Opportunity for Labour on Tax Credits

[Hibbyradge]

There is an opportunity for Labour to reduce the scale of the cuts here, if it's managed properly. When Tory MPs balk at their own party's measures, then there's a chance to make a difference in opposition.

The cuts won't be stopped, but they could be scaled back with good tactics.

However, I fear that the left's principles will triumph over pragmatism and the Tories will circle their wagons ensuring that the cuts go ahead in all their gory (sic).

We'll see.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34577535

[hibsbollah]

Labour can't do much about it, except keep repeating that 3 million people will be £1000 worse off. The only hope for an Osborne backtrack is a growth in the embryonic Tory backbench revolt.

[Hibbyradge]

Labour can't do much about it, except keep repeating that 3 million people will be £1000 worse off. The only hope for an Osborne backtrack is a growth in the embryonic Tory backbench revolt.

Exactly.

The opposition must nurture that revolt.

[Onceinawhile]

Labour can't do much about it, except keep repeating that 3 million people will be £1000 worse off. The only hope for an Osborne backtrack is a growth in the embryonic Tory backbench revolt.

£2,000 a year worse off for me.

But my personal allowance is going up £200 so that gives me £40 back so we're even according to gidiot.

[Hibbyradge]

If the legislation cannot be defeated in its entirety, then, the Labour Party must work to lessen the impact of the cuts on those likely to be worst hit, alongside the Liberals, the SNP and those Conservative MPs who want to do the same.

The next stages on this Bill will give us a clue as to whether the Labour Party is really on the side of the working poor, or if the left of the party want to use them as political cannon-fodder.

[hibsbollah]

Fascinating stuff for political geeks today. House of Lords are voting on 4 possible amendments to the Govts cut to working peoples tax credits, which could kill off a bill that has gone through the elected house twice (and by contradicting the Commons on a legislative matter, go against 300 years of convention). It also raises the possibility of Cameron appointing a load of new Tory peers to stop this happening again, and conceivably, a constitutional crisis for the queen. Go on the Lords!

I really ought to stop watching bbc parliament and get some work done :dizzy:

[Hibbyradge]

Cameron won't appointment loads of new peers.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/25/cameron-osborne-tax-credits-lords-uturn

[lucky]

Labour in the lords are going for motion to delay the cuts for up to 3 years. This will enable the minimum wage to be increased correctly. I'm against working tax credits as its subsidises business paying low wages but you can't just make sweeping cuts without migrating it.

[Colr]

Don't worry, guys. Jez has the tax issue covered

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leader-close-to-defeating-tampon-tax-as-tory-rebels-lend-support-a6707391.html

May leave the Tories bloodied on this issue!

[ronaldo7]

Liberal motion by Mansoor on fatal motion to take out tax credit cuts completely defeated 99 to 310, Labour abstained.

Labour motion by Meacher to delay until government considers the cuts, wins by 307 to 277 Liberals vote with Labour.

Labour motion by Hollis to delay tax credits until the Government introduces a package of transitional measures wins by 289 to 272

[Holmesdale Hibs]

All labour need to do here is keep their mouths shut. It's a bull**** bill and neither the public or a non-negligible number of Tory MPs agree with it. They just need to keep quiet and watch Osbourne backtrack.

If Labour get too cocky, it's easy to point out that Corbyn and others want the Lords abolished and it's slightly hypocritical to support it when it suits them. McDonnell spoke well about it but I wish I had a tenner for every time he said 'think again'.

[lucky]

Hopefully tonight's decision will lead to a rethink on the tax credits and abolishing of the HoL. I would want it replaced by a second chamber elected on a PR basis.

[Colr]

Just what we need. More career politicians!

[Glory Lurker]

Hopefully tonight's decision will lead to a rethink on the tax credits and abolishing of the HoL. I would want it replaced by a second chamber elected on a PR basis.


Absolutterly delighted to be able to agree with you on the Holy Ground for once, Lucky!!!!

:flag::flag::flag:

[hibsbollah]

Gaun the aristocratic arachnonystic parasites :aok:

[Geo_1875]

Gaun the aristocratic arachnonystic parasites :aok:

Arachna...... wtf?

[Hibbyradge]

Arachna...... wtf?

Good question! :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

Arachna...... wtf?

Spidermen know what's going on

[Hibbyradge]

Spidermen know what's going on

Spidermen folk...

[Future17]

Arachna...... wtf?

I think he means anachronistic. :greengrin

[hibsbollah]

Spidermen know what's going on

:grr:
:greengrin:

I can't even blame the spellchecker, it was all me. Maybe im dyspeptic.

Anachronistic.

[EH6 Hibby]

When they say they've voted to delay the cuts, how long are we talking about? Could they still go ahead in April if they push through the assessment on the impact of the cuts?

[lucky]

I'd abolish the HoL and replace it with an elected chamber but are the SNP wrong in not taking seats in it when you can clearly effect policy of the government on issues such as this. For the third largest party in the UK they were bystanders last night.

[steakbake]

I think last night's vote was an odd "victory".

There was the opportunity to take down the legislation completely which was rejected. All that Osborne has been handed is more time to 'consider' the implications and all in an act of self-preservation because option 1 would have set the HoL on a collision course with the HoC and hell, we wouldn't want any complicated constitutional questions coming up now, would we?

Labour have had repeated promises to reform the HoL in successive manifestos. Indeed, even when they had thumping majorities, the reform was little more than tinkering at the edges.

[The_Todd]

I think last night's vote was an odd "victory".

There was the opportunity to take down the legislation completely which was rejected. All that Osborne has been handed is more time to 'consider' the implications and all in an act of self-preservation because option 1 would have set the HoL on a collision course with the HoC and hell, we wouldn't want any complicated constitutional questions coming up now, would we?

Labour have had repeated promises to reform the HoL in successive manifestos. Indeed, even when they had thumping majorities, the reform was little more than tinkering at the edges.

Nope, that's not the case. That would have been the wrong move. It would have just resulted in the bill going right back through again. The amendment has forced the Tories to rexamine the whole thing, including providing transitional assistance to those effected and pushed the cuts back by years. The fatal vote would not have killed the legislation, it would have just resurfaced as primary legislation and gone through sooner or later.

Do not buy into the SNP spin that there was any chance to see the back of this last night, because there simply wasn't.

[lucky]

Nope, that's not the case. That would have been the wrong move. It would have just resulted in the bill going right back through again. The amendment has forced the Tories to rexamine the whole thing, including providing transitional assistance to those effected and pushed the cuts back by years. The fatal vote would not have killed the legislation, it would have just resurfaced as primary legislation and gone through sooner or later.

Do not buy into the SNP spin that there was any chance to see the back of this last night, because there simply wasn't.

100% correct. The lack of how the Houses of Parliament works is startling from the the SNP.

[The_Todd]

100% correct. The lack of how the Houses of Parliament works is startling from the the SNP.

The SNP know full well how parliament works, but they like to spread misinformation by taking advantage of the fact Joe Public doesn't generally have a clue how it works. That's not a criticism of Joe Public by the way. Most normal people couldn't care less about parliamentary procedure, but the SNP know it and flog it cleverly.

[Moulin Yarns]

I'd abolish the HoL and replace it with an elected chamber but are the SNP wrong in not taking seats in it when you can clearly effect policy of the government on issues such as this. For the third largest party in the UK they were bystanders last night.

I think you will find that no member of the SNP, or the Green Party, has ever been nominated to the HoL, but I am willing to be proved wrong.

[Beefster]

I think you will find that no member of the SNP, or the Green Party, has ever been nominated to the HoL, but I am willing to be proved wrong.

The Greens have Jenny Jones.

AFAIK the SNP refuse to nominate anyone.

[steakbake]

Nope, that's not the case. That would have been the wrong move. It would have just resulted in the bill going right back through again. The amendment has forced the Tories to rexamine the whole thing, including providing transitional assistance to those effected and pushed the cuts back by years. The fatal vote would not have killed the legislation, it would have just resurfaced as primary legislation and gone through sooner or later.

Do not buy into the SNP spin that there was any chance to see the back of this last night, because there simply wasn't.

Fair enough - we'll see what happens in due course. Probably watered down proposals to the same general effect.

[lucky]

I think you will find that no member of the SNP, or the Green Party, has ever been nominated to the HoL, but I am willing to be proved wrong.

Your correct on the SNP. I'm against an unelected second chamber but as long as it there then political parties should take up their quota. The SNP were ineffective last night. They stood on the sideline. I'm not sure how that's representing Scotland. Like their change of policy on NATO it's time for them to revisit this policy.

[The_Todd]

Your correct on the SNP. I'm against an unelected second chamber but as long as it there then political parties should take up their quota. The SNP were ineffective last night. They stood on the sideline. I'm not sure how that's representing Scotland. Like their change of policy on NATO it's time for them to revisit this policy.

Correct: they sat on the sidelines making a lot of noise and attacked Labour for most of the night (funny that, when the Tories want to pile into Labour the SNP are always willing and able to join in)

I too am against an unelected second chamber and as a Labour member (and, I'll be quite honestly probably in the Blairite centre) Labours Lords reforms didn't go nearly far enough when they were in power. It was a start but never finished the job. But until we do get a full democratic second chamber it's the only second chamber we've got and like it or not does a vital job so all parties should partake.

[Moulin Yarns]

The SNP were ineffective last night. They stood on the sideline. I'm not sure how that's representing Scotland.


Now you are confusing me.

How could the SNP stand on the sidelines when there were no SNP members of the HoL?

I notice Labour abstained on the Tory policy motion, yet again.

[The_Todd]

Now you are confusing me.

How could the SNP stand on the sidelines when there were no SNP members of the HoL?

I notice Labour abstained on the Tory policy motion, yet again.

That's his point. They choose to not take part in the HoL, therefore in cases last night they just sit on the sidelines carping

[Geo_1875]

That's his point. They choose to not take part in the HoL, therefore in cases last night they just sit on the sidelines carping

They weren't involved in last nights debate so how did you hear them carping?

[lucky]

Now you are confusing me.

How could the SNP stand on the sidelines when there were no SNP members of the HoL?

I notice Labour abstained on the Tory policy motion, yet again.

I think your choosing to be confused. As the Govenor said above by not talking up their seats they are not representing Scotland in the Houses of Parliament

[Moulin Yarns]

I think your choosing to be confused. As the Govenor said above by not talking up their seats they are not representing Scotland in the Houses of Parliament

55 of them are most definately representing Scotland in the Houses of Parliament, they were elected to do just that. Unlike the unelected chamber that were debating last night.

[Hibbyradge]

(funny that, when the Tories want to pile into Labour the SNP are always willing and able to join in)



Why is that funny?

I would imagine that the SNP will take every chance they can to attack their main opponent in Scotland, regardless of who else is doing the same.

No point Labour getting all pouty lipped about it.

However, how were the SNP attacking Labour if they have no representatives in the lords?



I too am against an unelected second chamber and as a Labour member (and, I'll be quite honestly probably in the Blairite centre) Labours Lords reforms didn't go nearly far enough when they were in power. It was a start but never finished the job. But until we do get a full democratic second chamber it's the only second chamber we've got and like it or not does a vital job so all parties should partake.

Even if it's to abstain.

[The_Todd]

They weren't involved in last nights debate so how did you hear them carping?

Nicola Sturgeon et al all carping on social media last night, working their followers into a frenzy as usual.

[Moulin Yarns]

Nicola Sturgeon et al all carping on social media last night, working their followers into a frenzy as usual.


That explains why I have not seen it reported in the media.

And a couple of Labour supporters it would seem :wink:

[The_Todd]

However, how were the SNP attacking Labour if they have no representatives in the lords?



Even if it's to abstain.

It didn't take long for Ms Sturgeon to get on her high horse to attack Labour last night along with her senior party figures.

And abstain? Abstain on what? Labour got their motion voted through last night.

[The_Todd]

That explains why I have not seen it reported in the media.

And a couple of Labour supporters it would seem :wink:

i suppose some of us expect better from a First Minister :wink:

[Moulin Yarns]

It didn't take long for Ms Sturgeon to get on her high horse to attack Labour last night along with her senior party figures.

And abstain? Abstain on what? Labour got their motion voted through last night.


You know fine well Labour abstained in the vote on the Tory motion.

[lucky]

You know fine well Labour abstained in the vote on the Tory motion.

No they did not they abstained on a Lib Dem motion which would have enable Osbourne to reintroduce it again. This has been mentioned in this thread earlier

[Hibbyradge]

It didn't take long for Ms Sturgeon to get on her high horse to attack Labour last night along with her senior party figures.



Why are you so surprised that your political opponents attack you?

The SNP offered to work with Labour to oppose the Tories. Labour said no and continues to say no.

[Hibbyradge]

No they did not they abstained on a Lib Dem motion which would have enable Osbourne to reintroduce it again. This has been mentioned in this thread earlier

That's a red herring.

If the Lib Dem motion had been carried, Osborne would have been utterly foolhardy to reintroduce the same legislation.

Not only would it have taken him many months to get it through the Commons, thereby losing the political advantage of getting the dirty work done early in the parliament, there would be no guarantee of it succeeding this time. Even if there weren't enough Tory rebels to defeat it, it would have had to go back to the Lords. I'm not sure they would have taken too kindly to being completely ignored.

Now we'll get a watered down version which will be spun as a caring measure by a listening chancellor. The poorest working families will still be penalised and it might even get Labour support.

Remember, only a few weeks ago, Labour promised to back the chancellor. No wonder they're under attack.

[Hibbyradge]

I too am against an unelected second chamber and as a Labour member (and, I'll be quite honestly probably in the Blairite centre) Labours Lords reforms didn't go nearly far enough when they were in power. It was a start but never finished the job. But until we do get a full democratic second chamber it's the only second chamber we've got and like it or not does a vital job so all parties should partake.

You have to laugh. (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/house-of-lords-told-to-be-either-more-or-possibly-less-democratic-20151027103312)

[hibsbollah]

It didn't take long for Ms Sturgeon to get on her high horse to attack Labour last night along with her senior party figures.

And abstain? Abstain on what? Labour got their motion voted through last night.

:agree: Labour have played this perfectly. It's about the politics of the possible. Watch the lords vote for the labour bill, Kick it into the long grass and then see what a weakened chancellor comes back with.

[Hibbyradge]

:agree: Labour have played this perfectly. It's about the politics of the possible. Watch the lords vote for the labour bill, Kick it into the long grass and then see what a weakened chancellor comes back with.

Actually, on balance, I agree.

It weakens Osborne, but keeps the threat of tax credit cuts alive, giving Labour plenty ammunition with with to batter the Tories.

As this article points out (http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2015/10/u-turn-tax-credits-may-be-harder-it-looks), Gideon hasn't many options to choose from.

[ronaldo7]

You know fine well Labour abstained in the vote on the Tory motion.


No they did not they abstained on a Lib Dem motion which would have enable Osbourne to reintroduce it again. This has been mentioned in this thread earlier

I think you'll find that Lucky is partially correct GF. Seven Labour peers actually voted the Lib Dem motion down, and voted with the Conservatives, including Lord George Robertson.

We then find that a Labour Lord actually votes with the Tories on the last Labour amendment(Baroness Hollis).

Great stuff this Lords lark. Maybe he just doesn't understand the workings of the place eh.

[hibsbollah]

Correct: they sat on the sidelines making a lot of noise and attacked Labour for most of the night (funny that, when the Tories want to pile into Labour the SNP are always willing and able to join in)

I too am against an unelected second chamber and as a Labour member (and, I'll be quite honestly probably in the Blairite centre) Labours Lords reforms didn't go nearly far enough when they were in power. It was a start but never finished the job. But until we do get a full democratic second chamber it's the only second chamber we've got and like it or not does a vital job so all parties should partake.

Indeed.

Or as Billy Bragg pointed out earlier, any damage to democracy posed by Labours' alleged hypocrisy is far outweighed by the £12 billion cuts themselves, which were imposed without consulting the electorate. Remember what Osbourne said at 2012 Tory conference:

"Where is the fairness, we ask, for the shift-worker, leaving home in the dark hours of the early morning, who looks up at the closed blinds of their next door neighbour sleeping off a life on benefits? When we say we're all in this together, we speak for that worker. We speak for all those who want to work hard and get on."

The implication Osborne gave was that low paid workers who go out and get a job will be supported in their efforts, while the cuts will be targeted on the 'feckless'. Without this shameful sleight of hand, the Tories probably wouldn't have got elected.

[RyeSloan]

Actually, on balance, I agree. It weakens Osborne, but keeps the threat of tax credit cuts alive, giving Labour plenty ammunition with with to batter the Tories. As this article points out (http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2015/10/u-turn-tax-credits-may-be-harder-it-looks), Gideon hasn't many options to choose from.

Gideon has been famed for his tactical astuteness but in this case looks to have been far too clever by half.

I agree with him in one sense though, the tax credit system is out of control and significantly distorts the labour market. The 16 hour part time threshold is the most obvious one...the average hours worked part time? Amazingly 16.1 hours! Some of the examples of how the system can be gamed by say two adults both working 16 hours part time is quite extraordinary but he's dropped the ball on this one.

Still on the plus side for him he's deliberately front loaded these changes into the early years of his (sorry dave's) government so he has time to repair the damage...maybe it was all a great wheeze to show what a 'listening chancellor' he is and will use his autumn statement to prove to the nation that he is a caring type after all?

[ronaldo7]

The SNP position on Tax Credits.

https://t.co/oYfJg1Lwfo

I wonder if Labour will vote with them to devolve tax credits so we can help support our low income families.

[The_Todd]

The SNP position on Tax Credits.

https://t.co/oYfJg1Lwfo

I wonder if Labour will vote with them to devolve tax credits so we can help support our low income families.

This is the problem with the SNP. Everything is all about where the decision is made or which government makes them. Process above substance.

[liamh2202]

The SNP position on Tax Credits.

https://t.co/oYfJg1Lwfo

I wonder if Labour will vote with them to devolve tax credits so we can help support our low income families.

Its easy saying the words people want to hear but if its devolved where will the cuts come from up here ?

[lucky]

The SNP position on Tax Credits.

https://t.co/oYfJg1Lwfo

I wonder if Labour will vote with them to devolve tax credits so we can help support our low income families.

The Scottish govt have the power already, admitted by Alex Neill, but sadly voted against Labour motion to restore them in Scotland.

[ronaldo7]

This is the problem with the SNP. Everything is all about where the decision is made or which government makes them. Process above substance.

Woe betide any Scottish Government or Scottish MP's trying to protect the Scottish people...Just like the bedroom tax.:aok: Over £100Million it's cost us for the policies of the Tories.

Labour happen to be in power in Wales, they don't even bother mitigating the bedroom tax.

[ronaldo7]

Its easy saying the words people want to hear but if its devolved where will the cuts come from up here ?

The only people mentioning cuts are the Tories. We might just have to wait until Gideon supplies us with his Autumn statement so we have all the numbers, to therefor be able to complete the Scottish Budget.:aok:

[ronaldo7]

The Scottish govt have the power already, admitted by Alex Neill, but sadly voted against Labour motion to restore them in Scotland.

How many people/families are on tax credits?

How much needs to be raised to allow all monies to be paid?

Have Labour costed this project, if so where is the money coming from?

First Minister on cracking form today. https://t.co/aBBY7CvtcQ

[liamh2202]

The only people mentioning cuts are the Tories. We might just have to wait until Gideon supplies us with his Autumn statement so we have all the numbers, to therefor be able to complete the Scottish Budget.:aok:

You dont think we need to make cuts and sort out the debt?

[ronaldo7]

You dont think we need to make cuts and sort out the debt?

We're already getting our budget cut. Anywhere between 5% to 10% depending who you speak to. We could also send the SSBN's to the bottom of the oggin though:aok:

[Mibbes Aye]

Woe betide any Scottish Government or Scottish MP's trying to protect the Scottish people...Just like the bedroom tax.:aok: Over £100Million it's cost us for the policies of the Tories.

Labour happen to be in power in Wales, they don't even bother mitigating the bedroom tax.

One question, give me an answer.

Do rich people or poor people benefit most from the SNP's council tax freeze?

[liamh2202]

We're already getting our budget cut. Anywhere between 5% to 10% depending who you speak to. We could also send the SSBN's to the bottom of the oggin though:aok:

Haha im not biting ;)

[ronaldo7]

One question, give me an answer.

Do rich people or poor people benefit most from the SNP's council tax freeze?

Define Rich and Poor.:wink:

You'll have to ask me on another thread. This ones for Tax Credits.:aok:

[Mibbes Aye]

Define Rich and Poor.

Shame on you. I'll make it simpler.

Who benefits most from the council tax freeze?

[ronaldo7]

Shame on you. I'll make it simpler.

Who benefits most from the council tax freeze?

I think you've done this one to death on here Mibbes. I'm willing to take your word for it.:aok:

[Mibbes Aye]

Woe betide any Scottish Government or Scottish MP's trying to protect the Scottish people...Just like the bedroom tax.:aok: Over £100Million it's cost us for the policies of the Tories.

Labour happen to be in power in Wales, they don't even bother mitigating the bedroom tax.


One question, give me an answer.

Do rich people or poor people benefit most from the SNP's council tax freeze?


Define Rich and Poor.:wink:

You'll have to ask me on another thread. This ones for Tax Credits.:aok:


Shame on you. I'll make it simpler.

Who benefits most from the council tax freeze?


I think you've done this one to death on here Mibbes. I'm willing to take your word for it.:aok:

It reads like you're all about the SNP protecting the Scottish people

Maybe the rich ones more than the poor ones, eh? :wink:

[ronaldo7]

It reads like you're all about the SNP protecting the Scottish people

Maybe the rich ones more than the poor ones, eh? :wink:

That was short and sweet then. Try and stay on track now.:greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

That was short and sweet then. Try and stay on track now.:greengrin

Rich over poor mate, is that what you signed up for?

[ronaldo7]

Rich over poor mate, is that what you signed up for?

This really has been done to death mate, and as I've said, I accept you analysis of the situation.

The policy back in 2007 was a vote winner with many people I spoke to, hell, it even helped the wee woman doon the street who had seen her council tax bills go through the roof.

The local income tax policy never got off the ground due to other parties being against.

The policy must have had some benefits, as the Labour party decided to put it in their manifesto.:greengrin

It looks like it's had it's day, and we need to fund local gov differently, but what that will look like, I don't have a Scooby.

Council tax bills rose in Scotland by 51% in the ten years up to 2007. Something had to be done.

Many hundreds of "Rich" people have benefitted from the policy, I accept that, although it doesn't mean I like it, but how many hundreds of Thousands of "poor" people have benefitted

We better get this thread back on track mate, or M59 will be along to make sure we do.:aok:

[lucky]

The problem with the LIT was that it was not local. As with everything by the SNP what it's says and does are two separate things. Council tax freeze has been popular but a disaster for local services. If anything had to be put in place then it was a cap in increases. Councils should be held account for their ability to raise and spend CT, it's local democracy , if the voters dislike their council or its tax policies then remove them. The rich have benefited more from this freeze. It's wrong and we now need to stop it

[Beefster]

That was short and sweet then. Try and stay on track now.:greengrin

Serious question - have you ever criticised the SNP on anything (I'll even accept you thinking they've done a crap job on something once or if you've seen one of their policies and thought 'hmmm, that's not right')?

I'll be honest, I've never seen a non-politician so unwaveringly on message for one political party. I might have just missed the times you've gone rogue though.

[ronaldo7]

Serious question - have you ever criticised the SNP on anything (I'll even accept you thinking they've done a crap job on something once or if you've seen one of their policies and thought 'hmmm, that's not right')?

I'll be honest, I've never seen a non-politician so unwaveringly on message for one political party. I might have just missed the times you've gone rogue though.

Land reform. They weren't hard enough. Edinburgh south candidate this year. Many more. Is this a test for all posters our just the SNP one's? I'm flattered.

[Beefster]

Land reform. They weren't hard enough. Edinburgh south candidate this year. Many more. Is this a test for all posters our just the SNP one's? I'm flattered.

No, it was just for you. Thanks for the response.

[The_Todd]

A council employee tells an SNP MSP that the council tax freeze should be lifted to allow local authorities some breathing space and because she's concerned for her job. SNP MSP responds saying the freeze is good because people will have money to spend in shops, creating jobs in shops.

I'm sorry, but for all the garbage the SNP and it's support shouts about Red Tories this is one of the most conservative policies they have and one of the most conservative responses to a concern I think is possible.

Can we leave off all this "SNP are a leftist alternative" please?


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CTHkjAjWsAAzM-c.jpg:large

[ronaldo7]

A council employee tells an SNP MSP that the council tax freeze should be lifted to allow local authorities some breathing space and because she's concerned for her job. SNP MSP responds saying the freeze is good because people will have money to spend in shops, creating jobs in shops.

I'm sorry, but for all the garbage the SNP and it's support shouts about Red Tories this is one of the most conservative policies they have and one of the most conservative responses to a concern I think is possible.

Can we leave off all this "SNP are a leftist alternative" please?


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CTHkjAjWsAAzM-c.jpg:large

Aye, she's right charmer right enough.

[The_Todd]

Aye, she's right charmer right enough.

That's not even the point: her concern is a valid one and his response is a glimpse into the real SNP. Your response ignores the actual policy detail and plays the man not the ball.

[ronaldo7]

That's not even the point: her concern is a valid one and his response is a glimpse into the real SNP. Your response ignores the actual policy detail and plays the man not the ball.

I think I've already made my points on the council tax.

Her concern is indeed valid, although some of her trolling on twitter is open for all to see.

[lucky]

I think I've already made my points on the council tax.

Her concern is indeed valid, although some of her trolling on twitter is open for all to see.

Ron, we disagree on nearly everything on politics but FFS your beginning to sound like a cult member who can hear nothing against the SNP. You need to take the blinkers off a bit

[Mibbes Aye]

This really has been done to death mate, and as I've said, I accept you analysis of the situation.

The policy back in 2007 was a vote winner with many people I spoke to, hell, it even helped the wee woman doon the street who had seen her council tax bills go through the roof.

The local income tax policy never got off the ground due to other parties being against.

The policy must have had some benefits, as the Labour party decided to put it in their manifesto.:greengrin

It looks like it's had it's day, and we need to fund local gov differently, but what that will look like, I don't have a Scooby.

Council tax bills rose in Scotland by 51% in the ten years up to 2007. Something had to be done.

Many hundreds of "Rich" people have benefitted from the policy, I accept that, although it doesn't mean I like it, but how many hundreds of Thousands of "poor" people have benefitted

We better get this thread back on track mate, or M59 will be along to make sure we do.:aok:

The very poorest get nothing from this policy. Nothing.

It's pure George Osborne. Talk about giving the lower incomes a boost to disguise the facts.

And the fact is that the richest benefit three times as much as the poor and the very poor get nothing at all.

Every time you talk about the SNP standing up for Scottish people it's fatally undermined by the fact that your flagship policy favours the rich over the poorest.

You can't toss the poor a bone (and the very poorest nothing at all) while giving the biggest benefits to the well-off and claim you are standing up for Scottish people.

[RyeSloan]

The very poorest get nothing from this policy. Nothing. It's pure George Osborne. Talk about giving the lower incomes a boost to disguise the facts. And the fact is that the richest benefit three times as much as the poor and the very poor get nothing at all. Every time you talk about the SNP standing up for Scottish people it's fatally undermined by the fact that your flagship policy favours the rich over the poorest. You can't toss the poor a bone (and the very poorest nothing at all) while giving the biggest benefits to the well-off and claim you are standing up for Scottish people.

The very poorest don't pay the tax...you can't do much more than that though can you.

We've been through this a zillion times but government policy shouldn't just be about one sector of society. I'd wager the vast majority of contributors to this message board who are based in Scotland have benefited from this particular policy, to make out that one policy decision that doesn't benefit the poor (because they are already excluded from paying it!) therefore defines every other policy or defines a parties stance on 'helping the poor' is just daft.

[Mibbes Aye]

The very poorest don't pay the tsectors ofu can't do much more than that though can you.

We've been through this a zillion times government policy shouldn't just be about one sector of society. I'd wager the vast majority of contributors to this message board who are based in Scotland have benefited from this particular policy, to make out that one policy decision that doesn't benefit the poor (because they are already excluded from paying it!) therefore defines every other policy or defines a parties stance on 'helping the poor' is just daft.

The very point is that the poorest don't pay because they are so poor. Instead of giving subsidies to people in million-pound plus properties, why not allow resources to be focused on tackling the systemic and unfair inequalities that pervade our society?

You seriously can't be suggesting that people so poor they get relief from council tax are on a good thing. Maybe it's you who is George Osborne :greengrin

And government policy can and must focus on specific sectors. Or should we just get rid of laws protecting disabled people or black people from discrimination, for example? I know that in proper political terms i.e. not party-based but more philosophy-based, we are poles apart and I respect that, but the notion of Smith's 'invisible hand', trickledown economics and self-righting societies is archaic!

[Mibbes Aye]

The very poorest don't pay the tax...you can't do much more than that though can you.

We've been through this a zillion times but government policy shouldn't just be about one sector of society. I'd wager the vast majority of contributors to this message board who are based in Scotland have benefited from this particular policy, to make out that one policy decision that doesn't benefit the poor (because they are already excluded from paying it!) therefore defines every other policy or defines a parties stance on 'helping the poor' is just daft.

And it isn't just 'one policy decision'. It is the flagship policy, first thing they proclaim in the last Westminster and Holyrood manifestoes.

It is not redistributive, quite the opposite and makes a mockery of any claims to be seeking social justice.

You might not be fussed anyway but it makes them hypocrites to my mind.

[RyeSloan]

The very point is that the poorest don't pay because they are so poor. Instead of giving subsidies to people in million-pound plus properties, why not allow resources to be focused on tackling the systemic and unfair inequalities that pervade our society? You seriously can't be suggesting that people so poor they get relief from council tax are on a good thing. Maybe it's you who is George Osborne :greengrin And government policy can and must focus on specific sectors. Or should we just get rid of laws protecting disabled people or black people from discrimination, for example? I know that in proper political terms i.e. not party-based but more philosophy-based, we are poles apart and I respect that, but the notion of Smith's 'invisible hand', trickledown economics and self-righting societies is archaic!

What I'm saying is that the resources you are asking for are being applied...the poor get a full rebate on the tax.

It just so happens that there is a policy that mitigates some of the cost of the tax on the rest of the population. Not everyone not classed as poor are automatically without the need for some assistance and maybe it's not that wrong for the tax payers to get a small bit back on occasion.

As I said we have defo been through this a few times, I'm comfortable with the thought that not every policy implemented has to be solely focussed on the poor and inequality.

And as for me being Gideon...ha you know I would be much more draconian than him ;-)

[Mibbes Aye]

What I'm saying is that the resources you are asking for are being applied...the poor get a full rebate on the tax.

It just so happens that there is a policy that mitigates some of the cost of the tax on the rest of the population. Not everyone not classed as poor are automatically without the need for some assistance and maybe it's not that wrong for the tax payers to get a small bit back on occasion.

As I said we have defo been through this a few times, I'm comfortable with the thought that not every policy implemented has to be solely focussed on the poor and inequality.

And as for me being Gideon...ha you know I would be much more draconian than him ;-)

That's probably true :greengrin

The resources I'm asking for aren't being applied though, we arent tackling structural inequality if we are squandering finite money on making the affluent feel a little bit better.

What I do like about you is the honesty. You are small-state and generally anti-interventionist and while it's not a position I would take, you aren't pretending to be something you're not.

[RyeSloan]

That's probably true :greengrin The resources I'm asking for aren't being applied though, we arent tackling structural inequality if we are squandering finite money on making the affluent feel a little bit better. What I do like about you is the honesty. You are small-state and generally anti-interventionist and while it's not a position I would take, you aren't pretending to be something you're not.

Play with a straight bat that's what I say...exactly why I'll never be a politician! Even today I read an article about the mess that the police Scotland merger is in and it ended with a quote from a spokesman for the whatever minister in the SP that is responsible...no acceptance of responsibility or even an admission that there may be issues but did manage to end with "and labour fully supported the creation of a single force in the face of Tory cuts from Westminster"
I mean is there nothing that happens in Scotland or the SNP do that they don't trot that line out for? It's sounding increasing pathetic.

Anyway my final point on the CT freeze is that yes it benefits the affluent but it also benefits many many people that aren't...believe it or not I'm not a huge fan of the freeze (although I like the CT even less) and it's pretty obviously there as a vote winner which is typical of politicians, generous to a fault with other people's money.

[Moulin Yarns]

And it isn't just 'one policy decision'. It is the flagship policy, first thing they proclaim in the last Westminster and Holyrood manifestoes.

It is not redistributive, quite the opposite and makes a mockery of any claims to be seeking social justice.

You might not be fussed anyway but it makes them hypocrites to my mind.

Here was me thinking the SNP flagship policy has always been independence.

You learn something new every day

[Mibbes Aye]

Here was me thinking the SNP flagship policy has always been independence.

You learn something new every day

Indeed.

Yet the policy they led with in both manifestoes was their council tax freeze. Independence didn't get a look in.

[ronaldo7]

Ron, we disagree on nearly everything on politics but FFS your beginning to sound like a cult member who can hear nothing against the SNP. You need to take the blinkers off a bit

:aok:Thanks for that advice.

[Mibbes Aye]

Play with a straight bat that's what I say...exactly why I'll never be a politician! Even today I read an article about the mess that the police Scotland merger is in and it ended with a quote from a spokesman for the whatever minister in the SP that is responsible...no acceptance of responsibility or even an admission that there may be issues but did manage to end with "and labour fully supported the creation of a single force in the face of Tory cuts from Westminster"
I mean is there nothing that happens in Scotland or the SNP do that they don't trot that line out for? It's sounding increasing pathetic.

Anyway my final point on the CT freeze is that yes it benefits the affluent but it also benefits many many people that aren't...believe it or not I'm not a huge fan of the freeze (although I like the CT even less) and it's pretty obviously there as a vote winner which is typical of politicians, generous to a fault with other people's money.

I don't disagree with you.

My ire is at the fact that if you're giving money away why do you leave out the poorest.

And why do you give more to the better-off than the less well-off.

As for Police Scotland I think that's a public inquiry in the making.

[Hibrandenburg]

All this continuous rattling on about the council tax reminds me of the labour/conservative alliance droning on at Salmond about what currency he intended to use after independence when he'd answered the question 25 000 times already.

If that's the only policy that the SNP have that you really object to then they cannae be doing to bad then. Change the record ffs.

[Mibbes Aye]

All this continuous rattling on about the council tax reminds me of the labour/conservative alliance droning on at Salmond about what currency he intended to use after independence when he'd answered the question 25 000 times already.

If that's the only policy that the SNP have that you really object to then they cannae be doing to bad then. Change the record ffs.

No one's made a single convincing defence of this flagship policy and it shows the lie of any claim to be progressive.

If you've got one then crack on.

Otherwise, you maybe shouldn't be trying to tell people how to post :wink:

[ronaldo7]

Labour vote against the Scottish Parliament having powers over tax credits. They seem to think it's ok to mitigate against, but not have the powers and associated funds over them.

[Glory Lurker]

Labour vote against the Scottish Parliament having powers over tax credits. They seem to think it's ok to mitigate against, but not have the powers and associated funds over them.


Despite form that suggests that they are more than capable of it, I don't believe that this is the rank incompetence it seems. Labour are playing a coldly-calculated political game here. Tough luck to the folk who'll suffer while it's played out.

[Hibrandenburg]

Despite form that suggests that they are more than capable of it, I don't believe that this is the rank incompetence it seems. Labour are playing a coldly-calculated political game here. Tough luck to the folk who'll suffer while it's played out.

They've left Scotland exposed to tory cuts. Looks like we are "in it together".

[Hibbyradge]

They've left Scotland exposed to tory cuts. Looks like we are "in it together".

Under the bill, the Scottish Parliament will be given the power to set rates and bands of income tax from April 2017, keep half of all VAT receipts, and be given the ability to top up welfare benefits and create new payments.

A series of amendments tabled by the UK government aimed at clarifying and strengthening some sections of the bill were approved.

These included control over abortion law, which was opposed by Labour, and enhanced powers over welfare, including the ability to top-up any cuts to tax credits made by the UK government.

Does that not cover it?

[ronaldo7]

Under the bill, the Scottish Parliament will be given the power to set rates and bands of income tax from April 2017, keep half of all VAT receipts, and be given the ability to top up welfare benefits and create new payments.

A series of amendments tabled by the UK government aimed at clarifying and strengthening some sections of the bill were approved.

These included control over abortion law, which was opposed by Labour, and enhanced powers over welfare, including the ability to top-up any cuts to tax credits made by the UK government.

Does that not cover it?

A good piece by Robin McAlpine in https://t.co/YmTHFsVz9t

One of the questions asked of Mundell last night, was that if the Scottish Gov top up benefits, would the Uk Gov take back the extra from Universal Credit. He never answered. I sure we'll find out the fine detail soon enough though.

[Glory Lurker]

A genuine question for Labour people - why did Labour vote against the devolution of tax credits to Holyrood, as opposed to abstaining or, indeed, supporting it? I don't think I've got an agenda here (!), I genuinely do not know what informed the decision Labour made.

[lucky]

A genuine question for Labour people - why did Labour vote against the devolution of tax credits to Holyrood, as opposed to abstaining or, indeed, supporting it? I don't think I've got an agenda here (!), I genuinely do not know what informed the decision Labour made.

Because the Scottish Parliament already had the power to negate the cuts. Labour will not continue to support more powers to Holyrood based on the fact the party supports devolution not independence. Devolve powers are never going to enough for Nationalist and a constant drip feeding of power will lead to independence by the back door so Labour have chosen not to support any more powers other than those in the Scotland Bill.

[Glory Lurker]

Thanks, Lucky. But why the vote against? Why not just abstain? Labour abstained on the equal rights amendment, which surely falls in the same category?

After posting last night, I remembered that I had posted after the vote about what I thought Labour's move was pure politics. My question last night was genuine - I can't see what prompted a vote against rather than an abstention.

[erin go bragh]

No one's made a single convincing defence of this flagship policy and it shows the lie of any claim to be progressive.

If you've got one then crack on.

Otherwise, you maybe shouldn't be trying to tell people how to post :wink:

Salmond gave a plan a,b and c regarding what currency we would use . All the bull**** from media saying we couldn't use this or that . wink

[The_Todd]

A genuine question for Labour people - why did Labour vote against the devolution of tax credits to Holyrood, as opposed to abstaining or, indeed, supporting it? I don't think I've got an agenda here (!), I genuinely do not know what informed the decision Labour made.

For starters, Tax Credits are now part of the Universal Credits system: it was never just a case of devolving "tax credits" with the wave of a magic wand. The SNP know this, the SNP know their sudden demands for tax credit devolution was unrealistic and never going to be voted through - and usefully the SNP now have yet another thing to loudly whine about. Pure politics from the SNP, and never anything designed to actually improve the lives of anyone.

Secondly, Labour stand firm on the pooling and sharing argument, the safety net of the welfare state should be paid in by all nations of the UK and the ability to take out from the shared pool should continue.

Thirdly, the Scottish Labour Party will be continuing to join the UK-Wide campaign to argue against the tax credit cuts across the whole of the UK from Gwent to Glasgow, not just seeking an exemption for Scottish people and screw the rest.

Even with all these things, the narrative from the SNP is, as always, Scotland = SNP and UK = Tories. Well that's fine, but why should we trust John Swinney any more than we trust George Osborne? Why is "Scottish Tax Credits" automatically better than "British Tax Credits"? It's just simple nationalism. The Scottish Government can already top them up to make the lives of those potentially impacted better, but the aim of the SNP is to prove the UK cannot and does not work and therefore they won't want to do so.

[Glory Lurker]

For starters, Tax Credits are now part of the Universal Credits system: it was never just a case of devolving "tax credits" with the wave of a magic wand. The SNP know this, the SNP know their sudden demands for tax credit devolution was unrealistic and never going to be voted through - and usefully the SNP now have yet another thing to loudly whine about. Pure politics from the SNP, and never anything designed to actually improve the lives of anyone.


I don't see how it would be any more difficult than the topping up suggestion you make below. A mass of administration to pay out top ups that it looks like will be clawed back as income. Whatever efforts might have been required to devolve the credits to Revenue Scotland, at least the outcome would not have been absurd.

Secondly, Labour stand firm on the pooling and sharing argument, the safety net of the welfare state should be paid in by all nations of the UK and the ability to take out from the shared pool should continue.

Thirdly, the Scottish Labour Party will be continuing to join the UK-Wide campaign to argue against the tax credit cuts across the whole of the UK from Gwent to Glasgow, not just seeking an exemption for Scottish people and screw the rest.

I think your second and third points are saying much the same thing - why should Scotland look to protect itself when we could alternatively suffer virtuously with the rest of the UK, hoping that the key swing seats in SE England will vote for a Labour government that radically puts the interests of the less fortunate first. Not for me, sorry.


Even with all these things, the narrative from the SNP is, as always, Scotland = SNP and UK = Tories. Well that's fine, but why should we trust John Swinney any more than we trust George Osborne? Why is "Scottish Tax Credits" automatically better than "British Tax Credits"? It's just simple nationalism. The Scottish Government can already top them up to make the lives of those potentially impacted better, but the aim of the SNP is to prove the UK cannot and does not work and therefore they won't want to do so..

As above, yes it can top it up, but only at a stupid cost and potentially for little benefit to those it is aimed to help. Oh, and the UK does not work :greengrin