pined.
For us in every house we pay,
A tax that's like a fine,
An impost for our bed and board,
A penalty condign.
"So pay the council and you'll find,
A sense that when you've paid,
Of meanness in your housing Bands,
That justifies my raid."
Thus spake the PM and forthwith,
Appeared a whining throng,
Of people cursing Gord who thus,
Was now proved in the wrong.
And so we bleed for Gord, oh sigh!
For us he'll always fleece,
Hell take so much and leave us then,
Without a penny piece.
Isitfair The Nationwide Campaign Calling For The Reform Of The Council Tax System. Please visit www.isitfair.co.uk
Saturday, November 22
Council Tax Deputation re Hampshire County Councilliors Allowances
by
Christine
on Sat 22 Nov 2008 05:05 PM GMT
Deputation Hampshire County Council Thursday November 20th, 2008
Good morning everyone nice to see you all again.
In September, the Isitfair campaign made a submission about councillors’ allowances before the Independent Review Panel.
We already knew that the Cabinet of Hampshire County Council would not be seeking an increase in salary and that councillors would accept a rise in line with employees of Hampshire County Council. I have to say that we were well received by the Paneland that they listened very carefully to everything we had to say.
A few weeks later we sat in on a meeting of the Governance Committee who we understood would examine the findings of the Review Panel.
In the past we have said that national politics should not play a part in local government and I still feel that should be the case. Not so the councillors. Invariably on contentious issues, they split down party lines. But not this time. Oh no. There was complete unity between the parties and what I witnessed did them little credit. The Review Panel stood little chance of surviving the intentional destruction of their thoughts and ideas. It has been suggested on occasion that I might seek election as a councillor, but if this is what happens to ones integrity, I want no part of it.
Much of what the Panel had to say included the concerns of our campaign.
The unaccountability of councillors and lack of transparency were among those concerns.
We also observed that over the last ten years the cost of councillors in HCC had risen by more than £1 million.
Now,
Who runs the council? Is it you? That SHOULD be the case, but unfortunately for us, since this Government decided to force the Cabinet system into local government, 69 of you have been disenfranchised (your Leader’s words not mine). As one councillor has said, “As far as I am concerned there is no democracy in councils since the cabinet system was introduced. Apart from the chosen few, the rest of us might as well go home until the next election.”
Not only are you disenfranchised, but you are much more expensive.
Over the whole of Hampshire (excluding Southampton and Portsmouth) councillors now cost over £5.5 million pounds. Interestingly, the biggest jump was in 2000/2001 when the cabinet system was introduced. You may think this is peanuts, but just imagine how many council tax bills that would pay.
On to transparency,
In a recent Isitfair survey across the country, 94% said that information about their councillors should be in the public domain and easy to find. They believe that elected representatives need to be transparently open. After all, what have you to hide?
One of the other points we made to the IRP was the ability of councillors to make a good living from the public purse without revealing the true extent of that living. Not just from Hampshire County Council, but all other bodies – other Councils, Police, Fire, SEEDA, etc.,
Actually one can’t help wondering how they manage to give the necessary time to each and every one of these functions and, in some cases, have regular employment or run a business.
And yet, when we asked our members the question, Do you know what additional positions your councillor holds in your county and district, and whether your councillor sits on more than one council or publicly-funded body, the vast majority of them said no.
Every committee, county wide and nationwide, that councillors sit on should be listed on line, in public libraries etc, so that the electorate can see just what their councillor does. He/she should also reveal any interests that could possibly conflict with their public office. MPs have to make this information available to the public, why should councillors be any different?
Perhaps better use could be made of your on line profiles. How long is it since you looked at yours and those of your fellow councillors? Do you think that they are acceptable to the electorate? What does it say when looking through Councillors’ profiles we find this: little more than name, and party and ‘what do you think of my dodgy photo’. I suppose that is eight words more than the rest. We, the electorate are being treated with some contempt.
The IRP made reference to earlier aims to make those elected more representative of the population of Hampshire. Now, there are always exceptions to the rule, but I personally do not think that being a councillor is a young persons forte. The young should be out there, having fun, getting married and having a family and concentrating on earning a living. People who spend their lives in local government and then graduate into national politics, gain little knowledge as to how the other half live. When they have experience of life - that is the time to put something back into the community.
We should remember that some councillors receive over £50,000 from the public purse, thus joining over nine hundred other employees of the council.
In 1996/7 there were 54 employees being paid £50k or more In 2007/8 there were 916
The salary bill for the 54 people was about £3.5 million.
The salary bill for the 916 has rocketed to somewhere between £51 million and £61 million.
Our collective minds boggle. How can this possibly be justified? I have on previous occasions urged you to stand firm against the unfunded burdens handed down by central government . May I now draw the attention of the Conservative councillors among you to the words of Eric Pickles published earlier this year:
"Over the past 10 years Conservative local authorities have cooperated with the government to make the best of ill thought out plans and deliver the best possible results for local residents. Swamped by ever changing government targets, overburdened by red tape and overloaded by regulation we have delivered quality services and low council tax. The time is overdue for Conservative Councils to stand up to this bullying and controlling government on behalf of their communities. It is time for Conservative councils to ‘just say no.’"
That is what he said. I cannot agree with the council tax being “low”, but of course, the paltry and diminishing grants from Central Government make low council tax almost impossible.
And lastly, as I have on this occasion kept off the subject of council tax I would like to remind you that the Isitfair campaign for the reform of the council tax system is alive and well, and living in over 80 per cent of local authorities in England and Wales.
Thank you for your attention.
Wednesday, October 29
Council tax payers to bail out local authorities?
by
Christine
on Wed 29 Oct 2008 06:27 PM GMT
Isitfair
An Independent, Nationwide Campaign Calling for the Reform of the Council Tax System. Please Visit www.isitfair.co.uk
Council Tax Payers to bail out Local Authorities?
No, no, no!
Local authorities have more than £1bn tied up in Icelandic banks. With the fear that this money might not be returned, the Local Government Association (LGA) went running to the Treasury asking for help and protection.
It has also emerged that since September 2007, rankings by credit reference agencies should not simply be taken at face value. This was the Chancellor’s advice. However, the lure of high interest rates was too much to resist for some. To make matters worse, some of this money has been borrowed.
We have also seen the start of the ‘no blame game’. No one has done anything wrong, acted improperly or irresponsibly. Oh no. Local authorities have all followed the guidelines set down by John Prescott in 2004. How reassuring.
In total, it is estimated that local authorities have £8bn invested globally. Kent County Council alone has £163m invested. The total of all investments by public bodies globally is estimated at £30bn.
To make matters worse, it has also emerged that many local authority finance directors are baffled and confused by the money markets and have to take advice from external consultants about the investment of tax payers’ money.
£30bn invested globally
If local authorities have £8bn invested globally, it begs the question ‘why are they holding so much?’ This does not include council reserves of a further £11bn. These two amounts alone total £19bn which at a conservative annual interest rate of 5% generates £550m of interest income, which is nearly half of the annual increase in council tax for 2007-08.
Council tax receipts are now nearly £25bn per annum, and rising. Year after year, increases in council tax outstrip both inflation and wage increases. Yet, year after year we are told that councils are ‘cash strapped’ and threaten to cut services unless council tax goes up.
With at least £19bn in reserve or invested, councils are anything but ‘cash strapped’.
£25bn annual council tax
Some unnamed, so called "experts" are reported as stating that if local authorities don’t get their £1bn back then council tax payers will have to pay this again. Who are these "experts" and what right do they have to make such an assumption?
The consumption of public services is available to all, not just council tax payers. When you call the police or fire service, they don’t refuse to help you if you are not a council tax payer.
Any loss that any local authority may suffer, and it is too early to know if this will be the case, should be met by the Government. This problem is the result of local authorities following national guidelines. The Government can find £50bn to bail out the banks. Another £1bn really won’t make any difference. If the Government refuses, then there are plenty of reserves to fall back on locally, even if this means re-prioritising some spending decisions.
Public Finances are in "good shape"
Gordon Brown stated this in the Commons this week (w/c 20 October 2008) in order to justify his decision to spend his way out of recession. If this is really the case, then why are local authorities claiming to be "cash strapped"? These two statements are contradictory and require clarification. Local authorities have benefited from over 10 years of above inflation rises in their council tax receipts and now receive £25bn p.a.. On top of this they receive a further £10bn plus in fees and charges and continually claim to be saving millions of pounds in efficiency savings. Yet, every year, we get the same tired old message when they pass the ‘begging bowl’ round – ‘council tax must rise or services will be cut’. The Government allows them an annual 5% increase before they consider applying any cap yet still they want more. Clearly, something is very wrong – spending would seem to be out of control.
Helping hard working families
We have been told time and time again by Gordon Brown that he is doing everything he can to help hard working families and that he is acutely aware of the problems that families face. Yet, this message seems to have failed to reach the local authorities who are already announcing even more council tax increases for next year. Do these local politicians live in a parallel world? Are they so detached from reality that they have not noticed the credit crunch, the huge rises in the cost of oil, food, electricity and gas? Council taxpayers have to bear the brunt of these massive price increases and adjust their budgets accordingly. It is now time for profligate local authorities to rein in their spending too. Helping hard working families does not mean increasing their taxes.
Cash Strapped Council Taxpayers
What will happen when the council taxpayer runs out of money? Many thousands already have to make hard choices when managing their meagre incomes. The economic climate is certainly not going to get better or easier in the short term. It has been said many times already that the current level of council tax has reached its limit of acceptability. Another year of inflation busting increases may see history repeating itself as all peaceful means of encouraging the Government to reform local authority funding and to make it fairer have simply been ignored and treated with utter contempt.
No more council tax increases
In Scotland this year, the SNP in consultation with all local authorities achieved a freeze in council tax, thus proving beyond all reasonable doubt that with the right political will, council tax increases are avoidable.
In London too, Mayor Boris Johnson has also announced a freeze on the GLA precept to 2010/11 at the earliest. His longer term aim is to actually reduce the precept by cutting out waste. The GLA precept in London has rocketed by 152 per cent since 2001.
Since its introduction in 1993, the annual amount of council tax raised has increased by 300 per cent, from £8bn to 25bn.
It is now time for the Government to put a stop to this incessant, year on year inflation busting increases. People are sick and tired of seeing their hard earned money being taken away from them by local authorities who think that they can spend it better. Much of this is simply squandered. For example, one council spent £5k on squash court signs in Braille for blind people only to discover afterwards that blind people don’t play squash! Perhaps this is because they can’t see the ball, which is blindingly obvious even to a blind person. How stupid is that?
Action is needed now
Write to Gordon Brown, your MP and Local Authority Chief. Tell them that this decade of irresponsible council tax increases and spending must stop. Where known, quote examples of waste in your locality. The present system of council tax has been exposed as fundamentally flawed and should be replaced with a fairer system based on ability to pay.
Tell them, in no uncertain terms how you have to adjust your budget to make ends meet. If we all ran our home budgets the same way as Government has run theirs, we’d all be bankrupt. We can’t simply turn to our neighbour and expect (demand) that they pay for our poor financial mismanagement. These politicians need to be told and told and told until our message gets through.
Isitfair, a Campaign run entirely by volunteers.
c@isitfair.co.uk
Sunday, October 12
Council Taxpayers to bail out local Authorities................
by
Christine
on Sun 12 Oct 2008 03:29 PM BST
Council Tax Payers to bail out Local Authorities who invested in Iceland
No, No No!
 Local Authorities are reported as having a total of £1bn tied up in the failed banks of Iceland. Some reports are suggesting that if this money is never returned, then the council tax payer will have to pay again to cover this loss.
Since its introduction, council tax has always risen annually by more than both the rate of inflation and average earnings. It is forecast to triple to £25bn by 2010.
Local Authorities have therefore received ever increasing real term amounts of tax payers' money and clearly have too much - hence the £1bn investment they have been able to make. No longer will council tax payers' believe that they are "cash strapped".
This is a national problem and any bail out to Local Authorities is the responsibility of the Government. They laid down the rules and guidelines that allowed Local Authorities to make these investments. They must share the responsibility for the consequences of these investments. The Government found £50bn to bail out the banks - another £1bn for Local Authorities shouldn't be a problem.
Government and Local Authorities are both accountable to the electorate. Council tax payer's have been exploited for over 10 years now. Gordon Brown says that he will do whatever is needed to help hard working families. He can start by making a binding promise that council tax payers will not be expected to pay again for any loss that may result from this crisis.
Wednesday, October 1
Council Tax Freeze..............
by
Christine
on Wed 01 Oct 2008 04:59 PM BST
The Conservatives have made their intentions clear, that for at least the first two years in office they will freeze council tax. Pleased to hear it, but that is something that is ‘do-able’ now. It has always been ‘do-able', but neither the Government nor local government have put much effort into it. Perhaps the promise of a new regime will push them in the right direction
At a time when employers in the private sector are pulling in their belts, having looked at the vacancies in local government, it seems to me that they are making little effort to do the same. Local Government must be slimmed down, and now. When one council employs more people than the Royal Navy, it becomes quite clear that there is an element of empire building going on. One does not only have to consider the salaries (and no one gets the minimum wage in the public sector) but the pension that goes with it. The employer (us) is contributing about 18% of salary to these gold plated pensions.
The Government, together with the unions have failed to stem the spiralling cost of this unsustainable and unaffordable (to the taxpayer) pension.
Yes, councils must cut their cloth and the Government must be more even handed with their grants.
Can anyone explain to me why council tax on the ubiquitous band D property in Westminister or Wandsworth is about about half that of councils in other parts of the country? When a well respected county treasurer tells us that if he received the same grant as Westminister, he would not have to levy ANY COUNCIL TAX , something is going badly wrong. The whole system needs reforming, no tinkering, just completely reformed to make it a fair tax for all.
Dennis Healey may well have said that he would squeeze the rich until their pips squeaked, but the present Government has forgotten the 'rich' and is squeezing us all. Not just until the pips squeak, but until they are well and truly crushed.
So, the Conservatives will freeze council tax. There is perhaps, another eighteen months before the next General Election. What I would like to see is a Conservative party working on a replacement for this wretched tax during that time. We would like to think that the two year period during which the Conservative Party proposes that CT is frozen, would be used to phase in a new, fairer way to fund local government.
Sunday, September 7
Is council tax out of fashion? It could be - for Scotland
by
Christine
on Sun 07 Sep 2008 01:33 PM BST
Well, Alex Salmond has taken the plunge. We will watch with great interest how this works out. I have to say that at the moment we are a bit dubious and we had originally worked out that a rise of 3p in the pound on income tax would not be enough. I suppose if the present grant system and the amount of grant stays in place it might be possible - but is it possible that the Government in Westminster might pull the plug? I must wish him well and hope that he does pull it off.
The Government and both of the main opposition parties all favour some sort of property tax and will take some shifting on that stance. We will see, we will see. Listening to Alex Salmond, it was music to my ears to at last hear someone say that they were looking for a tax that would be fairer to the pensioner and the low paid, a fairer tax that would be based on income.
Come on Governments in England and Wales, get rid of this tax - a tax that is used as a pocket for any stealth tax the Government knows would be unpopular with the electorate as a whole. Just look at the concessionary travel passes for pensioners, brought in by the Government but now mostly funded by the council tax payer. The CPOs another Government idea originally funded centrally, but now falling on the shoulders of the council tax payer.
Actions speak louder that words, and Alex Salmond has been heard all over the United Kingdom.
Friday, September 5
One of the Princilal causes of Council Tax unfairness
by
Christine
on Fri 05 Sep 2008 03:52 PM BST
THE STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT (An occasional observation) Michael Boon
When in opposition, most politicians espouse the cause of more localism and less centralisation. However, when they achieve office, they seem to find the attractions of power so magnetic that they end up implementing yet more centralisation. Part of the problem is that the governance of most states has evolved from an era of absolute monarchs and the divine right of kings. All structures and power are top down. It is interesting to ask what would happen if all power structures were based on the bottom up principle, with 'lower' levels of government choosing for themselves what powers they ceded to 'higher' levels - the implication being that they could always take these powers back!
One of the problems of the electoral system, and it would be even more of a problem if we were to have proportional representation, is that we vote for parties, (often in ignorance of what policies they are actually proposing), and not for people. If we were to have very low level elections, say at street level, most of us would know the person we were voting for, whether we could trust them and whether or not they shared our values. If these representatives were then to choose, from amongst themselves, representatives for the next higher level of government with a clear statement of the limitations of the powers delegated upwards, and this were to be the model until we reached a national government, a 'democratic deficit' would become well nigh impossible.
Moreover each section of the population would tend to get the type of government that it wanted: probably something vaguely Tory in the South and something vaguely socialist in the North. However, those that believed in the big state would have to fund it themselves and not expect to be bailed out by taking money from people elsewhere - which, whether you like it or not, is one of the principal causes of the unfairness of Council Tax. This is nothing more than the principle of matching power to responsibility. You pay for what you or your representatives decide to do and not for what other people or their representatives decide.
Of course, actually implementing such a scheme would be fraught with all sorts of practical difficulties. Nevertheless, it is an intriguing thought.
Monday, September 1
Council tax payers and the compensation culture
by
Christine
on Mon 01 Sep 2008 01:14 PM BST
Council tax payers and the compensation culture
I must give the credit for this story to Ben Glaze of Wales on Sunday. Wales on Sunday have given me permission to use the details.
Ben Glaze has found, through the Freedom of Information Act that over £8million has been paid out in compensation claims by nineteen authorities in Wales and their insurers. Of course the figure is much higher but information was not forthcoming from three, namely,Caerphilly, Rhondda Cynon Taf (the second largest authority) and Monmouthshire, all of which refused to provide information
Among those taking legal action against councils were councillors claiming for pothole damage to cars, tripping over pavements and damage to vehicles on council property etc. I would have thought that all of these were avoidable had the council kept their services up to scratch!
Other claims include slipping on apple sauce (total cost £4,750), £165 paid out after a teacher confiscated a mobile phone taken into an exam by a pupil, and £90 paid out for a broken stiletto heel.
Local government consultant and ex-Bridgend council leader Jeff Jones said the growing compensation culture was leading some people to make false claims. He said: “People seem to think local government hasn’t got a face and that nobody is losing out. But in actual fact, insurance premiums go up and the people who pay these premiums are the council taxpayers. There is nothing wrong with people making a claim that is legitimate, but there are certain organizations out there which think they can exploit it. But, I’m glad to say, councils are starting to hit back and winning cases.”
Every day, several times a day, commercials appear on television urging people to claim ‘for what is rightfully theirs’. On the mention of compensation, millions of eyes light up across the country all thinking, “What’s in it for me?” It is a disease, a disease caught from our ‘friends’ across the water. People are no longer responsible for their own actions; if they looked where they were going they might see the crack in the pavement, the pothole in the road. Wales is a small country and if more than £8million is paid out there, just imagine the cost across the United Kingdom! Millions of pounds that could be used for the benefit of the whole nation. Millions of pounds that could go some way towards holding council tax down
Thursday, August 28
Business rates explained to council tax payers
by
Christine
on Thu 28 Aug 2008 11:42 PM BST
The Business Rates Delusion Michael Boon
From time to time many interested parties argue that the National Non Domestic Rates, (NNDR or Business rates), should be repatriated so that they could be determined by Local Authorities. On the part of Local Authorities generally, this is probably nothing more than a simple power grab. There is no doubt that some Local Authorities collect more via Business Rates than they receive back from Central Government after redistribution. Many of these Local Authorities, (and / or their residents), appear to imagine that if only they retained the Business Rates that they collected, then Council Tax for their residents / electorate could be reduced. This is almost certainly a delusion.
In principle, the total grant from Central Government to each Local Authority is nothing more than the difference between what Central Government thinks that that Local Authority “ought” to spend and what it “ought” to raise by way of Council Tax. The Central Government grant is usually shown as being made up of three major components. These are the Revenues support Grant, (RSG), the redistributed NNDR and the Police Grant. However, this separation is really just window dressing. It is almost inevitable that, if Business rates were to be “repatriated”, any winnings would be “taxed away” by a reduction in the RSG and any losses would be made up by similar increases in RSG. The overall fiscal position of any Local Authority would be essentially unchanged.
There also appears to be considerable misunderstanding as to how the NNDR is redistributed. Actually, although it may appear rather complicated, every single resident receives, via his Local Authority, exactly the same subsidy from NNDR per head in total. If we take the fiscal year 2005-06, (i.e. before education spending disappeared from Local Authority “spending” and grants), then we can see that each service received exactly the same amount per head. Every separate fire and rescue service received a grant labelled as “redistributed NNDR” of £11.55p, (and a few extra decimal places), per head. Similarly each Police Authority received an NNDR based grant of £16.25p per head, whereas each District Council received a redistributed NNDR amount of £28.88p per head. The position with County Councils is slightly more complicated. Some County Councils, (e.g. Surrey), run their own fire services whereas others, (e.g. Hampshire), do not. Those counties like Hampshire and Durham that do not run their own fire services receive a redistributed NNDR amount of £304.36p per head. Those that do run their own fire services, like Gloucestershire or Cumbria, received the larger amount of £315.91p per head – which is £11.55p more, (i.e. the same amount as the separate fire service receive). With two exceptions, Unitary Councils, London Boroughs and Metropolitan Councils, all receive a redistributed NNDR amount of £333.24p per head. Because, in effect they provide the same services in total as are provided by District and County Councils separately, it is no surprise to discover that this amount is simply the same as the latter receive separately, (i.e. £304.36 plus £28.88). The two exceptions are The Isle of Wight and the Scilly Isles, which run their own fire services. Quite naturally, these two Authorities receive and amount via NNDR of £344.78p per head of population. This consists of the fire services element, (£11.55), plus the usual Unitary Council element, (£333.24). As a result of these various paths of support, everybody receives an NNDR subsidy of £361.04 per head.
|
This Month
| July 2010 |
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
Recent Visitors
Christine - Thu 29 Jul 2010 12:51 PM BST
HELLOOOOOOOOOOOO - Sat 24 Jul 2010 09:00 AM BST
Max123 - Wed 21 Jul 2010 07:16 AM BST
peterson00 - Mon 19 Jul 2010 01:08 PM BST
camellialan - Fri 18 Jun 2010 01:45 AM BST
|
