A 1p / 2p raise to income tax should lawfully trigger a general election

[TesChique]

There are vague promises in manifestos, and there are those which are explicit and should be binding except in exceptional circumstances (war etc)

If labour, or any party reneges on a core manifesto promise it should lawfully trigger a general election

They have lied to the public.

AIBU to think we need to see this change in law?

Do you really think that the pre election Labour Party genuinely believed that they would be able to fund their proposed spending (and presumably union commitments) by being a bit more careful than Rishi?
I’m not suggesting that such a fundamental change could be implemented without other changes (ie. more data sharing) also being legislated. I can see the obvious issues with OP’s manifesto/GE idea, but it doesn’t stop me from loving the notion that GEs would be better run if political parties were held accountable for the stuff they say.. if we aren’t voting for the promises made to us, what are we voting for?

Just to add, there is a huge volume of fiscal data published by IFS/OBR/ONS/etc already, and the civil servants you mentioned are most likely the same people who would be employed by the new incumbent to deal with the details/process - what I would like is to vote for actual plans from a party with an actual plan..

I don't think they ever said "....and we will fund this by being a bit more careful than Rishi", or did they?

Yes, I know they will be the same civil servants after the election, but my point was that the election runners (which isn't just one other party, by the way) have not had access to them for the previous five years and in the run up to calling the election (they can't access them as much once it's called, admittedly).

Trump has barely begun wrecking the global economy.

So it isn’t an excuse then for Reeves and Starmer.

Ik some people hold Trump in focus for everything but I was just reading about the valuation of Nvidia, and other firms in US. That profit is a lot of tax take.

Overall I don’t really share your view on this but still it doesn’t add up to excusing Reeves and Starmer lying about not increasing taxes.

@Negroanyby Reeves’ own admission see OBR quote

Labour's manifesto is, "fully funded and fully costed - no ifs, no ands, no buts… no additional tax rises."

"I have been very clear that every policy we announce, and every line in our manifesto, will be fully costed and fully funded."

“Nothing in our plans requires any additional tax to be increased.”

“We’ve got the Office for Budget Responsibility now… You don’t need to win an election to find out [about the public finances].”

“I don’t believe that fiddling around with tax rates is the best way to grow the economy.”

They did try other things rather than raising income tax, people had issues with every single one and this is all thats left 🤷🏻

the system is broken, it doesn’t work but the last way to fix it is to say that as soon as ANY party changes their plans (or lies…) a general election should be called.

i would like cross party decisions made on some of the big issues like the NHS and changing how our political system works…to make it actually work

Purely selfishly, my pension and investments have shot up since Trump introduced Tariffs..... global markets have done very well, some investments have moved away from the US to Asian and Euro markets too.

However, will it last and it doesn't help Reeves, lower Gilt yields have though, caused in part by Reeves not ruling out tax rises.. ironic!!

Labour made a mistake with their no tax rises GE promise, they'd have won anyway, perhaps with a lower majority.

It is amusing to see the usual suspects moaning about Labour tax rises, whilst not bothering about Tory Tax rises..... or the Hunt NI cut, which is costing the country £11 billion per year to fund.....

Imho the UK isn't doing great but ok, we ve avoided a recession, unlike in 22/23 when under Sunak, we have, relatively speaking, some growth, inflation is 3.8%, it was 12% under Sunak.... with food inflation running at 30%.....short memories!!

Hopefully Reeves can cut some welfare spending, increase unearned income taxes and avoid PAYE tax increases at the lower rate.

One politician i hope doesn't resign is Badenoch, she is doing a sterling job of ensuring the Tories never get back into Govt..... polling alongside the Greens, when with Labours problems, they should be cleaning up.

The Tories blamed Labour for 18 years!

Are Labour doing fantastically? No, and I don't think it was possible for them to do so given the state of things. They're not being quite as bad as it appears though, it's that the majority of major media platforms are against them so only highlight the negatives, and will spin any positives as negatively as possible or ignore them.

Frankly though, all the parties seem to be in denial. We have an aging population and a falling birth rate. This is expensive. Add to that the gutting of social care and the knock on effects to the NHS, and then everyone else who uses the NHS.

This issue has been known about for decades, and very little has been done, because all the options are unpopular. Just like seriously tackling the housing crisis by bringing down house prices would be unpopular, and seriously working to reduce carbon emissions would be unpopular. None of this has been dealt with properly because none of them looks further than 5 years ahead.

So you’re one of the champagne socialists that can afford to vote Labour then. I’ve barely got two pennies to rub together, let alone hold a string of investments 🙄

Our benefits system is spiralling out of control and the MH issue is the equivalent of the bad back in days gone past. Labour are useless and want a large public sector with gold plated pension schemes and they are even blew about wanting a 4 day week. Anyone ever tried to get hold of Birmingham City Council, HMRC recently.

You can never tax your way to growth Reeves.

It was a promise they never should have made. Personally I think that they should merge NI and Income Tax to close a few loopholes. Maybe reverse Hunt's cut to NI.

It's about time that dividends and capital gains were fairly taxed too. Why must those of us on PAYE pay more while those who own all of the assets get preferential rates?

It's not sensible to think that only poor people have the right to vote Labour.

> I asked Chat GPT
So it's safe to ignore you

if you pay £200 more as a result of a 1% rise in your tax, you're already paying £20,000

I think democracy is in a very tricky position.

Lots of people are huge advocates of the NHS and high levels of public spending on spiralling welfare payments but either can't or don't want to fund any of it. It is very easy to vote for something that you don't think you will be funding and may well be the beneficiary of. As more of the population becomes dependent on the state this is hugely problematic for democracy as turkeys don't vote for Christmas and those that stand to gain from a spiralling welfare system will vote to maintain it whilst everyone else is stuck footing the bill.

Even in this context this is spectacularly controversy as it's so clear that Labour lied to get into power. There was absolutely no way they could even maintain current spending levels without raising major taxes. They have fiddled around with deckchairs on the Titanic and caused immense harm to delay the inevitable. Many political parties break manifesto promises but doing this so early in a Parliamentary term and so dramatically does call the whole system into question. What are we actually voting for if no party is held to any of their promises and a party like Labour has free reign to do whatever they like for five years if they get a big enough majority without having to go back to the public to check if they actually have a public mandate anymore?

Why a party like Labour? That applies to all political parties. Look at all the promises Reform councils are currently breaking because there’s no fat left for their promised cuts. Before the election the Tories were promising tax cuts they couldn’t possibly deliver. They didn’t fund the NI cut they unsuccessfully tried to bribe the electorate with.

Basically the country outsources fiscal responsibility to the bond markets.

This is how excessive spending ends normally. If the politicians can't enforce austerity, the bond markets will by refusing to lend.

Labour are petrified of the bond markets, as bond market enforcement is normally punitive and results in a rapid end for the party in power.

You can see at the moment they are watching the situation like a hawk and hovering ready to take action the minute Labour exhibit any signs of largess.

They are also watching carefully whether or not Labour will follow their fiscal rules. The fiscal rules are a double edged sword, because yes if you implement them then you will gain some kudos and lower rates while you follow them. But if you then break those rules or try to fudge there will be a serious price to pay.

Reform Councils are slightly different because they are stuck with a load of unfunded statutory obligations. They don't have the power to actually override these because they are decided at a national level.

Labour don't suffer from the same problem at a national level. They have all the power they need to do whatever they want and yet they are seemingly paralysed by their own left wing and lack of initiative. It is well known that the population generally don't trust Labour with public finances and many don't support tax and spend agenda. This is why Labour had to promise not to raise the key taxes as a commitment to being fiscally responsible. It really was vitally important on order to get them elected and yet they are going to break this promise less than 2 years into power. We now have three years with a party that has very little of their initial manifesto intact. Again, the question is who voted for this? How is this democratic?

The Tories didn't get into power so it isn't the same as something that is actually happening right now to actual people with very real tangible consequences. Labour have had loads of ridiculous manifestos over the years (Corbyn anyone?) but if you don't actually get into power and wreck the economy then it doesn't really count the same

@Marshmallow4545 "Reform Councils are slightly different because they are stuck with a load of unfunded statutory obligations. They don't have the power to actually override these because they are decided at a national level."

There is nothing "different" about the difficulties Reform councils face. Except possibly that they wrongly claimed they could overcome them by austerity.

Honestly I think democracy may have run it's course. Too many people are voting for the things they want but for other people to pay for it. It's not sustainable.

It is different than the problems faced by a National government. They can't change national law and legal protections.

What makes it sustainable, or at least more sustainable in the long term, is government debt.

But ultimately governments can't create wealth from nowhere, so either they spend within their means, or at some point they will trash the currency.

It rarely ends well for governments who trash their countries currency.

So democracy does have a built in limiter - it's more a question of whether the people want it applied or not, because when that limiter comes in it normally gets pretty horrible for everyone.

That, of course, applies to all local councils at all times. There is nothing special about the difficulties facing Reform councils.

Indeed but the poster I was initially responding to suggested that the Reform Councils were no different than the Labour government in terms of their inability to deliver policy. I was simply pointing out that Local Council powers are extremely limited compared to national government. Local Councils are very much at the mercy of National Government.