Westministenders: Hey Hey we're the Monkies.

[RedToothBrush]

Welcome to the Listening Parliament.

Have you noticed it yet?

The Three Monkeys of See No Evil, Hear No Evil and Speak No Evil have been in a bit of a fight with didn’t fair well. Its funny how politicians of all shades and levels are desperate to prove just how good they at listening and how they see the problems.

Its quite incredible to think that officials elected to serve the public are even in this position where they are having suddenly think about how they show they are listening. It rather shows up that they have been accustomed to telling the public what to think and what to believe.

What they are still to work out, is that in saying they are listening, they also have to demonstrate they are listening and be credible.

The trouble is, that even though some of the monkeys have been killed off, we still have a lot of monkeys in parliament. 'Monkey say, Monkey do' actions still lurk. Politicians who imitate others without understanding the consequences.

There is no point in listening if you are only listening to one group and don’t understand the consequences of simply repeating the words of others.

Politicians saying they are listening when you can find dozens of incidents where they have said completely the opposition, without having the gumption to explain they have changed their position and without having the grace to explain the evidence that has lead them to change that position rather undermines the idea they are listening.

U-Turns are not a bad thing. U-Turns can show that you were making an error but were wise enough to admit that and why you were wrong. U-Turns are bad when you fail to acknowledge your failings and only do it to chase votes. This is where cynicism creeps in and lack of trust in politicians occurs.

Listening also requires actions to reflect words. There is no good in saying one thing, if your actions don’t reflect that. This is where the Listening Parliament is already failing. And I’m sure we will see it more.

Above all, listening is only part of a conversation. A politician is supposed to be accountable. They are supposed to have their eyes open to evil, not deaf to it and not unwilling to speak inconvenient truths where they recognise the evil.

Any politician who tells you they listen needs to back it up somehow. They need to demonstrate and justify their positions accurately. If they don’t they aren’t listening properly.

Isn’t it funny how it was in Hartlepool that the monkey got hung for being a Frenchman? No one was there to explain differently.

I've never understood the obsession that some people have with Oxbridge. They are good universities, sure, but also rather peculiar and there are at least twenty other good universities in the country of various levels of peculiarity. I'm particularly amused by the idea that it doesn't matter if you don't get in as an undergrad as there might be other chances later. If you're going to stay on at university that normally means research, and the top research groups in certain specialisms are often not at Oxbridge. Indeed, there are a few areas where I would advise against postgraduate study at Oxbridge if you want to come out with your sanity intact.

But this comes back to the question of what higher education is for. Seems to be badges and buttons as far as I can tell.

On the subject of willingness to pay more tax for public services polls have shown that people are actually willing to do this, despite their being this assumption that they are not. A quick Google shows this one on NI from January. It isn't a huge majority, but it is there and shows that the conversation is worth having.
yougov.co.uk/news/2017/01/12/majority-people-would-support-raising-national-ins/

This poll also shows an increasing number of people willing to pay more tax: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40408576

My local council held a consultation a couple years ago on how to deal with the Government cuts. One of the questions asked if people were willing to accept a raise in council tax to reduce the impact on services and how much would they be ok with it rising by. Keeping in mind that a local referendum has to held for any raise over 2%, a majority of people said they would accept a rise up to the 2% mark. Dispite this the county councillors refused to raise the council tax that year.

I do not think that there is really as clear an unwillingness to pay more tax as people seem to think. There is a myth that we are all selfish individualists that don't have a shit about our communities and this myth seems to be fully believed by a lot of Tories. I do not think there is any actual, real evidence for its basis in truth. When faced with the actual facts and options, I believe most people would pay more to ensure they and others around them get social care, health and community services.

If you're going to stay on at university that normally means research, and the top research groups in certain specialisms are often not at Oxbridge.

That's true of course - some top research specialisms are at Oxbridge and others are at one of the many other fine universities in this country/the world.
But something that has changed massively over the past few decades is the proportion staying on for post-grad qualifications to then take those into industry, not to stay on as a career academic. Oxbridge has a considerable cache with employers - much more, in most cases, than whether the professor who supervised this candidate's D.Phil was the top for a particular, very narrow, speciality.
I wouldn't disagree that Oxbridge is peculiar in many ways. But many people like and value what both places offer, and my comments were addressed to a poster whose DS clearly does.

As for the question of what higher education is for - I'm a believer in the acquisition of knowledge and adding to the sum of human understanding for their own sake. But Oxbridge is not the only place to do that of course.

Interesting. A thread discussing taxation and representation.

Presumably in honour of tomorrow ?

As a foreigner, I don't expect to bite in general elections TBH. First of all where do you draw the pine between those who should be voting (because they will be staying in the U.K. for a long time and those who are merely passing by??)

But what about the fact that you are required (on pain of jail) to pay your taxes to HMG ? Shouldn't you have some say where they go ?

And why the distinction between local and general elections, anyway ?

I wasn't too annoyed not to be able to vote in the presidential elections, but I did dislike intensely that I was not able to vote in (or stand for) local elections.

Placemarking in a desperate attempt to catch up!

EU citizens can vote in local and European elections and (in NL) also for the water boards. It is an EU thing ec.europa.eu/justice/citizen/voting-rights/index_en.htm

Interesting bit at the bottom on that citroen on ex pat voting rights.

Indeed Hash...Disenfranchisement is very non-EU.

I would pay more tax, BUT the govt would need to close all those loopholes that mean the rich can pay a good tax advisor to make sure they pay half nothing.
I'm pretty convinced just closing those now so everyone (people and companies) paid what they were intended to would raise a lot of extra cash.
It gets my goat that PAYE employees, who make up the bulk of low to middle earners, can't avoid tax in the same way as self employed/corporations.

Lh Germany allows EU citizens to vote in local, regional and EU elections, not GEs

Afaik, I can vote in every kind of election in Germany except GEs - and there are a lot !

citroen your link on voting rights is interesting. Even when the EU is talking in terms of EU citizenship there seems to be a recognition of supremacy of country of origin nationality, hence the desire to move to protecting country of origin national voting rights rather than acquiring it in country of residence.

Interesting from a Scottish pov because the "local government" nature of the Scottish Parliament was used as the mechanism to extend the franchise for Indyref1 but this appears contrary to the spirit of National voting rights for what could have resulted in an Independent country.

When it comes to taxes, I'd maybe look at raising the VAT rate.

Given that most foodstuff and kids clothes are zero rated, in theory it should mean that those who can afford to spend more, pay more. We currently have one of the lowest rates in the EU and the highest threshold for registration.

I think this would be the fairest way to raise taxes.

And I would scrap the reduction in corporation tax. It was fairly low as it was.

I don't feel EU / UK citizens need to vote in each other's GEs, BUT that's provided they retain the protection of the ECJ

• policies wrt immigrants are set by national govt and is obviously a vital area where expats are more affected than the natives

However, with ECJ protection, expats don't need to vote in GEs, where voting is on a wide range of issues and where expats may not have the detailed knowledge, or the commitment to a longterm view.

I'd make profit on property sales subject to Capital Gains Tax, including primary residence.
Property should be to live in, not for windfalls.

It's the only way I see now to tax the windfalls that the mostly middle-aged / elderly gained, not by being more clever or hardworking than the younger gen, but mostly by being born at the right time & place.

I wouldn't make any allowances for improvements either. People do those for their own enjoyment & comfort, anyway, not for the greater good of society.
No loopholes for the wealthy with their clever accountants to exploit.

I'd have the rates the same as for income tax, so 25% up to the limit, then 45% etc PLUS I'd add levels, so that at 1 million profit the CGT is 90%
That will stop London property being boight up and left empty by the world's mega rich.

< lights blue touchpaper and retires >

I'd be happy to pay more tax if it meant we could have a functioning NHS, schools and welfare state. However if the government can magic up 1.5 billion pounds to pay off the dup then I don't believe they are as broke as they claim.

I'd like to see rent controls brought in - I think it would discourage buy to let landlords, and save money on housing benefit payments.

I quite like your tax plans for housing bigchoc

Totally agree a house should be a hine not an investment.

With that in mind, no council tax discounts for second homes.

I wouldn't object to CGT on sale of primary residence but would need to be appropriate allowances to take account of inflation, as used to exist for non-residence. However I would say that as house prices are still at 2008 levels in most of Scotland.

Also agree on rent controls and security of tenure.

Unoccupied 2nd properties in Scotland can already be subject to 100% council tax surcharge.

Interesting tweet by Jo Maugham QC:

"Facts won't kill Brexit, or logic or commonsense: Brexit's immune to that stuff. But it will never withstand 20 months of British pisstaking"

If only...

What if all taxes (maybe a few exceptions) were increased by a small amount?

Income tax
VAT
Council tax
Fuel
Capital gains
Council

Would it spread the pain? Or make life awful for a lot of people?

mother the US taxes primary residence gains. There is a generous allowance after 2-5 years residence rather than indexation ($250k for individuals and $500k for couples according to wiki). This was the rule which caught Boris as his London property gains were not under the double taxation treaty as they were not taxable in the UK.

The other way to deal with the risk to the ladder would be roll over relief.

The UK ladder, as pointed out by Red earlier, is already broken as the gaps between stages are too large and the bottom rung is too high leading to ageing first time buyers.

whenshewasbad my sense is that this approach would just stoke an inflation / wage spiral disproportionately affecting lower earners.