Skip to main content

Charging Council Tax to people on JSA

I explained why Birmingham was wrong to do this in parliament yesterday. The video of my speech is here. The text of the debate is here

There is always a challenge understanding the arguments when different people quote different figures. I will, therefore put up the two arguments about costs. These figures look only at the effect on the city council. That is about 88% of the total council tax bill. The rest goes to Police and Fire.

Labour's figuresMy figures
2012/3 government support88,231,59888,231,598
2013/4 government support(79,494,242)(79,494,242)
Shortfall8,737,3568,737,356
Contingency882,3160
Requirement for 1.45% increase in Council Tax 1,292,152 0
Total to find10,911,8238,737,356
From Flexibilities5,437,9776,012,692
Government Grant02,129,441
Final Shortfall5,473,847595,223
The money that can come in from reducing backdating is 792,542 which is more than that required for my approach to the figures.

The policy question is the one highlighted in my speech. Do you tax the poorest in society in order to find funds to support the council tax of the poorest or do you share the burden amongst people. (ie on the general fund).

I made the point in my speech that without any increase in council tax the council should expect an additional £1.4 million, but that the budget for 2013/4 for inflation is also high and could easily stretch to cover the missing support that results from an increase in council tax of 1.45% (much that there is an argument for taking the government money here as well).

Comments

Jake Maverick said…
personally i still reckon it would be a good idea to cut taxes and increase money available to spend on things that are actually worthwhile, here's a few suggestion

STOP employing people to steal/ tax from people and then another building full of people to give it back to them, calling it a Tax credit

STOP charging g-men tax and then paying other g-men to steal it back from them and then more g-men to steal/ tax them and so on and so on....

STOP spending millions in middle of a recession rebranding buildings to things that you nicked from pretty decent horror/ fascist/ sci fi movies, like the Dept. of Justice.... (still not sure whether that on ewas a joke or not?)

stop paying people to rape, torture and murder people then selling your victims personal data to private companies that then come around and turn few hundred pounds of damage into tens of thousands...

jail the gulity of crime and free the innocent

move the govt depts out of London....by my estimate you just reduced the cost of 'administration' gravy tain thing by about 97%

stop spending billions on thermal nuclear warheads that only a lunatic will use. we only need a couple at most....you could probably sell the rest to those who dnt have them and create a balance of power for once?

now you're abt 90% out of recession and everything is looking hunky doory again....now if you could only recreate/ create a climate of trust small bsuniessman like myself will get you the retsof the way....which means no more secret rules, spying and the rest...put whatever rules inw riting, sign it and stick by them...remove immunity from prosecution...call it a one page rule....sole trader one page of rules, Ltd, two pages of rules (and i mean A4 in a legible size font, doesn't include any crap like 'on our secret website we can unilaterally vary without bothering to tell you' for example.....these aren't actually the rantings of a lunatic you know, you ARE the lunatics!

and plastic bags, stop talking to whichever moron brought in banning them....save you millions from enforcing it, just tax it, double the tax every year you'll get there quicker AND the minus sign in front of that large number with all the zeros becomes a +

plastics generally...make a law that labels and the tops are to be made of same platic as the main body from now on, it becomes economic to recycle them...here's the clever bit...give british manufacturers couple years extra notice, they absorb the cost structure quicker...corner uk market when come sinto effect, few years later when Europe does the same they'll corner market there as well as they absorbed cost struture a lot quicker...obviously just dnt admit to it, in the same way that shooting somebody repeatedly in the head isn't murder, it's promotion to RP squad...it's just COMMON SENSE/ BUSINESS SENSE.

stop torturing/ tagetting the kind of people that could have and would have generated a hell of a lot of wealth for this country....

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/01/22/284861/campaigners-meeting-to-expose-harassments-by-uks-mi5/
Jake Maverick said…
& make fresh milk legal again

100 millions saved every year, less road accidnets/ fatalities (dead slaves can't work) from driving all that milk to be cooked.

lower carbon emissions, less taxes to yourselves (?)

NHS would even spend less torturing people, more so over time, as immune systems grow back
Jake Maverick said…
no point when decent folk can't even get access to a bank account....

why would you deliberatey set out to destroy this country economically, morally and every other way you can think of?

you can't actually be this tupid...russian plot? NWO? what is the endgame really on all this...? must be a point to it all....

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…