Imitation is the highest form of flattery.

Conservatives are claiming credit in some of their local council literature for the rise in Tax thresholds which is putting some £600 into the pockets of the lowest earners. Labour  has suddenly developed an enthusiasm for the mansion tax. Both are Liberal Democrat ideas or policies but we don't mind. We are used to it. The important thing is to get it right. What would be good is if the Conservative part of the coalition thought a bit harder before rushing off to do , usually, the wrong thing. Think of the so called 'bedroom tax' & the nonsense of how can you move when there is nowhere to move to?  Note also that Communities Secretary, Conservative Eric Pickles, has had to modify his policy on home extensions. In far too many cases the implementation of the policy has not been thought through and it is duff implementation that is causing most of the grief

Epitaph for Thatcher

“Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope”. So said Thatcher as she stood on the steps of No10 Downing St for the first time. If she really meant that as her political goal then she was either uttering a monumental lie or her reign was a monumental failure. That most particularly applies to the 'bring harmony' bit. The enormous disharmony that she created we can still see all around us this very day. To many millions she didn't bring much hope either.

Tories in Trouble

An Ipsos Mori analysis for the Financial Times of a years worth of opinion polling reveals that female support for the Conservatives in the C2 socio economic group [ skilled manual workers such as hairdressers, factory workers etc] has slumped by 12% to its lowest level for 16yrs. Even worse news for the Tories is that in all other groups, except the very top such as lawyers, doctors etc., their female support has also fallen between 7% & 4%.  Can this be because it is largely women who confront the shake up in the benefits system against disproportionately large rises in the costs of essentials? An objective scrutiny of the welfare structure as it was in 2010 clearly indicates that something had to be done but the Conservative ministers responsible - especially Duncan-Smith & Osborne have completely bungled it. There are blameless claimants losing money they cannot afford whilst (for no better reason than vote grabbing) rich pensioners remain coddled & the wealthy get a tax cut they don't need.

Thatcher the destroyer

Paddy Ashdown, in an interview about Margaret Thatcher, says she was a better destroyer than builder and wasn't that true. At the beginning of 1981 unemployment reached nearly 3m peaking at 3.2m a few years later. Manufacturing capacity fell by a fifth. At the same time the top rate of income tax was cut to 60% and then 40%. OK so a major shakeup was necessary. I was in the thick of the industrial mess at that time with incompetent management on one side & unions being obstructive for the sake of it on the other ( apart from the Unions a bit like now really – so it makes Ashdowns point about destruction but not building). Her great error, one might almost say crime, was to reduce taxes rather than invest in training for those thrown out of work. It was still, in those days, hard to find a decent domestic plumber, electrician etc & it wouldn't have taken much to retrain a shipyard plumber etc to do domestic work. But no it was the scrap heap. For that she should never be forgiven and to spend any taxpayer money on her funeral is a disgrace.

George Osborne is a disgrace to politics

How low can George Osborne sink? Yesterday on the BBC he said: "Philpott is responsible for these absolutely horrendous crimes [the death of 6 children]and these are crimes that have shocked the nation; the courts are responsible for sentencing him. But I think there is a question for government and for society about the welfare state - and the taxpayers who pay for the welfare state - subsidising lifestyles like that, and I think that debate needs to be had.". One man, Philpott, who was NOT living exclusively on benefits held up as an example of the alleged general evils of the benefit culture ! Osborne is a disgrace to politics. There is no doubt that the welfare budget needed attention and the policy of a single benefit rather than several has much merit. LibDems do not have a problem with that principle but the way it has been done is a complete shambles. Just take housing benefit. It is absurd to assume that people struggling financially to put food on the table will ring fence the rent money that will now be paid to them rather than to landlords. Reducing several payments down to two instead of one doesn't destroy the policy. It simply demonstrates that Iain Duncan Smith is possessed of a brain cell.

All in it together? What a lie.

Must read book by ex-tax inspector Richard Brooks 'The great Tax Robbery' [272 pages Oneworld] is subtitled: ' How Britain became a tax haven for fat cats and big business'. Just a few gems. Osborne has allowed chunks of his corporate tax policy to be written by companies with the help of the same accountants who design avoidance schemes. Under the previous Labour regime penalties levied by HMRC on very large companies for transgressions had fallen to 0.01% of their 'error' – around 200times less than the fines imposed on small companies. Also, since a Private Finance Deal in 2001, HMRC's offices have been owned by a company in Bermuda. HMRC cannot therefore scrutinise the finances of its 'landlord'. Lots more. Read the book.

Defending Politics

I have just been reading a book called 'Defending Politics' by Prof. [of Parliamentary Government & Governance] Matthew Flinders of the University of Sheffield. His contention is that democratic politics delivers far more than most of us recognise and that “If more & more people are disappointed with what modern democratic politics delivers then it is possible that the fault lies with those who demand too much, fail to acknowledge the essence of democratic engagement, and ignore the complexities of governing in the 21st Century” and “Would politics be interpreted as failing a little less if we all spent a little less time emphasizing our individual rights and a little more time reflecting on our responsibilities to society and future generations?” These statements are taken from a summary on the dust cover but the book argues the case very readably and even handedly and I personally agree very much with him. You do not have to spend long on Facebook/Twitter to see how the 'debate' on pretty much anything is reduced in pretty short order to hysterical rants in which vicious character assassination is the prime thrust.