Gaining in Government, Differentiating from the Tories

Being a Liberal Democrat is not always never easy but some things have the power to make it all worthwhile - and in the last few weeks there have been a number of things that fall into that category.

I've discussed Equal Marriage here, here and here. And equal marriage legislation is something of which we can be, justly, proud.

But there have been other things which have made me proud to be a Lib Dem: The raising of the personal allowance as far and as fast would never have happened under either a Labour or Conservative Government: millions have been lifted out of Income Tax and millions more have had their Income Tax cut.

On Leveson, Nick Clegg set new parliamentary precedent by setting out a distinctive Liberal Democratic response from the Government front bench.

Liberal Democrats have also been central to the introduction (from 2015) of shared Parental Leave: allowing parents to decide what best works for them when they have a newborn child.

This week, two parliamentary committees have challenged the Government: the Home Affairs Select Committee has called for a Royal Commission into Drugs and the Joint Committee of the Houses of Commons and Lords has torn apart the Draft Data Communications Bill.

On both of these issues, Clegg has stood up and supported the outcome of the reports in direct conflict with the Prime Minister and the Home Office.On both of these issues he has stood firmly, and vocally on the side of Liberalism.

Here is the Deputy Prime Minister in his letter to Members and Supporters this week:

Dear Andrew, 

Do you want the Home Secretary to be able to order the storage of vast quantities of data about who you email and call, your physical location, your web browsing and Facebook sessions? No, neither do I. Untargeted, blanket powers like these are an invitation for future governments to invade your privacy.

That's why this week I pressed the pause button on the Communications Data Bill that was going through Parliament. A special committee was established to look at the legislation and its conclusions, published on Tuesday, were crystal clear - the legislation didn't strike the right balance between our security and our personal privacy. We need to have a fundamental rethink and produce better proposals which give the police and security professionals the powers they need without going over the top. 

My decision sparked controversy in some quarters, with the usual allegations that by attempting to protect civil liberties you are, by default, on the side of terrorists and paedophiles. I’m not usually inclined to dignify such arguments with a response, but let me just repeat what I said in the papers: of course we need to look at what new technology means for how we protect people from serious crime, and we will need to take new measures to address the problem. But we can do that by striking the right balance between our collective security needs and our individual right to privacy. 

That is a difficult balance to strike - even more so when you are in Government. But it is no use standing up for civil liberties in opposition if you then forget all about them in power. It’s the same pattern that sees politicians rule out a sane approach to drug laws until they are safely out of office and only then they reveal they always favoured the kind of approach this week’s Home Affairs Select Committee suggested - a willingness to look in an open-minded way at all the evidence and alternative ways of dealing with the problems caused by drugs. 

In all of this I am bewildered by the way some of the biggest opponents of any kind of independent regulation of the press see no problem with the apparently limitless Government regulation of individual citizens. Liberalism for me is about protecting people from overmighty institutions while enabling people to get on in life. That’s not easy and we must always ensure that we ask ourselves tough questions, but I’m confident we are playing our part in getting the balance right. If you want to help the Liberal Democrats as we campaign for civil liberties you can support us here.

Thank you,

To subscribe to Nick's weekly letter, click here.

Andrew

A special mention to Julian Huppert MP who (along with Lord Strasburger) was a member of the Joint Committee and is also a member of the Home Affairs Select Committee. A true Civil Libertarian and justly one of our most highly regarded MPs.

What will YOU do with YOUR Sixty Pounds?

This is another post about the Liberal Democrats push to increase the Personal Allowance towards (and beyond) £10,000. I make no apologies for that, although I do promise to focus on other things in future posts.

I mentioned in this post about Caron Lindsay's idea that we should relate the figures of tax saved to real-life examples of what this money could be spent on. It appears that Caron's wise words have been listened to by the party as members got an e-mail from Party President, Tim Farron on Friday.

In it he discussed this issue and launched a website encouraging people to think about how they would spend an extra £60 a month. (This represents* the basic rate tax saved by increasing the Annual Allowance from £6,475 when the coalition took power - which was unchanged from previous year - to £10,000.)

So what are you doing with the £16.67 you're already saving in income tax each month? What would you do with an additional £43.33?

For myself, it'd make things a bit more comfortable while I pay down debt and save for a trip to Australia. I appreciate, though, that that isn't going to help with an economic stimulus, so I shall also purchase new clothes, which are even more desperately needed now I've lost over a stone in weight!

You can respond here and say what you would do? Note that the website asks for an e-mail address which is, presumably, for authentication purposes but may also lead to you being added to a mailing list.

Once you've completed the form, the site will also give you information about the impact of the policy locally. In Bristol, 16,200 people will be taken out of Income Tax altogether.

Andrew

*Pedants note - the actual figure before rounding is £58.75.

Winning the Arguments on Tax (2)

Earlier this week, over on Lib Dem Voice, Stephen Tall reported on a ComRes poll for the Independent which saw 60% of respondents agreeing with the proposition:

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People on high incomes should pay more in tax in order to take people on the lowest incomes out of tax altogether.

As Stephen points out, this isn't quite Lib Dem policy (which is to seek to tax wealth whilst taking lower income families out of tax) but it does show a general support for the principle of the state seeking to supporting those with the lowest income and wealth in society through the taxation system.

Stephen provides some analysis of the figures, based on the poll's tables (which you can find here). 

I'd like to add a couple of points:

The tables show the policy is supported by a majority in each social group although this support is weaker amongst those in the "higher" groups. 

More surprisingly, though, support is weakest amongst younger people, who would be amongst the likely beneficiaries, which suggests a (probably general) need for greater engagement with these (18-24 and 25-34) age-groups.

There's a few other points that are thrown up in the tables but which probably fall outside of the remit of this blog - you may find another post on the subject appearing over on the the widow's world sometime!

Andrew

Winning the Arguments on Tax

Courtesy of Mark Pack's Facebook page, which is a fabulous resource for Lib Dem related (and general political) news, here's a link to a photo of The Times' editorial yesterday which considers favourably the principles underlying Lib Dem tax policy: a presumption towards the taxation of wealth as opposed to income.

And it's not just The Times: Tim Montgomerie of Conservative Home also advocates tax cuts and (an element) of increased Wealth Taxes, although he comes at this from a somewhat different angle.Tory MP Mark Reckless has popped up on the wireless advocating Council Tax rebanding and closing of Stamp Duty and Capital Gains Tax loopholes. The Spectator has an interesting report on two papers from the OECD which would also appear to support this position.

Of course, there are still a number of disenting voices on the right... you can always rely on The Telegraph to see moves to rebalancing the burden of taxation as "cynical targetting of the better off"...

Andrew

Every action...

...has an equal and opposite reaction. It's an irrefutable law of physics (at least for now, although we did think that nothing could travel faster of light and that is now being questioned...)

It could also be a law of coalition politics - the Tories and Lib Dems are able to press ahead on things on which they agree and give way on other things with with which they don't. Earlier on Facebook, Caron Lindsay posted a link to this Huffington Post piece by Louise Phillips which deals with exactly this. Every time you hear a Lib Dem talk about increases in personal allowances remember that Tories gave up plans to increase the Inheritance Tax Nil Rate Band, (re-)introduce Married Couples Allowances or remove the current 50% "Additional Tax" band.

Caron being Caron, though, she didn't leave it at a just a Facebook link - she's written her own excellent post on the subject. She succinctly points out that the reduced tax has been swamped by people's experience of high inflation and wonders whether it is better presenting the facts as practical examples of what this could have purchased rather than just pounds and pence.

As inflation comes down and this year's annual allowance increase (whether that be the £8,105 previously announced or a new, higher figure urged on Osborne by Lib Dem ministers) kicks in, she'll have to think of bigger examples of how the Liberal Democrats are making a positive difference to people's take home pay, and their monthly finances.

Andrew

Lib Dem Gains - Bristol Edition

Earlier today I, along with party members throughout the UK, got an e-mail from Nick Clegg's office which outlined how some Liberal Democrat gains will impact on local areas - in my case, the City of Bristol. As a result, here's a special local edition of Lib Dem Gains:

• 158,000 people are getting a £200 income tax cut (a move which benefits 23 million people across the country
• 4,700 people have been lifted out of paying income tax altogether, with more to come
• £625 million extra has gone to Bristol schools, aimed at the most disadvantaged pupils and set to rise to £2.5 billion a year by 2015
• 64,800 pensioners have been given an extra £4.50 a week – and those retiring from today will be on average £15,000 better off over their retirement.

For those of you in Scotland, or otherwise interested in Scottish politics, mosey on over to Caron's Musings for a list of the gains that could be had from voting Lib Dem there this year.

Feel free to add your own local figures in the comments section, too.

Andrew