Think tank slams government, but it’s one for the ‘good news’ files

I think nearly all Liberal Democrats will take this as good news rather than bad:

The highly-critical assessment of the coalition’s first year in power was delivered by the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) – which was founded by Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith.

And it comes just months after the former Tory leader himself risked stoking tensions with Liberal Democrat colleagues by renewing calls for the state to reward marriage financially.

In a report to mark the anniversary of the power-sharing deal, the CSJ complained that the tax break plan had “moved off radar” because of opposition from the Liberal Democrats.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

8 Comments

  • You only have to look at France’s income tax to see how unfair and illiberal our own is. A transferable tax allowance between married couples would be the first step in reforming our own. What’s so wrong in giving a very modest tax break to families where a parent chooses to stay at home and dedicate themselves to their family and society?

  • LondonLiberal 11th May '11 - 10:06am

    “What’s so wrong in giving a very modest tax break to families where a parent chooses to stay at home and dedicate themselves to their family and society?”

    It’s not a tax break to ‘families’,. though, is it? it’s a tax break to ‘married couples’ – who may not have children. If my partner doesn’t believe in the need for a piece of paper to prove our commitment to one another, why should we suffer financially?

  • @London Liberal
    Because at its base level marriage is a state recognized partnership. The state can’t give tax breaks to couples who don’t register their relationship. Anyone who objects to marriage because it’s “only a piece of paper” needs either their head or their motives examined because if its not that important why not go along with it?

    @Lee Dargue
    Much of what I said to London Liberal also applies to your comment. Your question needs rephrasing because a straight comparison isn’t possible. For the transferable tax allowance to benefit a married couple one of them has to either not work or be earning less than the allowance, therefore the question is in fact:

    Why should someone, who’s married to a partner who’s not working, pay less in tax than I, someone who is single?

    And the answer is quite clearly because the person who is married is financially supporting someone while you are not. For the same job and the same pay, you are better off than them financially and so should have to pay more in tax. Unless you believe we should all pay the same tax irrespective of our ability to pay then objecting to the married couples tax allowance is illogical.

  • Andrew Suffield 12th May '11 - 8:02am

    Because at its base level marriage is a state recognized partnership. The state can’t give tax breaks to couples who don’t register their relationship.

    If you wish to make this argument then you must first make marriage available to everybody.

    Because let’s not beat about the bush here. The Tory “marriage tax break” proposal was not about families, it was about kicking gay people.

  • @Andrew Suffield

    People in Civil Partnerships would also have been entitled to the transferable tax allowance, in keeping with the principle that civil partnerships and marriage are equal. Lets not beat around the bush, you are ignorant of the facts.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • TonyH
    Goodness me, some people are really tying themselves in knots trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. The seat needs a new MP. Tragic circumstances...
  • Lorenzo Cherin
    Mark, the best piece I think in a while, on here! And the standard is often high!! Liberal, must indicate, flexible, otherwise it is not a Liberalism I recog...
  • Andrew Toye
    I do not see the conference decision to "stand a candidate in every seat unless local members agree to stand aside" as a turn to tribalism - far from it. T...
  • Christine Headley
    I was in a seat where we were stood down for the Greens in 2019. Most seats like ours are by definition weak, but by standing down we are made weaker still. Our...
  • Peter Reisdorf
    For people like me, living alone and working from home, the last lockdown in the middle of winter was a nightmare. I finished work and went out for a walk, but...