The People's Jury: Guilty or Not Guilty?

In his excellent piece for the Telegraph (here) blogger Graeme Archer does a grand job of knocking down the rather, ahem, inetresting idea in the Guardian (where else?) that a randomly selected "jury" of 1,000 Britons ought to hold court on some of the big issues facing the public.

Putitng aside Archer's point about this unelected clique telling our elected parliament what to do and think (I am rather fond of the idea of parliamentary sovereignty and voting at election time to make my voice heard) the idea is doomed because it almost certainly won't get the protagonists what they want.

By dangling 3 big issues - MPs expenses, the banking crisis and phone hacking - in front of the public, all issues where the public take issue with "vested interests" and "big businesses" - they make the idea sound attractive. But consider this. Britain is - wait for it - a conservative (small "c") country. For the vast majority of the last century or so, we have had Conservative, Conservaive-led or Conservative-dominated National governments. There is, as we are now finding out, a big conservative element to the LibDems and also to the Labour Party too. We have had precious few radical socialist, or even just socialist, governments and the only time recently when Labour have "won big" is when they shifted to the right (i.e. to where the people of Britain are). Sorry Guardian readers, however few of you there are left, it is true. Go to a council estate anywhere in the country, where you might expect Labour support to be strongest. Ask them about Europe, or immigration, or taxation levels and see what they say; I distinctly remember one voter last time in the heart of Lakeham lecturing me about the evils of Europe, too many immigrants, tax too high etc etc and - you guessed it - he would still be voting Labour. Even Labour folk have a conservative element to them.

So if you take 1,000 random Britons you wouldn't get the spread I think The Guardian expect. And instead of asking them about MPs expenses, as Archer suggests, you put other issues in front of them, you might not get the answer you expect either.

So I lay this challenge to The Guardian, The People's Jury and its fans. With some polls putting support for a return to the death penalty at over 70%, would you be happy for the first idea for discussion to be the death penalty?

Dontcha just love indrect democracy - when it suits you, eh, Guardian readers? ;-)

Chaos at the HMRC?

I have today received my new tax code which, given the ridiculous problem where I was landed with a £2,000 tax bill only to have it written off after a week of complaining, I have great suspicions about.

I would urge everybody to look at this week's Panorma (click here for the iplayer version) which details the apparent chaos within the HMRC. My advice? Check everything, enquire if in doubt and follow everything through.

Apparently, we're all the taxman now.

Facing Both Ways?

Clegg on BBC today: "Any increase in taxation is unwelcome."

LibDem policy at every General Election I can remember has been ... to raise tax? So LibDem policy is unwelcome?

"Lessons to be learnt" admit LibDems as Cable's tax policies fall apart

The BBC reports on a very stormy meeting of LibDem MPs and frontbenchers who collectively tear apart the shambolic tax policies announced by Treasury Spokesman Vince Cable. Apparently they say that lessons will be learnt - will the first lesson be that not everything Cable says is gospel and, despite being the most influential LibDem in the country, he cannot carry the whole party and his own disasterous leader along.

5 steps to an acceptable tax hike ... but can it actually work?

Want to raise tax? Want to avoid the unpopularity that comes with wanting to raise tax? Follow these easy steps and you won't go far wrong!!

1. Only tax the "rich"
2. Define "rich" as anybody with a "million" of something
3. Make the tax rise sound small; only do things in demonination of "1%" or "2%"
4. Say the cash is for something very important indeed - so rich people are supporting good projects
5. Completely over-value the tax rise to make people think it is a great way of raising money

The trouble is that even if you do all 5 of these, most tax plans of this ilk tend to fall apart quite easily. Unless, of course, you think people will believe anything you say and do...

Obviously St. Vince of Cable has been taking the advice but already there are concerns about it. Even some LibDems are worried about this - they are worried because the people it hits live in some of their marginal seats in the South West and also South West London, and others remember the fate of Guildford in the 2005 over the "local income tax" policy (which shared a number of the criteria 1-5 too).

However I worry more that policies like this tend not to work. This one will hit house prices and independent financial experts have already said it won't raise anywhere near the figure that Cable claims. Houses that fall into the tax band will suddenly fall just under it - that is just one way to get around it. Many more will no doubt will be worked out later.

Cable has a position in politics where he feels and acts like he's untouchable. I think this may be a policy too far and not even his soft press can cushion the blow if it all falls apart in the wind.

Listening to Business

On Friday, I attended a business meeting, courtesy of Conservative Business Relations, for local businesspeople to meet with and discuss future policy with Shadow Business Minister Jonathon Djangoly MP at the City College building in St. Andrews Street. It was great to see such a big turnout of local businesses and clearly a sign that many people see us at a govenrment-in-waiting. I made a few remarks regarding changing educational qualifications - such as the Diplomas and Young Apprentiships - and their impact on business. I also spoke about educational achievement in Norfolk and the skills that school leavers require to add value to businesses. From the feedback afterwards I gather that this struck a real chord with businesses.

In addition there was much discussion about Norfolk's infra-structure, including work on the A11, A47, A140 and A12 and the rail network, the growth agenda around Norwich, red tape in business and support for the tourist industry. The businesspeople there were certainly angry with the government, and felt it was actively getting in the way of business in providing jobs and creating wealth. I was glad to see the Conservatives making promises to, for example, apply business rate discounts automatically instead of making firms apply for them.

Afterwards, along with fellow PPCs George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) and Chloe Smith (Norwich North) we did a video for the Chamber of Commerce about the event and future Tory policies on business which will go up on their website when it is ready (I will provide a link when it is ready).

The most important part of the meeting was listening to what business want and need from a future Conservative government; low tax, simplified regulations and an open market. Many businesses - such as some of the hotel owners from North Norfolk - reported good trading, but mant remain concerned about the future. That is why it is important that we stick together, listen to business and work our way through tough times together.

Cameron has another "moment"

I am starting to strongly believe that Cameron's leadership is marked by a number of significant moments - things that define him to the general public and, so far anyway, they are greeted with opinion poll bounces. The Inheritance Tax announcement was one such "moment", as was his 07 conference speech (the one without notes). Today, although events elsewhere mean it won't get as much attention, we may have seen another moment - on tax on savings.

Savers have been affected by the necessary reductions in interest rates whilst pensioners have suffered from a decade of Gordon Brown's tax raids. They are currently being championed by, amongst others, the Daily Telegraphy who should warmly welcome Cameron's pledges.

As well as supporting pensioners and savers during this turbulent time of financial turmoil, the Conservatives will take further economic measures to help the victims of Gordon Brown's recession.

The Conservatives' proposals include improving the flow of credit and saving jobs with a £50 billion National Loan Guarantee Scheme, freezing council tax for two years by cutting wasteful government spending, encouraging companies to hire again through a tax break for new jobs, reducing employment costs for small businesses by cutting National Insurance and helping them with cashflow by delaying VAT bills for six months.

Labour's tax and debt bombshells are taking Britain to the brink of bankruptcy. Their answer to the debt crisis is yet more borrowing. It is clear that the longer Labour is in power, the worse the economic situation will become.

Only the Conservatives can make the long-term decisions to get the public finances back under control with the proposed National Loan Guarantee Scheme and an Office for Budget Responsibility which would ensure that no Labour Government could bankrupt the country again.

It's a good plan and Cameron has announced it well.

We'll see how significant a "moment" it is and largely that will depend on the media coverage.

Clegg shows leadership over tax review

Having been on my holidays, one of the joys of returning home is sifting through all of the political news that you missed whilst in depeest darkest Devon. I understand that the LibDems are now mooting (but not confirming) abandoning Local Income Tax and instead backing a reformed land tax instead. So, let's check on how all these LibDem sacred cows are doing ...

The party of "1p extra tax for education" is now the party of low taxation.
The party of "tough liberalism" now believes you shouldn't lock anti-social youths up.
The party of students is now considering dumping its opposition to fees.
The party of scrapping the council tax now thinks it may be OK after all, if you tweak it a bit.

Only really the Iraq cow is still there, although fewer and fewer people notice that cow despite the occassional "moo". And what do I make of all this? Step forward my new hero ... Nick Clegg.

Now you'll be aware (and nobody believed me at the time) that I thought Chris Huhne was a much more dangerous LibDem leader for Cameron to deal with and that Clegg was a lightweight who would snap in the political wind. Although popular opinion may think that to be true (there is no love for Clegg on the doorsteps of Norwich), I think Clegg is (to quote Cameron) building a house with solid foundations.

Gone are the populist LibDem ideas, where the party would run a whole election with only 3 policies (Iraq, council tax and tuition fees). Gone is the idea that the LibDems are too nice, or too gutless, to have a real policy debate. Clegg is taking on his party and good on him.

Whereas the LibDems used to debate goldfish in bags or porn for 16 year olds, they now seem to be addressing some of the "hard choices" (copyright, T Blair) facing Britain.

Nick Clegg has taken a long hard look at their policies and their election result - LibDem PPC in Guildford, Ms Doughty, has long said that the LIT cost her seat in 2005 because it hammered young professionals and working families too hard. She was right, and credit to Clegg for seeing beyond the populism of "axe the tax" to think about an alternative. Louise and I were hundreds of pounds a year worse off under the LibDem LIT at a stage in our lives when we can least afford it, with 2 young kids. How many more people in our position realised this and didn't vote LibDem as a result?

Even though many of these cows are not yet dead, just wounded, it is clear that Clegg may yet have the political courage to take on his party - even the SDP dwellers. I don't yet know if he is Blair circa 1994 or Cameron circa 2006, but Clegg has shown in the last week he may yet surprise us all.

LibDems plan £20bn cuts to Health & Education

If the Tories had proposed the document launched by Nick Clegg today, to reduce tax and cut the overall level of government spending, then my blog post title is exactly what Labour and the media would have run with.

In fact, no matter what Hague, IDS or Howard said about taxes, Labour would translate that directly into numbers of nurses sacked or children in a class. But now, I believe that things have changed; firstly people have accepted that we are taxed too much, secondly people know that Labour's throwing money at public services hasn't worked and thirdly people know there is so much waste in public services that you can cut tax, reduce spending and not impact on frontline service delivery.

So well done Nick Clegg - you are saying what people are thinking and I strongly urge the Tories to make clear their committment to cutting tax and reducing waste. Now is the time to do this. But is it too late for Cameron with Clegg moving onto this turf?

No - for two reasons Principally the tax cut, less government gene is in every Tory and people know we are committed to it, whereas the LibDems seem to have discovered this after being thrashed in by-election after by-election. And also, if Cameron said this then his party would cheer him to the rafters; when Nick Clegg does it the left of his party nearly choke on their breakfast cereals. Clegg may have to fight for this every step of the way with his own party.

So Cameron still has time to make this issue his own.

The 10p Row Gets Worse

Never before have we witnessed such a mess as a Chancellor trying to get out of a political hole by carrying on digging. Yet today that is what we saw today from Chancellor Darling as he tried to put the 10p tax rate debate aside by putting up the tax allowance on the basic rate. This will cost £2.7 billion but ...

It is a one-off payment, a one-off solution to a problem created by Gordon Brown.

It is being paid for by borrowing! We'll end up paying this back one way or the other.

22 million better off, but only 4.2m of those were impacted in the first place and Darling still misses 1.1 million people!

It may have caused a humiliating backdown from Frank Field but it won't pass the opposition or the media test. The news is pretty damaging and the papers will say so. Darling will always have this U-Turn around his neck and the issue will become attached to Gordon Brown too.

Am I the only one who thought Darling should have started with an apology too? I also thought that both Osbourn and Cable did very well ... but they did both have an open goal, I suppose.

Poor old Darling; the unluckiest Chancellor attached to the unluckiest Prime Minister ever.

Bizarre Tax Changes

Thanks to Brown's last budget I, as a middle manager and teacher on post-threshold pay, am significantly better off because of his tax changes.

Thank you, Mr Brown.

However, my wife, as a part time primary school teacher, is significantly worse off.

Together I think we do end up better off, but why? Why is the lower income earner hit whilst my tax goes down? And why if income taxes are to fall should they do so on us?

This was a topic of conversation in school today; a lot of the teachers were much better off whilst many of our support staff colleagues - admin, cleaners and dinnerladies - were down in the dumps. Many of them swearing they won't vote labour on 1st May.

Why the Tories are making the running on tax again

The issue of the total tax take in the UK is set to become one of the cornerstone issues at the next General Election. When the economy was good, people shrugged off Labour's various tax hikes with a sense that at least they were paying for the investment in "schools 'n' hospitals" that Blair told us all was vital. The new electoral rule was that tax cuts were a vote loser; because any tax cut could be expressed not in pounds and pence but in the number of schools shut or nurses sacked. And it worked.

Now the chickens from the last 10 years are coming home to roost and improvements in public services are clearly not coming fast enough, people are starting to query all this tax. Residents on the doosteps are starting to ask a few harsh questions of the government - why are we paying so much tax, why has it had to go up so much and ... more importantly, can I keep more of the money I earn?

Because without better public services, people are finally challenging the last reason they had for putting up with tax rises year-after-year. I hope Cameron does put the focus on the reform of public services rather than just the funding of them.

I now think the conditions are right for the Tories to talk about tax cuts without being accused of being service-slashers. The rules of the game have changed. Labour convinced people that tax cuts mean service cuts. Cameron now needs to convince people that tax cuts mean a fairer society and reform leads to better services.

I think that residents are now willing to listen to Cameron and the arguement is on our side.

Frank Field: Right theory, Wrong practice

Labour MP Frank Field has had to put up with a lot over the years - not least being ousted from Blair's first government for being too radical and since then being treated by his own side as if he's about to defect to the Conservatives.

Well, today Frank launched rather interested reform plans that would charge people who earn over £150,000 a year an extra 10% tax which could be offset totally through donations to charity. You can read the BBC report here.

I am a great believer in charity; that some things are beyond the state and that people working together can do wonderful things for society. Much lamented US President Herbet Hoover once remarked that a single dollar given by free will was worth ten dollars given by the government. I happen to agree, and I think thats one of the aspects that makes me a Conservative. The act of giving is as much an important act as the amount itself.

So, anything which encourages greater giving has to be good - especially as this type of giving normally goes to projects ignored by the government. However, to force rich people at a financial version of gunpoint to give to charity rather defeats the point. I'm sure that, if introduced, this would net the government no money at all - most rich people would still rather give to a favourite charity than this unpopular goverment.

Frank Field is spot on in asking how we get more people, particularly the rich, to give to charity - but this plan is not the answer.

LibDem haven't cut tax ... how odd

Donal Blaney on 18DS has just reminded us that the LibDems are in power in Scotland and dozens of councils around the country and have never cut tax, despite the fact that they could. Good point ... so why should we trust them now?

Iain Dale also points to the fact that the LibDems have argued for higher taxes over the last 3 elections and have now switched. Have they accepted the political arguement for lower taxes? Dale once said that politics was like football - nobody switches from high tax to low tax like nobody switches from City to United.

The more I read about this, the more and more I feel we can't trust this LibDem plan.

LibDem Tax Plans

The LibDems often tell us that they hate the headline grabbing antics of Labour and the bandwagon jumping of the Conservatives. Yet they managed to achieve both today with their tax cut plans. Apparently they will cut tax, raise tax thresholds and support businesses, all by increasing the tax on the super-rich and increasing green taxes. Apparently this is fairer. It may well be, but it also doesn't add up. Iain Dale does a pretty good fisk of the policy here.

However, and I urge the Tories not to fall into this trap either, politicians seem to think that green taxes are dreadfully popular and will pay for nearly everything you want (in the same way that "cutting costs" used to). Green taxes are a good thing, but they are not sustainable. If you are taxing bad things like flying short haul then you have to accept that people will not fly (if not, then the green taxes aren't very green and don't work!). If people don't fly then you don't raise the tax. And thus your tax take falls. So how will the LibDems pay for their tax cuts in two, three, four years time? Will they then raise tax again or cut spending on health and education? Green taxes sound good but in themselves cannot have a tax policy built upon them.

Please, by all means, raise green taxes to support the environment - but don't think it will last to provide meaningful long-term tax cuts. It won't.

It may have got short term headlines, but I think this may cause the LibDems a long term headache.