Budget representations

I have made representations for more money for social care and for local schools in West Berkshire and Wokingham. I have also urged action to reduce excessive business rate rises, where the government has now indicated its intention to take some helpful measures tomorrow.  I look forward to the budget to see what results.


  1. Lifelogic
    March 7, 2017

    All the indications from Hammond are that it will be an “Osborne continuation” budget. So it will be completely wrong headed. Yet more back door (perhaps front door too) tax increases, ever more misguided red tape everywhere, quarterly reporting to HMRC for everyone, bonkers sugar taxes (on some sugars only), maintaining stamp duty at up to 15%, keeping 45% income tax, still ratting on the inheritance £1M budget, putting IPT tax up to 12% and perhaps even further, putting business rates up, more attacks on pension pots, the self employed, landlords and tenants, more silly schemes and endless distracting complexity …..

    With the tax mainly to be pissed down the drain on augmenting the feckless, providing rather dire public services, the appalling & rationed NHS, greencrap lunacy subsidies, moronic vanity projects like HS2 and Hinkley, gender pay reporting other moronic PC absurdities.

    This is not really the right budget for anything, let alone an early election that Willy Hague seem to want. I think he is right for once. We will not get a clear Brexit without an early election under May.

    Where is the pro business, pro growth, cheap energy, lower tax, cut the red tape vision – there is none. No vision at all really, just yet more socialist like Heath, Major, Osborne and Cameron in the wrong party.

    1. Glenn Vaughan
      March 7, 2017

      “This is not really the right budget for anything….” Lifelogic kindly informs us.
      Why has he had advance notice of the Budget’s contents before anyone else?

      Furthermore if his opening paragraph is correct then why would anyone sane advocate an early General Election with such an uappealing backdrop?

      Truly bonkers!

      1. Lifelogic
        March 8, 2017

        Hammond had already set the scene in his interview with Marr. The budget was dreadful, it was the same big government (tax, borrow and waste) Osborne agenda as I predicted.

    2. Derek Henry
      March 8, 2017

      You should learn the actual accounting between HM Treasury and the BOE. Your taxes and everyone elses is destroyed in the overnight interbank market.

      They are destroyed in a very simple process so that the BOE can meet its overnight interest rate.

      Word of advice. Taxes fund nothing since we left the gold standard. They control inflation and promote goods over bads and that’s about it.

  2. Lifelogic
    March 7, 2017

    Have you made representation for far lower simpler taxes, cheap energy, far less red tape, far less government and a sensible “lets actually grow the economy” agenda?

  3. Anonymous
    March 7, 2017

    Thanks. Could you also have a word about proposed drink drive limits (to zero.) This will ruin country pubs.

    Fatalities aren’t being caused by ramblers having a pint with a baguette after a hike.

    Drunk drivers who kill are generally well over the existing limit so will ignore the new one too.

    And packaging fatty food in plain wrapping ? As with tobacco packaging and sugar tax – we have had enough of busy bodies taxing and punishing everyone because of the few.

    The latest on insurance tax (punishing those who do the right thing and have third party insurance) …

    Such things in this country are at risk of spoiling business and criminalising everyone to the point that they lose all respect for the law and disobey it in ever larger numbers.

    1. Lifelogic
      March 7, 2017

      “Drunk drivers who kill are generally well over the existing limit so will ignore the new one too.”

      Indeed they will. They are often showing off to mates or racing friend too. Rarely are they the person driving home gingerly at or around the current alcohol limit. Interestingly cycling is far more dangerous statistically than driving at about the current alcohol limits but the government encourages that.

    2. acorn
      March 7, 2017

      If we had a general election now, do you think the UK would be set to become a “one party state”? A year or so back, I suggested to JR that the UK was gradually climbing the North Korea democracy scale since the 2010 election. Naturally, he said that was nonsense.

      Outside of the EU; ECHR and the ECJ, there would be no recourse for the little people of the UK, who would be more and more oppressed, by a single political party, that was 100% tethered to the Corporatist Spiv City of London. The little people would be back to a classic English feudalism existence.

      Discuss, marks will be given for anything that shows signs of intelligence. You have 3 hours for this paper, your time starts now.

      1. Anonymous
        March 8, 2017

        Acorn – In electing to Leave the EU we elected for big change – in 2010 Britain was in the EU without sign of leaving it. EU membership did not prevent our ascendancy in the North Korea democracy scale, indeed the EU, ECHR (the HRA) and the ECJ were oft used by our ministers as an excuse for unpopular decisions and inaction.

  4. Mark Watson
    March 7, 2017

    As a (genuinely) self employed person I await the budget with interest.If as seems likely Hammond scores another own goal and increases class 4 nics from 9-12% I trust he will abolish Class 2 contributions and furnish me with all the perks employees receive?

  5. alan jutson
    March 7, 2017

    Thank you.

    I hope your representations are successful, but shouldn’t we really have fair system to start with. !

  6. John
    March 7, 2017

    Was at a live music pub venue at the weekend and there was a request for our continued support as the business rates were going to be racked up.

    Yes its a town that has seen huge population growth but its not delivering increased business for pubs nor live music venues, the population growth is from countries that don’t frequent these places. They should not have these rate increases as it destroys a native culture.

  7. Bob
    March 7, 2017

    What is needed is a good look at the way the money is being spent.

    Is simplification of the tax system just another fogotten promise?

  8. margaret
    March 7, 2017

    Off topic but John how do you decide which debates to turn up for and are others discussing in the antechamber whilst the house is in session?

  9. agricola
    March 7, 2017

    Much good sense coming from the Lords on fracking this evening. Nothing so far from the Nimbys so I’m off to bed.

  10. Jack
    March 7, 2017

    So you say “prosperity not austerity” yet admit the government wants to reduce the budget deficit (aka the non-government surplus) further. This is austerity. You also say you want more bank lending, but banks lend based on income. Austerity directly reduces people’s incomes.

    The UK economy is extremely fragile. The latest sectoral balances show the reduction of the government’s budget deficit, in combination with a growing current account deficit, has eliminated the private sector’s surplus and now the household sector is borrowing at an unprecedented 2% of GDP. Financial crisis part 2 on the way? Certainly looks like it’s already underway in America, with the private credit structure under pressure from tight fiscal policy (hopefully could change under Trump and his tax cuts).

  11. Derek Henry
    March 8, 2017

    John is right on the money.

    It is quite simple, if there is unemployment taxes are too high and if we ever reach full employment which is around 2-3% then taxes are too low.

    Taxes do not fund the monopoly issuer of £’s. They control inflation and help regulate aggregate demand that then allows our private sector to adjust and grow and create jobs. VAT and national insurance and interest rates can be used also.

    John is right to concentrate on productivity because we are getting close to full employment but wages are low right across the board. Being more productive is key to increasing those wages. Which will also destroy jobs.

    Hence there lies the problem.

    Maybe a transistion job or a job guarentee would be the answer pay people £375 per week and by backing retraining and recruitment into the new more productive jobs in the public sector.

    So they can learn new skills that the private sector are looking for. So we then create a pool of employed people on £375 week in a transition job. Rather than a pool of enemployed on £75 per week.

    I know what businesses would prefer. Aggregate demand on £375 per week with employed people they can choose from to hire.

Comments are closed.