Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Good news for Labour from Glenrothes by-election

Scottish Labour backed calls for a probe into why "an SNP government department lost confidential personal data again".

A spokesman for the party added: "Lindsay Roy won the by-election because of the incompetence of the SNP locally and nationally.

Remarkably self-aware for a nuLab type - no pretence at claiming they won because their party or policies were actually better. :D
 
It does seem remarkable that as soon as questions are raised the evidence 'disappears'. I'd have thought material pertaining to the running of elections would be held under strict protocol and diligence, especially given the sensitivity over recent election cock-ups in Scotland.
 
It does seem remarkable that as soon as questions are raised the evidence 'disappears'. I'd have thought material pertaining to the running of elections would be held under strict protocol and diligence, especially given the sensitivity over recent election cock-ups in Scotland.

It does seem remarkable that as soon as the SNP administration in Edinburgh drops yet another major manifesto commitment, an election scandal turns up in the constituency where the Labour party got thousands more votes than it had expected. I'd have thought material held by the Scottish Government pertaining to the running of elections would be held under strict protocol and diligence, especially given the sensitivity over recent election cock-ups in Scotland.
 
It does seem remarkable that as soon as the SNP administration in Edinburgh drops yet another major manifesto commitment,
This is one I don't get. The SNP is a minority government; Iain Gray knows full well they can't get through their local income tax proposals if the parliamentary arithmetic doesn't add up. Labour, or another party, needs to back it too. So is he disappointed it isn't going through, or pleased it isn't going through? If the latter, shouldn't he be saying "hooray"? Not "oh no, the buggers aren't doing what they promised".

This is why I look on in disconnected disdain for the machinations of the lot of them.
 
This is why I look on in disconnected disdain for the machinations of the lot of them.

The only point I wanted to make was that it is just as easy for me to portray the missing ballot forms as an SNP trick (and they ARE in charge of the department that handles ballots) as it is for others to portray it as a Labour one.

I share your desire to see saintlier politicians, though.
 
Saintlier politicians who oppose the change to a local tax based more on the ability to pay? Some saints! :rolleyes:

That is an admirably simple presentation of one side of the argument and misses out the little disadvantages. This isn't the time and place to rehearse them - and anyway Mr Salmond has booted the policy into touch.

None of them are saints, they're just hacks, and all too human. :)
 
No, I don't want saintly anything. But local taxation based on ability to pay would have been good. We could have had that had Iain Gray supported it. His party chose not to. But now they've got their way, they're not cheering, but booing the SNP for not giving us a local income tax. Now, I'm no fan of the SNP, but can you not see the hypocrisy there?

(I know the SNP plan had features that made it inferior to say the Lib Dem version or the old SSP version, but had Labour wanted a local income tax, we would have had one, with whichever amendments necessary: that is the logic of minority government).

And the point as to whether the missing ballots are an SNP trick or a Labour trick: two things - Labour benefited in this case, and Westminster elections are run by the Scottish Office, not Holyrood.
 
It's obvious, there isn't really a political argument to be had. None of the other parties agreed to the SNP's plan to scrap council tax and replace it with a local income tax. The SNP is a minority government. So how else could Salmond have got it through?

If Labour had signed up to it they could even have claimed a kind of victory- allegedly left-leaning parties working together during the recession. They're playing politics and I think that's exactly what people are fed up of now, and not just in Scotland.
 
But local taxation based on ability to pay would have been good.

I've never got this. The fiddling of income tax is much greater than that of property tax, because the rich can disguise their income but seldom compromise on their home(s) just to save a bit of tax. Actually, it's not only the rich who fiddle their income tax, it's almost anyone who can. I guess we've all met the builder who lives in the huge house with the flash 4x4 who boasts of declaring a tiny income because most of his jobs are off the books. But he's paying properly assessed council tax on all those bathrooms.

Moving local taxation to an income based scheme will increase the incentive to fiddle declared income to reduce both national and local taxes. Why is that a good thing?
 
Homes are not closely enough related to income. It turns out to be too tangential. Currently too many wealthy people pay too small a relative proportion as a result.

Second home taxation would of course be needed, but there is a number of proposals to cover that.

Tax evasion is a separate issue.
 
It's not even remotely separate. It remains far too easy to minimise income whilst maximising wealth, that's what tax planning- the legal or quasi-legal end of tax evasion- is all about. The richest can ensure they pay little or no income tax, I can't fathom why anyone would want them to pay lower local taxes.

Homes are more closely related to wealth than almost anything else. Wealth is a different measure than income and a system of local taxes based on wealth ensures that the rich at least pay something. Shifting the burden of local taxes away from wealth and onto income will simply increase the incentive for tax planning or evasion. That's not to say the council tax system is a particularly good wealth tax- after all it was introduced in a panic by the Tories, but replacing it with a local income tax isn't a great idea.
 
Income is more closely related.

The differential between Fred Goodwin and a full time worker on the national minimum wage is 250 to 1.

there is no transparency, so we don't know how much income tax he pays, but I'll bet it's nothing like 250 times the nmw worker.

face it, for those workers with a standard job and no other income, income tax is compulsory and unavoidable. That's much less true for anyone on self-assessment and for those with sufficient wealth it's almost entirely voluntary.

The differential between the highest council tax band and the lowest is 3 to 1.

Clearly a far more progressive tax is needed.

we agree, but the way to fix a broken property tax is not to convert to an equally broken income tax.

It's simply not the case that the only difference between rich and poor is their _declared_ income. Apart from council tax the only way wealth is regularly taxed is from the _declared_ income derived from it. So long as the wealthy can organise their tax affairs such that they minimise what income they declare- and that hasn't been hard- they can continue to accumulate wealth. Property based taxes assess an aspect of wealth they're reluctant to disguise- their home(s).
 
face it, for those workers with a standard job and no other income, income tax is compulsory and unavoidable. That's much less true for anyone on self-assessment and for those with sufficient wealth it's almost entirely voluntary.
It's not something I need to be told to 'face'. I'm well aware of the business class' shenanigans. (They are the real benefits cheats, not the stereotyped 'chav' doing the ironing in the Shop-a-Neighbour TV ads. But will the true situation feature in a TV ad? Not under current social structures). However, I'd rather Fred paid redistributive tax on even his declared earnings than just the top band of council tax.

What we all need to face is that the current system is designed by the wealthy for the wealthy. I'm under no illusion that the local income tax proposals of the SSP will ever be allowed to see fruition under the current state of affairs; indeed, even the milder SNP proposals have fallen at an early hurdle. The business classes have a highly developed sense of class consciousness, and will continue to ensure that their interests are represented over those of the masses.
 
I wasn't trying to be rude, it's just a figure of speech.

What we all need to face is that the current system is designed by the wealthy for the wealthy.

that's right, and that's why finding a diversity of ways to tax them is essential, and that includes revamping property taxes. Simply taxing declared income whilst ignoring underlying wealth is in the interests of the few haves, not in the interests of the many havenots.
 
I wasn't trying to be rude, it's just a figure of speech.
Aye, fair enough.

that's right, and that's why finding a diversity of ways to tax them is essential, and that includes revamping property taxes. Simply taxing declared income whilst ignoring underlying wealth is in the interests of the few haves, not in the interests of the many havenots.
I'm not saying taxing income is perfect, just better than the council tax, which does not closely enough track ability to pay.
 
Back
Top Bottom