A former shadow cabinet member has attacked Mr Howard for calling Tony Blair a "liar", and other senior Tories are saying he is too cowardly on tax. The first battle is set to be played out today as Oliver Letwin, the shadow chancellor, will tell party members he cannot propose tax cuts during this week’s conference because no one would believe him if he did.I read the speech made by Mr Letwin to the Scottish Conservative Conference earlier this year and was distinctly unimpressed. No one will believe that the Tories will cut tax until they admit that state spending needs to be slashed and it's a pretty poor "conservative" party that can't see where to start. Getting rid of state employees' pension schemes would be a useful beginning. On taxation, the Tories should promise the abolition of all inheritance tax and also get rid of taxes on savings.
A libertarian returns to Scotland
"Freedom and Whisky gang thegither"
- Robert Burns
Monday 4 October 2004
Who trusts the Tories?
Not even senior Conservatives it seems:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Comments made on previous template:
David Rainey
Andrew, the ~50% Thatcher peak was 45.8% in 81-2. There then followed 12 consecutive years of tax cuts, hence the reputation I would guess. But it did take them 7 years to get back to Callaghan levels. David
5 October 2004, 16:41:45 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
Me again above. Computer playing up.
5 October 2004, 13:59:02 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Guest
-"can you tell us what taxes went down, and when?"
Andrew, on this point, I have just seen a new term: "stealth tax cuts" in this BBC article "Fuel protest costs treasury £2bn yearly":
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3716346.stm
Could "stealth tax cuts" catch on?
5 October 2004, 13:58:18 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Alastair Ross
Overall,under the Conservatives from 1979 to 1997, taxes increased in real terms by 1.8% per year on average, while overall spending increased by an average of 1.7% per year, again in real terms. Both of these numbers correspond to a decrease in taxation and spending as a share of GDP, as the economy grew, on average by 2.1% during this period.
5 October 2004, 00:36:07 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
David Rainey
James, no, the numbers don't work that way. You're right, though, that revenues did go up when taxes were cut - thank you Arthur Laffer - but for most of the 80's, total tax revenue as %age of GDP were higher than 1979.
You are also right that total taxes were cut from 90 to 97 ending up around 34% by the time TB&GB arrived.
David
5 October 2004, 00:34:28 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
James Hammerton
Stuart,
Could the rise in tax take as a %age of GDP by the Thatcher government be an example of the cutting of tax RATES leading to an increase in tax REVENUE?
Also, didn't the tax take go down (along with public spending) towards the end of the Thatcher era?
4 October 2004, 19:54:55 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
David Malloch
The Tories are the proverbial Chocolate Fireguard, they are as useless at Westminster as the SNP are at Holyrood.
They will not likely get back into power for a good few years, and if Labour wants to take advantage of its free run, now is definitely the time to do it.
For it will not last forever, governments fall eventually and oppositions become governments. One day - probably - there will be a Tory government at Westminster and an SNP one in Edinburgh.
4 October 2004, 19:17:42 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
Stuart, Stewart, Steuart, Stiobhart are all the same name. When Mary Stewart became Queen of France the House of Stewart changed the spelling to Stuart, cos the language lacked a "w". Another legacy of the Auld Alliance.
4 October 2004, 14:02:47 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
Thats OK Andy. Its not like me to fly off the handle.
The 39% figure comes from a recent The Economist article. The nearly 50% figure comes from the same source about 15 years ago. The Economist is an august, liberal, free-trade and free-market publication (founded by a Scot by the way), and although I often have quibbles with it (especially its nutty "Scotland and North of England Correspondent") I do generally trust its impressive statistical output.
Tax-take as a % of GDP is the measurement best suited to international comparison, and to comparisons over time; and shows that the UK has a comparatively low, and declining, level of tax.
4 October 2004, 13:58:11 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Andrew Duffin
Eek! Spelled the name wrong, humblest apologies.
4 October 2004, 12:56:00 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Andrew Duffin
Not doubting your facts Stewart (I assume you've researched) but if Mrs. Thatcher was taking 50% and Blair is only taking 39%, can you tell us what taxes went down, and when?
4 October 2004, 12:55:16 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Stuart Dickson
It is a myth that the tories were ever the party of low-taxation. A truly low-tax government has not existed for over a hundred years.
Taxes soared under Thatcher, despite her windfall from Scottish oil and gas revenues. At its peak Thatcher's tories were ta**** nearly 50% of GDP in tax. Blair's government is ta**** only 39%; far lower than the European average.
4 October 2004, 11:34:21 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply
Alastair Ross
Labour's attitude to taxation resembles that of the English Puritans to bear-baiting.The practice was banned, not because it was regarded as cruelty to bears, but because the masses derived pleasure from it. Similarly, taxation is regarded as deprivation of upper income group pleasure, whilst the debilitating effects of profligate welfare spending on the underclass are ignored.
4 October 2004, 08:27:22 GMT+01:00
Post a Comment