Fixing the Economy:Tax Rises

Could William Hague be guilty of bribery or was it just a publicity stunt when this morning he announced that a new Conservative government would not only keep taxes low, but also would legislate to make rising  taxes illegal. This appears to me to be a shallow attempt to coerce the electorate into voting Conservative while imagining that the general population are avaricious and unintelligent. Firstly, even though a UK Parliament could make a law to not to rise taxes, the very same Parliament may also pass a counter law saying that it can, at any time that it chooses (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32510931). I simply do not understand why the idea of tax rises is so bad. I believe that you pay for what you get, tax less and you get less: less jobs, less nurses, less libraries, less homes, less high quality education, a less healthy, literate, informed and happy population. We all pay tax to receive services and if we want services that will provide a good quality of life for everyone we have to be prepared to pay for them.

The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) also think that taxes should rise. In their Manifesto 2015 (http://www.cipfa.org/cipfa-thinks/manifesto2015). They believe that "Vote winning policies will only serve to damage the public interest". They say that the current set of cuts and the "Austerity" model is unsustainable and that cuts during a growth period is unprecedented. It has not and will not reduce the deficit and that Government has to budget for the medium and long term. One of the major problems is the increasing proportion of people over the age of 64 to those between 16-64: it estimates that state pensions will account for around 16% of government spending by 2019. They emphatically state "If debt levels are to remain sustainable: either taxes will have to go up, substantial cuts will need to be imposed on other budgets such as education, or care and pension levels will need to be cut. There are no other options."


So, the Green Party are committed to raising taxes. At least we are honestly stating that, we are not giving hollow promises that we will or will not keep or taxing by stealth, such as student loans or uping VAT. We understand the reality and we know that by investing in public services tax payers will get value for money. More tax means more jobs, more nurses, more teachers, more buses, more affordable homes, more care and more equality. A common question asked of Green Party election candidates is "... and how will you pay for that?". The frank answer is "by increasing taxes". However, the tax increases are targeted on people who are well able to pay them. The Green Party 2015 Manifesto sets out in fully costed detail what taxes will be increased or introduced (https://www.greenparty.org.uk/we-stand-for/2015-manifesto.html). Some will be unpopular, for example the reintroduction of the fuel duty escalator, higher duty on tobacco and alcohol. Whereas other will be popular, reducing the tax gap between the highest earners and the general public with a new top level 60% income tax. This on its own could raise £120 billion per year. We will wage a war on tax dodgers with a new army of HMRC recruits, reinstating posts that have been cut. There will be some tax reductions, for example, employers' national insurance and VAT on housing repairs. We will take the money in, like every government does but then we will reallocate the money and channel it into the things that matter. We will give you back your money, as hospitals, trains, houses, nurseries and schools.

Numbers are good, targets are bad

I received this reply to the previous post from a Maths student, and I thought that it was worth sharing

 "Something that is important to input here is that currently, the numbers approach isn't working. But much of the operational research (mathematicians who aim to make the world more efficient) cannot give optimal (or most robust) solutions to the end user because politicians come in and tell them that they have to input 5000 new nurses etc so they have something concrete to give to the constituents. I would like an approach that embraces the power of numbers, statistical models, predictive and prescriptive approaches but also has an element of the qualitative about it also.

 There should not be targets to be hit numbers, but using the numbers to better understand where things go wrong in conjunction with the doctors and nurses. Giving patient outcomes as a measure of performance, not numbers in and out. I think using numerical approaches but also perhaps learning a thing or two from customer service specialists would do well. And I mean to say this not in to get the suits in, but working how to perform at your best as a team, talking to people who may have good suggestions."

I think that the point is that numbers help us to understand how the world is, and that targets to make greater numbers do not change the world. Using numbers to make informed decisions will. Numbers and statistics are not the bad guys, it is the fairground "High Striker" approach that is.



Photograph by By Hedwig Storch (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

National Heath Service

A voter has drawn my attention to a cross party Bill that Caroline Lucas MP (Green Party) presented to the House of Commons on 11th March 2015. It was supported by 11 other MPs from the Liberal Democrats, Labour, SNP and Plaid Cymru. I have read this National Health Service Bill to restore the NHS as a publicly funded and accountable service with very great interest. I am a passionate supporter of the National Health Service not only because I was born in Tredegar, birthplace, home and constituency of Aneurin Bevan, the Minister for Health commonly considered the architect of the NHS (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/bevan_aneurin.shtml)  but also because my entire family have had good service from the NHS since it's outset. 

I think that sometimes people forget the concept of the NHS. It is not a charity, it not a gift from a rich donor, it is not a commercial body trying to make money for shareholders, it is not something that "The Government" provides from some imaginary pot of money. It is a service that each and every individual in the UK pays for out of taxes, and just remember that we are taxed in many ways, VAT, duties on alcohol and tobacco as well as income tax. We all own the NHS, we pay into it to provide a service to us when we need it, for going to the dentist, for having our eyes tested, for pregnancy and contraception services. Just imagine the cost of having a baby if you had to pay the midwife, doctor, surgeon, nurses. This treatment is given unquestioningly because it is equally available irrespective of job, class, colour, creed, gender or sexuality. It is neutral and judgemental because it is about improving the health of our nation as a whole, from cradle to grave. 

Recently, I have been concerned about reports in the media of hospital failures of hygiene, lack of nursing care and overloaded emergency services and I believe that these issues have come about through the internal market system imposed on NHS services. This focuses far too much on financial outcomes and achieving statistical targets as opposed to real care for the patients. As a service for all more energy should be spent on co-operation, open science and working together in order to improve health. I do therefore fully support the inclusion of the National Health Service Bill in the first Queen's Speech of the new parliament, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2014-2015/0187/15187.pdf.

Incidentally, I was campaigning at the weekend for the NHS to be kept as a public service.