WARNING: The Dangers of Loan-Sharks

Loan-sharks can be a real problem. Thankfully, in Harlow we have some dedicated campaigners like Gary Roberts, Trading Standards, and Jenny Smith of Harlowsave Credit Union, who are helping to highlight the problems. They have sent me the leaflet that you can see above. It is a warning to us all.

by Robert Halfon MP - Working Hard for Harlow.

Tax Cuts for millions not for millionaires

Today, Charlie Elphicke (MP for Dover) and I have published a joint article urging the Chancellor to cut taxes for lower earners. You see the full piece HERE, or below.

Tax cuts for the many, not the few. Let's increase the personal allowance to £10,000
By Robert Halfon & Charlie Elphicke

Tax cutting has to be as much about morality as about economics.  Both are just as important, and neither are mutually exclusive. For Modern Conservatives, the task is clear: Any tax cut must be affordable, help the economy to grow and be justifiable on ethical grounds.

For any tax cut to be credible in times of austerity, it is necessary to show that it can be funded. It must also benefit the many, not the few.  This is why Labour's plans are the economics of the madhouse. Labour's VAT cut would focus help on the better off, paid for by more Government borrowing. Only Ed Balls and Labour could dream up tax cuts for the few paid for by higher interest rates for the many.

For Modern Conservatives, tax cutting is in essence a moral creed – allowing people to keep more of their own money so they will have the choice on how, if and when to spend it. Starting with tax cuts for the poorest for who lower taxes would make the greatest difference. Unlike Ed Balls and Labour, Conservative tax cutting must be for the millions rather than millionaires.

So how do we square the circle? How do we help those most in need and boost the economy? Across the board income tax cuts meet the criteria of helping millions but are incredibly expensive.  A basic rate income tax cut of just one pence would cost £3.85bn in 2012-13, so the 3p cut suggested by Ed Balls and Labour would cost a cool £12bn. Not only is it expensive, it is unprogressive, as the rich would benefit most. (No wonder the country went bust!)

For our part, we see lower taxes for the lower paid is a greater priority than the abolition of the 50p rate.

So how can lower taxes for lower earners be delivered?  We believe that increasing the income tax personal allowance is the right way forward. It doesn't just focus help on the most needy in our society it is also popular with some 67% supporting an increase (against just 22% who support getting rid of the 50% income tax trap left by Gordon Brown). It provides a more immediate economic stimulus as the least well off are more likely to spend any extra money that is to hand. The Chancellor was therefore right to increase the personal allowance to £7,475 for the current year and plan an increase to £8,105 for the next tax year.

The media would have you believe that this is a Lib Dem policy. For sure it was included in the Lib Dem manifesto. Yet it is in truth a very Conservative policy that many of us were pushing a decade ago when the Lib Dems were still arguing for another penny on income tax. So while the media would have you believe that this is something that Nick Clegg is fostering, we do not see that Modern Conservatives should cede any ground as being the true parents of this policy. This is a tax cut that doesn't just help the lower paid, it incentivises the jobless from moving out of Labour's toxic legacy of benefits dependency. Little wonder then that Labour are making the case for tax cuts for millionaires over tax cuts for the millions they would prefer to see dependent on the state.

How do the numbers stack when it comes to taking poor people out of income tax? HMRC figures indicate that every £100 the personal allowance is increased costs the Exchequer £490m. So on the face of it, a £1,000 increase would cost £4.9 bn. However, in Budget 2011 (see p42, line 22), the higher rate threshold was adjusted so that only basic rate taxpayers would see the benefit of the higher personal allowance. In other words the change was made to focus the tax cut on the least well off. Hence the cost of a £630 increase in the personal allowance was £1.05bn. An increase in the personal allowance by £1,000 on this basis would cost the Exchequer £1.7bn.

Now, bear in mind that the personal allowance will rise to £8,105 from April. If we want to see the first £10,000 of earnings taken out of income tax altogether from then, the cost to the Exchequer would be £3.2bn.


Interestingly, this is the headroom the IFS is reported as saying the Chancellor has for the Budget. If there is the headroom available, as Modern Conservatives, we believe the Chancellor should indeed take the plunge and increase the income tax personal allowance to £10,000 with effect from this April.

Petrol Prices and unemployment : The Sun backs the Halfon/FairFuel UK E-petition for Cheaper Petrol

This week we found some information from the London School of Economics, showing the link between high petrol costs and unemployment.  I will post the details of the study later.  Meanwhile:

From today's edition of The Sun:

The Sun is backing my e-petition for Cheaper Petrol and Diesel, which I have set up with the FairFuelUK campaign.

So far, it has clocked up 55,000 signatures in two weeks. If we can get 100,000, we are very likely to secure an MP's debate in Parliament. This wil keep the issue of rip-off fuel taxes - and the need for cheaper petrol - high up on the Government's agenda.

Working together with FairFuelUK, I have been campaigning on this issue for many months now, including debates in Parliament, delivering a petition to Number 10 Downing Street, and even pushing a car up Whitehall.

Recently, I also asked the Prime Minister David Cameron about this at PMQs, and he gave a very supportive reply.

High petrol prices are the number one issue facing Harlow residents, and thousands of families and businesses are struggling with the cost.

Please sign our e-petition today - it only takes 30 seconds. Please also share this with your friends on Facebook and Twitter, and urge the Government to cut fuel duty NOW.


by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

The Sun backs e-petition for Cheaper Petrol

Today, The Sun backed my e-petition for Cheaper Petrol and Diesel, on page 2 of the newspaper. You can see a photo above.

In just a few days, the e-petition has already been signed by over 35,000 people. As the e-petition says, high petrol and diesel prices are crippling our economy. Many motorists now pay a tenth of their income just to fill up the family car, and millions of families are suffering.

Businesses are under immense pressure, especially the road freight industry.

But petrol and diesel are now so astronomically expensive, it is actually COSTING the Government money. This is because fewer people can afford to drive, leading to lower tax revenues.

Therefore, the e-petition calls on the Government to:

1) Scrap the planned 4p fuel duty increases, which are scheduled for January and August 2012.

2) Create a price stabilisation mechanism that smooths out fluctuations in the pump price.

3) Pressure big oil companies to pass on cheaper oil to motorists.

4) Set up a Commission to look at market competitiveness, and radical ways of cutting fuel taxes in the longer term.

You can show your support and sign the e-petition here.



by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Campaign for Cheaper Petrol Continues...

With economic growth running at a sluggish 0.2%, we urgently need a cut in fuel taxes. As I told The Sun this morning, petrol and diesel are just too expensive. This is especially true at a time when oil companies like BP are raking in massive profits.

The astronomical cost is hurting families and businesses all across the UK. This is depressing the economy, and with difficult growth figures and the Eurozone crisis, we need all the help we can get.

George Osborne took a bold and decisive step earlier this year, to abandon Labour's rip-off fuel escalator and to cut petrol duty by 1p. The Chancellor has now even hinted that he may look at tax cuts in the autumn. I am strongly urging him to cut fuel duty.

As I set out recently on this blog, the high petrol taxes aren't just bad for motorists. They're bad for the Treasury too. That's why I have written to the Prime Minister, pushed a car up Whitehall in protest, and raised this numerous times in Parliament.

My letter to David Cameron asked him to delay or abolish completely the planned 4p petrol tax hike, which will hit motorists on New Year's Day, January 1st 2012.

We urgently need lower petrol taxes, to bring jobs back to Harlow, and to get our economy moving again.

p.s. sign our petition against high petrol taxes at www.fairfueluk.com by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

RADIO: Robert Halfon on the Dave Monk Show

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

VIDEO : Fair Fuel Debate in Parliament

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Interview with BBC News about Fair Fuel

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Fair Fuel for Harlow Motorists

Today in Parliament, with the FairFuelUK campaign, I launched a new All-Party Parliamentary Group to look at the high cost of petrol.

When the fuel protests broke out in the year 2000, we were worried about 80p per litre, and the damage it might do to our economy.

But now even the cheapest petrol station in my town is charging 133p per litre.

This means the average Harlow motorist spends £1,700 a year just to fill their tank. A tenth of the average Harlow income.

The Government defines “Fuel Poverty” as spending more than a tenth of your income just to stay warm. But what about spending a tenth of your income just to drive to work?

Harlow families now pour at least £63 million of petrol into their cars and vans every year (of which about £40 million is tax). Not to mention gas and electricity bills, which are also spiralling out of control.

That is the story of Harlow: a town held to ransom by petrol prices.

But across the country we see the same tragedy.

Despite the UK being a net exporter of petroleum products, and despite the fall in the international oil price, our petrol prices are still sky-high.

Our Government is pro-growth and pro-business, but we need to do more.

I believe we must do three things:

1) Firstly, we need a fair fuel rebate, so that when the oil price falls, the big energy companies face a choice: Either cut prices, or the Government will impose a windfall tax on energy profits, and use the money to cut petrol prices anyway.

This would be a solution to the Great British Petrol rip-off, which saw the major energy firms announcing record profits in the first quarter of 2011.

The AA, RAC, and FairFuelUK have all said publicly, that if the 2p drop in the market cost of petrol had been passed on to motorists earlier this year, it would have wiped out most of the impact of the 2.5p VAT rise. That is why I have written to the big energy firms asking for price transparency.

2) We must commit to no more petrol tax rises in this Parliament. George Osborne has already cut fuel duty by 1p and scrapped Labour’s fuel duty escalator. He has also delayed inflationary rises by a year. But I would ask him to go further, and look at abolishing even the inflationary rises.

3) We must establish a Commission to look at radical ideas, and other ways for the Government to raise revenue, to address the unfairness where UK fuel duty is so out of line with the rest of Europe.

For example, we must look at more toll roads in exchange for significant cuts in fuel duty, and how a fuel price stabiliser could work in practice.

Above all, we must be on the side of striving people. Environmentalism must not become a luxury for the rich, with no substantive answers, other than regressive taxes on energy. It is very easy for the wealthy to insist that the poorest families should pay more in petrol taxes and utility bills.

And to those who talk about the VAT rise in January, I say that Harlow motorists are actually £1 million better off now, than they would have been under Labour, thanks to our cuts to fuel duty and scrapping the tax escalator.

But as it stands, motorists are still being fleeced. For the sake of future growth and jobs, we urgently need reform.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

The Labour party fratricidal soap opera isn't relevant: their destruction of the economy is

The last few days have seen the newspapers filled with the carry on's of the internecine warfare in the Labour Party. To most people, struggling to keep their heads above water, the Labour fratricide is pretty irrelevant.

However, from all the verbiage in recent days, one thing does stand out: The fact that in 2006, Gordon Brown was warned that Government spending was out of control.  Restraint was necessary. Note that this was way before the banking crisis and the world recession.  Instead, Mr Brown began a £90 billion spending plan, virtually bankrupting the economy in the process.  The collapse of the banks and global economic disaster, meant that there was no money left to deal with the crisis.  The argument that Labour failed to fix the roof when the sun was shining holds true.

What is fascinating is the 2006 Cabinet document which said : "We have spent all this money and what have we got to show for it".  I remember as a Conservative candidate campaigning under the slogan "Taxes up, but where has all the money gone".  At the time the Tories were mocked.  Who's laughing now? Certainly not the UK Taxpayers' currently paying £120 million a day in interest rates alone - to pay off the debts and deal with Gordon Brown's deficit.

You can read more HERE.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Before you need a Plan B it is worth having a credible Plan A

With all the talk of cuts, it is worth remembering that the coalition have pushed through £16 billion of spending reductions compared to Labour's plans for £14 billion. Moreover Government spending has not actually been cut - what has been reduced is the actual rate of increase in spending.

So the Labour Party are exaggerating about the cuts - all for party political advantage.

The latest gimmick has been over he weekend, when the Shadow Chancellor demanded a 'Plan B' and implied the economic recovery plan was not working. He could not answer what Labour plans were, or what the level of debt should be, even though his party is calling for a slow down in the Government's deficit reduction programme.  If this were not bad enough, today the IMF said that the Government's economic programme was working and did not need changing - despite Mr Balls indicating that the IMF thought otherwise.

Labour's weakness in economic policy has now been exposed. Electoral history shows that when you lose economic credibility, you lose the credibility of the electorate.

Harlow: The most entrepreneurial Town in Essex

​
One thing that I believe is truly great about Harlow, is that our town is full of entrepreneurs. We have a can-do hardwork culture. On top of this, we also have thousands of dynamic companies that take on apprentices, like Destiny Hairdressing in the Greenway, run by Danielle Field, plus many other local shops and cafes.

Many hundreds of these are mini-businesses: one or two people outfits, start-up companies, and entrepreneurs who run their business from home.

When I am out and about, people who work in these firms often tell me that they feel Government is getting in the way of jobs and growth. But I’m pleased to say that at last we have a Government that is making life easier for Harlow entrepreneurs.

First of all, residents will be allowed to start a business in their home, if they are a social tenant, for the first time in history.

Secondly, profits tax is being cut to 26p for large firms, and 20p for small firms.

Thirdly, we are extending the Small Business Rate-Relief Holiday for another year. This will save 900 small firms in Harlow at least £1,500 each.

Fourthly, we will fund an extra 250,000 apprenticeships over the next four years. Apprenticeships in Essex have already risen by 44% this year, including my own Harlow apprentice who works with me in Parliament.

Fifthly, we are bringing in lower taxes for lower earners, by raising the threshold of income tax nearly £7,500 this year, and again to £8,105 in 2012. This will make the average Harlow worker £326 better off than they are today.

Harlow’s entrepreneurial spirit is well-documented. We have 2,500 firms registered in the town, and new start-ups all the time. Perhaps this is one of the reasons that local unemployment is coming down?

Since the height of the recession, at least 500 people Harlow who were unemployed have come back into work. I am proud to say that Harlow is well and truly open for business. We are starting to make our mark as the most entrepreneurial town in Essex.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.8

A Budget for lower earners and Harlow families, for jobs and for motorists

With the current state of the economy, it was always going to be a difficult Budget.

We are currently paying £120 million a day in debt interest alone - that is £180,000 for Harlow residents, every single day.

But, despite the economic problems, the Budget has some good news for local residents in three ways:

1. A Budget for lower taxes for lower earners, and help for families. Harlow families will keep about £8 million extra in their pockets, after the Government raised the income tax threshold.

This will save most Harlow workers £200 a year. And there are further tax cuts on the way next year, saving Harlow people a total of £300 a year from 2012.

Getting on the housing ladder is becoming increasingly difficult, especially for young families in Harlow. That is why the Government has announced £250 million to help first-time buyers to purchase a new shared equity house or flat. This will help 10,000 families, and also boost our construction industry, and apprenticeships, supporting thousands of new jobs.

2. A Budget for motorists. The last Labour Government planned huge fuel tax rises on petrol. For months I have campaigned for fairer fuel prices - and met the PM directly on this - to help ease the burden for the 35,000 motorists in our town.

The Government has listened, scrapping Labour’s planned rise in fuel duty - and actually cutting the tax instead by 1p. We are also cancelling Labour's "fuel escalator" completely.

This will save Harlow motorists at least £750,000 this year at the pump, and brings to an end the frequent rises we saw under the last Labour Government.

3. A Budget for jobs. Thankfully, in recent months unemployment in Harlow has fallen. But since Gordon Brown's recession our town has suffered from deep unemployment and rising costs. This has put a burden on hard working people who just want to have a decent living.

To combat this, we are investing £300 million to create 100,000 work experience places for young people, in real private sector jobs.

On top of this we will create an an extra 250,000 apprenticeships over four years, and new “Enterprise Zones” with tax breaks and easier planning rules. I myself have taken on a Harlow apprentice in Parliament, and am encouraging other MPs to do the same.
With more than 2,500 businesses registered in our town, Harlow is one of the most entrepreneurial towns in England, and I have asked the Government to consider us to be one of the new “Enterprise Zones”. Our firms will benefit from an extra 2p reduction in business taxes, creating thousands of new jobs.

As well as being a Budget for families, lower earners, jobs and motorists, I am glad that the Government has protected NHS spending, and will spend money on poorer pupils through the pupil premium.

The pupil premium guarantees at least £430 extra will be spent on each Harlow pupil on free school meals - about 2,000 young people in our town, whose education will benefit from an extra £831,000 in every single year.

Finally, the freeze in Council Tax will save £72 a year for an average Harlow family. It has been an extremely tough year, but our economy is at last moving in the right direction.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

The Choice in Politics: Spendacola or Debt-A-Selzer

The Picture is thanks to Conservative Home.  The website states:



"Instead of proposing a credible set of their own cuts, they oppose almost every saving put forward by the Coalition, and loosely promise to reverse anything they particularly dislike. But then, when under pressure, they admit that they cannot in fact do anything differently.

Miliband said: “"I can make no commitment to do anything differently”.  Balls went further: “Ed Miliband and I are clear on this; no commitments to reverse these changes, they would be irresponsible”. So, hold on. With all these cuts, all this noise, all these headlines, all these policy launches, Labour can “make no commitment to do anything differently.” Why, then, should we listen to a word that any Labour frontbencher says? After all, they can make no commitment to do anything differently.

The path Labour chose yesterday is the path of empty opposition, not the path of the credible alternative."

You can read more HERE.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Hurting small businesses

Why is it that small businesses, which are the lifeblood of the economy - in a way which big global corporates never will be - seem to be hit hardest from red tape and higher taxes? I was reminded of this most recently, by a small business owner, who came to see me in my MPs' surgery.  He told me how his business was having to pay ever increasing taxes and charges, especially at a time of economic hardship.  His argument was simple:  in these difficult times, small businesses should not have obstacles thrown in  their way to make life even harder.

I could not agree more - and asked the following question to the Leader of the House of Commons, Sir George Young, during Business Questions last week:

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): Will the Leader of the House find time for an urgent debate on costs to small businesses? Two of my Harlow constituents- Mr Raymond Patten and his daughter-have a small business outside Harlow. Their business costs have increased severely this year, with business rates up by 50% and licensing costs trebling. Does my right hon. Friend agree that while this Government are doing many excellent things to help businesses, we must not give with one hand and take away with the other?

Sir George Young: I agree with my hon. Friend, and I see that there is a debate scheduled for Tuesday on support for businesses, which he may like to attend. He will have read the Government's Green Paper, "Financing a private sector recovery", which lists a range of measures the Government are taking to support small and medium-sized enterprises, such as a business growth fund of £1.5 billion, £200 million for the enterprise capital funds and support for the enterprise finance guarantee, as well as supporting SMEs through growth hubs. I will, of course, draw my hon. Friend's remarks to the attention of the relevant Ministers.

Whatever is being proposed, it can't come soon enough:  if we are to have an economic recovery, we need to ensure that our small business entrepreneurs are incentivised and not discouraged.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Labour and cuts

It is so easy for the Labour Party at present. Difficult decisions made by the Coalition Government - on welfare, higher education, local government and policing - can be opposed as 'wicked cuts' detrimental to public services. Much simpler to express outrage against Coalition plans to cut the deficit. Much harder for the Government to explain why paying £120 million a day in debt interest alone is unsustainable in the long term. Not least because all this debt repayment could otherwise be spent on public services.

Whereas cuts are immediate and real, dealing with debt - even if the economy is almost bankrupt - is much more abstract.

Yet, Labour's easy short term political gain might not be so clever in the long term. If after months and years of undergoing the political pain of cuts, the economy improves, with the debt and deficit reduced, the Labour Party could significantly suffer in the polls. By 2014, if the Coalition can announce lower taxes as well as more money for reformed public services, they will reap the electoral dividend.

To be fair, not all senior Labour politicians are so short-sighted. Douglas Alexander MP (one of Gordon Brown's top Lieutenants), has argued that Labour lost the election because they simply denied that cuts were necessary. Through their language and rhetoric, they came over to the public as 'deficit-deniers' rather than economic realists. In a recent speech he stated:

"As I argued within government at the time and as I still believe today, the repeated refusal by some to use the word "cuts" for many months after the global financial crisis and the repetition of phrases like 'Mr 10%' gravely damaged voters' confidence that we got it,".

Mr Alexander's honesty is refreshing. He needs to pass his message on to his colleagues on the Labour benches, if his party is to regain economic credibility.

P.S. You can read more HERE: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/nov/30/labour-gordon-brown-cuts-douglas-alexander?
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

The Comprehensive Spending Review

This is the question I asked the Chancellor yesterday about the Public Spending Statement:

I said:

"My constituents of Harlow will welcome this Robin Hood public spending statement, particularly the resources that are going to cold weather payments, apprenticeships, and help for young children. Does he not agree that my constituents would rather have lower taxes, and more spending on public services, than spend £120 million a day paying off the debt?"



by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Work and Pensions Department spent £115 million going to conferences over ten years

Ever wondered why the country is nearly bankrupt? Well, I have tabled Parliamentary questions to almost every Government Department asking how much money they had spent going to conferences, between the years 2000-2010.

Most Departments have replied to me saying that the "information can be supplied only at disproportionate cost". Well this is not good enough, and I have followed up these non-answers to my legitimate question, with Freedom of Information (FoI) Requests. I hope I will get proper responses over the next few weeks.

However, to its credit, the Department for Work and Pensions, did give me a proper reply, which you might like to see below:

Departmental Conferences

Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of
7 July 2010 : Column 323W
expenditure by his Department and its predecessors on (a) organising and (b) attending conferences in each year since 1997. [5938]

Chris Grayling: The Department for Work and Pensions was formed in June 2001 from the Department of Social Security (DSS), the Employment Service (ES) and some parts of the Department for Education and Employment (DFEE) and no information is available before that time.

The Department does not hold a central record of the total cost of organising and attending conferences. However, identifiable expenditure for management conferences and external meetings are provided in the following table:

	£ million
2001-02	6.705
2002-03	19.729
2003-04	12.284
2004-05	10.738
2005-06	10.640
2006-07	11.533
2007-08	11.532
2008-09	16.273
2009-10(1)	15.636
(1) The accounts for 2009-10 have not been finalised therefore are subject to change.

These figures do not include expenditure incurred by the non-departmental public bodies:

Health and Safety Executive; or

Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission, since its inception in 2008-09

That means that this Department spent £115 million on going to conferences, an incredible waste of taxpayer's money.

Yesterday, in the House of Commons, I urged the Leader of the Commons, Sir George Young to have a debate on Government waste:

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): Has the Leader of the House seen early-day motion 454 on the cost of Government conferences?

[That this House notes that the Department for Work and Pensions spent £115 million on management conferences and external meetings between 2000 and 2010; further notes that most departments have refused to supply similar figures in answer to written questions, arguing that statistics on conferences are not collated centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost; believes that the British public have a fundamental right to know how their taxes are spent by Government departments, and that Freedom of Information requests are being sent to every department which has refused to answer; and finally notes that the £115 million spent by the Department for Work and Pensions under the previous administration on management conferences and external meetings appears t o be a gross waste of taxpayer s ’ money, given that the public debt increased to over £900 billion in early 2010.]

May we have an urgent debate on Government waste, given that the Department for Work and Pensions revealed to me in a written answer that it spent £115 million going to conferences in the past 10 years?

Sir George Young: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for identifying areas in which central Government can reduce the cost of administration. I see that his early-day motion does indeed identify some very large sums of money that have been spent on conferences and external meetings. I will communicate with my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General and get a response on the issues my hon. Friend raises.

The tragedy is that this example, is just one of many in which Government Departments wasted taxpayer's money, instead of spending it on frontline services. That £115 million should have been spent on getting people back into work.

I will let you know when I get asnwers to the FoI requests.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

The Robin Hood Government

Is this Government the most Robin Hood like in recent times?

Labour are quick to mount the class war cry at the Coalition Government. Yet, even with public debt at £900 billion, the new Coalition have made every effort to ensure that more money has been distributed from the rich to the poor than in many a year:

- The Income tax threshold was raised by £1000, removing hundreds of
thousands of people from income tax altogether.

- A new 'pupil premium' will boost education for one million
disadvantaged school children.

- A new 'Robin Hood' levy on banks will be introduced from January
2011.

- NHS spending will be ring-fenced.

- The basic State Pension will rise by earnings, prices, or 2.5 per
cent, whichever is greater.

- Child Tax Credit will increase generously next year.

- An extra £60 million will help fund an additional room for carers,
over the next few years.

- There will be a two-year public sector pay freeze, EXCEPT for the 1.7 million on lower incomes.

- Council Tax will be frozen next year.

- Housing Benefit was capped at £250 per week for a one bedroom
property, £290 for two, £340 for three and £400 for a four bedroom property.
So hard-working families will no longer have to subsidise people to
live in mansions that they themselves could not afford.

- A Capital gain tax on the assets of the rich so that we no longer have a situation that they pay less tax than their cleaners.

Far more Sherwood Forest than Notting Hill don't you think?


Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

Preparing for the Budget

As we all await the Budget on Tuesday, most are bracing themselves for some very tough spending rounds.

I thought it might be useful setting out a few home truths, as the Opposition get ready to battle over 'cuts':

• In 2010, the Government will spend £701 billion, £155 billion more than it can raise by taxes;
• Public Sector debt is £900 billion;
• Public Spending as a proportion to GDP is at 48%;
• The UK has the highest deficit in Europe other than Greece.
  
  
  

It is worth stating that any cuts, are in fact Labour cuts, caused by their mis-management of the economy. We often forget that it is not 'Government' money that is being spent, but 'taxpayers'. All taxpayers have the right to know that the Government spends their money wisely - and does not spend more than it can afford. Taxpayer's money is not a bottomless pit: every spending decision means that somewhere else, taxpayer money is not being spent. The last Government - over thirteen long years - spent our money, as if it was an ever increasing pot, and often did not spend it well. Tuesday, will mark a return to good housekeeping and common sense with the nation's finances.

P.S. There is a good article in the Sunday Times well worth reading. Click HERE.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com