At the start of Budget week, Danny Alexander writes at Comment is Free that the coalition government is about more than balancing the books, but about enacting reform with a foundation of economic recovery.
He returns to the commander’s intent of the Liberal Democrat General Election manifesto, restating its four key policies –
- Fair taxes that put money back in your pocket
- A fair chance for every child
- A fair future, creating jobs by making Britain greener
- A fair deal for you from politicians
– and appropriately for Budget week, majors on tax:
Liberal Democrats should be judged not only by how we deal with Labour’s profligate legacy, but on how we deliver our own agenda. We may not have won the general election outright, but we are on course to deliver all four of our main priorities from our election manifesto. With a £2.5bn pupil premium, every child will get the chance for a fair start in life. The referendum on AV will give you a say in making MPs work harder for your vote. Investing in green jobs will not only support our economy, but will develop green technologies too.
And most importantly of all, this government will deliver a fair deal on taxes. Our ambition is that no one should pay any tax on the first £10,000 they earn. This will create a fairer country that helps those on lower incomes to help themselves. We took the first big step to get there last June, increasing the threshold by £1,000, from £6,475 under Labour to £7,475 this year. From next month, almost a million of the lowest paid won’t pay any tax at all.
This change won’t just help those earning less than £10,000. In fact, once you take all the coalition’s personal tax changes into account, everyone earning under £35,000 will be better off.
Read the full article at the Guardian’s Comment is Free.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The "Just War" tradition
Our kids need a lorra, lorra, larffs!!
West End Ward Tuesday Surgeries #dundeewestend
The Joy of Six 1275
Find Halloween and seasonal gifts in my Etsy shop today.
Pamela Manning
Simon R
Nonconformistradical
Peter Hirst
16 Comments
The LibDems have a good story to tell, but no one will listen until Nick Clegg unreservedly apologies for signing the Pledge to vote against the abolition of tuition fees.
@David: If he did that, he’d be one up on most Labour MPs. And two-up on the MPs who maintain they didn’t break the 2001 manifesto promise because the £3k fees didn’t come in ’til September 2005.
A good spoof article, although a little early for April Fools’ Day which is clearly when it should have been posted.
If the rumours are true that this week’s budget will announce that: “Planning laws will be swept away in a bid to unleash a wave of housebuilding; councils will be allowed to keep more of the tax paid by local businesses, giving them an incentive to approve new development.” (The Observer, Sunday 20 March 2011) then the Coalition will go down as one of the ‘least green governments ever’, as more unspoilt countryside and wildlife habitat is concreted over and destroyed. Such a laissez faire approach to planning is clearly unsustainable and damaging to quality of life in this small grossly overcrowded island.
@terry “this small grossly overcrowded island.”
what are you suggesting we should do about this ? (even if it is true which it isn’t)
Fair taxes that put money back in your pocket
Yes Danny – but lets not talk about the even greater amount of unfair taxes that take the money out of your pocket.
A fair chance for every child
So what exactly has happened to the promises on Sure Start?
A fair future, creating jobs by making Britain greener
Have you looked at the job figures recently Danny? I think you will find that it part of your job description. I f you think you are delivering on this could I suggest you stop doing so.
A fair deal for you from politicians
I think the opinion polls and by election results are telling you all you need to know about this one Danny.
In fact, once you take all the coalition’s personal tax changes into account, everyone earning under £35,000 will be better off.
Not if they’ve lost their job due to “the cuts”.
@ Simon McGrath
“this small grossly overcrowded island.”
City states apart England, as opposed to the UK, is getting to be one of the most densly populated countries on Earth. If you take just the part of this island south and east of, say, Preston the result is even worse. I was delighted to have the opportunity a few years ago to flee the south east despite its better climate for a less crowed corner and I regularly hear similar comments from others so you can hardly argue that it doesn’t matter to people even if you, individually, don’t mind being crowded.
As to what to do about it there is no idea solution. The least worst is to try and maintain equitable arrangements between neighbours to preserve as far as possible amenity without allowing others to impinge on light, outlook etc. That is we need some sort of planning rules which is not to say that the existing planning is good or could not be improved – it is clearly not as good as it should be. A laissez faire approach would be a disaster although no doubt good for filling Tory Party coffers.
@Matthew Huntbach
If they’re *earning* then surely they haven’t lost their jobs. Hence your comment is a bit of a non-statement.
A fair chance for every child? With all the education cuts and Local Education Authorities dismembered?
I’m not saying that all Local Education Authorities are great – or even good. Some schools, in some areas, will be pleased to be rid of them. Others will lose much needed support and will struggle to replace this in the market place. Some academies will flourish, others will sink – the logic of the market, tough on the children caught in the middle.
I seem to recall a government that was very fond of saying that reform was essential because children only get one chance. Let me see, who was PM at the time? Ah yes, the grocer’s daughter from Grantham.
I think that achieving ‘priorities’ is admirable. But ‘priorities’ are negotiable. Promises are not.
There has always been a shortage of Liberal Democrat contributors to the MSN UK Politics Message Boards. Some of you may be aware that MSN closed that site today, with just a few days warning. The “refugees”, including myself, have started our own site at Proboards, and would welcome some Liberal Democrat supporters (and anyone else who might frequent this site) to tell us more about how your party is delivering its promises in government – and anything else you care to mention!
http://cuttingedgeuk.proboards.com/index.cgi
I suggest you read John Howson’s review of educational change before you claim any credit in that area.
The pupil premium has no benefit whatsoever as it has been more than wiped out by the 80% cut to devolved capital. Expenses such as IT which used to be met from the capital budget now have to be met from revenue and the premium just fills (some of) the gap.
@Nigel
Thank you for putting the Pupil Premium in its place. I wish Sarah Teather would admit the same. In schools we have LAs telling us how bleak it is and then Lib Dems in the media tell people schools are hardly affected.
As for IT, such a great tool to enhance good teaching and to engage the iPhone generation, not to mention its essential role in catering to pupils with special needs, people are reluctant to believe that it could be under threat. It is about to lose its footing due to inconvenient financial pressures such as staff salaries and building maintenance.
@Ivan White – thank you for posting your link. I had not been aware of the MSN site but I will now migrate to yours.
I hope that, there, as a Liberal Democrat (still, but only just) I will be able to say exactly what I think about what is happening in the Coalition.
Rebekah – you’re welcome, and you can say what you like about anything on the new site (as long as it’s not libellous, racist or homophobic!). We’re developing, by consensus, a ‘light touch’ moderation policy, and anyone who joins us now can help to formulate it.
On the old MSN UK Politics site, there were plenty of Labour, Tory and even UKIP supporters, but very few Liberal Democrats. That was a pity, because the best discussions will always include all shades of opinions (I’m sure Shirley Williams would agree!). That’s why I’m hoping that some Liberal Democrat supporters, and maybe others who use this high quality site, will join us from time to time in our new venture:-
http://cuttingedgeuk.proboards.com/index.cgi
George W Potter
If they’re *earning* then surely they haven’t lost their jobs. Hence your comment is a bit of a non-statement.
But then you’re talking purely in terms of present tense, so you can’t say they are better off because better off than what? The sentence assumes better off than some time in the past. Danny Alexander is saying his government means everyone who was earning £35,000 at some point will be better off at some point later than that because they will be paying less tax. I am pointing out this is untrue because as a result of his policies many people are losing their jobs and so are considerably worse off.