Pickles cuts Council Tax for granny flats

The Communities and Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles has been having a busy August - including announcements to help motorists, to make it easier to fly the flag, to diminsh wheelie bin blight on our pavements and to encourage more bungalows. He has also attacked Labour's plans for a tourism tax and encouraged councils to take action against illegal traveller sites.

However the item that I was especially pleased by was the Council Tax cut for those who build an annex to their home with it's own entrance. Those providing "granny flats" should be encouraged rather than punished. The alternative is for the state to step in with institutional care - and spiralling costs to adult social care budgets for local authorities.

At the moment there are estimated to be 24,150 family annexes in England. The Government would like there to be far more annexes - as well as more conversions of outbuildings and new extensions. Apart from the Council Tax cut the government has streamlined planning permission for conversions and is also confirming that it intends to remove the community infrastructure levy on self-build properties, including all extensions, family annexes and home improvements.

Ministers also intend to seek to remove Section 106 housing levies on such annexes and extensions – a ‘stealth tax’ slowly being introduced by town halls.

It is true that for pensioners there is already this exemption regarding the Council Tax. However the arrangement is unsatisfactory. What happens when the elderly relative dies? Then the garage or basement or barn that has been converted into a flat might sit empty yet still is being taxed at a higher level - around £500 a year more - than if it hadn't been converted.

Finding out who put up your council tax? Good luck with that

Paul Osborn is Executive Director of Conservative Way Forward. Follow Paul on Twitter.

Having just put the finishing touches on Conservative Way Forward’s startling new report on local government, I am still shocked at the implications. I know that many people out there don’t know who their local councillor is, or even what authority they come under. I also know that lots of people aren’t interested in local politics, believing it makes no difference who is in charge.

When we buy a new phone, or a new television, we want to know exactly what we are buying, what the best price is and how it has been reviewed by consumer magazines and by other buyers. The internet makes this easier today than it has ever been. You can scan in a barcode and get the cheapest price and latest reviews without even leaving the shop or you can get all the information and order from your armchair.  

Oxfordshire County Council proposes new bus lanes to raise revenue from fines

Oxfordshire County Council, a Conservative/Independents alliance, is proposing new bus lanes with the explicit intention of increasing revenue from fines. There are already far too many bus lanes. They are imposed to punish motorists rather than with a balanced view of whether they reduce overall journey times. Where bus lanes are in place, the damage they cause by increasing congestion could at least be limited by allowing taxis, motorcycles, and cars with two or more passengers to use them - a policy that Conservatives have considered in the past.

The proposal from Oxfordshire is particularly dubious after the ruling for Barnet Council that reinforced the existing law that councils can not increase fines on motorists in order to subsidise spending elsewhere. Not even other transport spending - for example a contribution to the Freedom Pass for pensioners using the bus or the tube.

In her ruling on the Barnet case, Mrs Justice Lang said:

"Where a public body uses its discretionary powers to levy taxes, the courts will strike down demands which are unauthorised by statute. In Vestey v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1980] AC 1148, Lord Wilberforce said at 1172D/E: "Taxes are imposed upon subjects by Parliament. A citizen cannot be taxed unless he is designated in clear terms by a taxing Act as a taxpayer and the amount of his liability is clearly defined."

Sounds right to me. It's a great thing about the British constitution that we have the rule of law rather than a bunch of state gangsters helping themselves to our money whenever they feel like it. It goes back a bit further than 1980. The Magna Carta of 1215 said "scrutage" - as tax used to be called - could be taken having "obtained the common counsel of our Kingdom."

In 1689 the Bill of Rights added:

"That levying money for or to the use of the crown, by pretence of prerogative, without grant of parliament, for longer time, or in other manner than the same is or shall be granted, is illegal."

I am pleased that Cllr Arash Fatemian, the Cabinet Member for Finance in Oxfordshire, is open-minded about finding ways to reduce costs and raise revenue. Renting out the County Hall as a wedding venue sounds good. I have already offered his council some other ideas that could be used instead of putting up Council Tax. The council leader dismissed criticism of the Council Tax rise saying this was "London/urban myopia." Then the council elections in Oxfordshire saw the Conservatives lose 14 seats and overall control of the council. Perhaps rural voters don't like tax hikes either.

But when it comes to imposing taxes without the authority of Parliament, under the pretence that they are fines, I part company with Cllr Fatemian. He is right to seek to avoid further Council Tax rises. But at least that tax is honest, legal theft. Stealth taxes are a poor alternative. Clogging up the roads of Oxfordshire with unwanted bus lanes as a brazen revenue raising scam is liable to land him in court. Perhaps the verdict will take a couple of years - which would be appropriate, offering a chance to uphold the Magna Carta on its 800th anniversary.

I urge Cllr Fatemian to look at other options.

How can Conservatives reach out to those in the £15,000-£40,000 income bracket? Cut their Council Tax

Patryk Malinski, who is standing as a council candidate in Hounslow next year,

I was really glad to see the recent publication of the Renewal group's booklet Access All Areas, in which the authors, not always in agreement with each other, generate ideas for broadening the appeal of the Conservative Party. Such publications are welcome because they are stimulating intellectually and ensure that complacency doesn't creep in and that the party develops in the right direction.

I would like to share my thoughts on Shaun Bailey's essay entitled “Engaging with ordinary working people”. The reason for picking this particular text is twofold: Firstly, it concerns me directly as I fall in the wage bracket that was defined by Mr Bailey in his article (between £15k and £40k). Secondly, as a member of the Conservative Party, I also want to ensure that our image is improved among the ordinary, working people.

I must admit I am disappointed by Mr Bailey's proposal mainly because, in my opinion, it offers very little substance. The author concentrates on changing the way the Conservatives communicate – but this seems to be limited to repeating messages about fulfilling some vague “promises”. For instance, I am not sure how “a consistency of message coming from MP’s” can change anything if the message itself is not clearly defined.

When Mr Bailey says that “this repetition might appear dull to the press, but the public never grow tired of hearing how their concerns are being dealt with”, I honestly think it's actually the other way round. The media live off the politicians' little bubble, but the public are increasingly tired of being patronised by bland rhetoric.

Despite Labour's claims, Council Tax collection rates have improved

Recently, the Shadow Communities Secretary, Hilary Benn, cited Labour research alleging that from 2012 to 2013, the number of households in Council Tax arrears had risen by 45 per cent in one year, with 700,000 more households in tax arrears due to ‘cuts’ in benefits.

That would be a worrying trend if it were true. But it isn't. The latest official statistics show that in-year council tax arrears have fallen from 31 March 2012 to 31 March 2013.

The total amount of collectable council tax was £22.69 billion in 2011-12 and £22.98 billion in 2012-13. Council tax collection rates have risen by 0.1% to 97.4% from 31 March 2012 to 31 March 2013. Total Council Tax arrears (in respect of the current year) were £689 million in March 2012 and £691 million in March 2013.  As a percentage of the total amount of be collected, this represents a slight fall in arrears (from 3.04% to 3.01%).

The ten councils with the worst collection rates in the country are all Labour - Salford (the very worst), followed by Manchester, Newham, Hackney, Nottingham, Lewisham, Greenwich, Southwark, Barking and Dagenham and Lambeth.

Councils plead poverty while losing £2.4 billion in uncollected council tax

New figures reveal that town halls have failed to collect a massive £2.4 billion in council tax across England – equivalent to £100 for every household in the country. It is overwhelmingly Labour councils that have the biggest arrears and the worst collection rates.

The worst council in the country, Liverpool has £114 million of uncollected council tax, or £528 per household. Nine out of the ten worst councils across England are Labour-controlled. Croydon is the only Conservative council in the top ten offenders. By contrast, nine out of the ten best councils are Conservative, with South Cambridgeshire having arrears of just £11 per household.
 
Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, said:

“Incompetent and rotten Labour boroughs are turning a blind eye to tax evasion. These new figures show how Labour councils are driving up council tax for law-abiding taxpayers by their neglect. There is real scope for sensible savings to help pay off the Labour Government’s deficit and keep council tax down: every household in the country could get a cheque back for £100 if this tax evasion was tackled.”

A quarter of Council Tax in Manchester spent on debt interest

Labour-run Manchester City Council spends over £36 million a year on interest for its £775 million mountain of debt. That means that one pound in every four collected in Council Tax is not spent on local services but on interest payments.

The council's asset register consists of 1,427 items.

There are three pubs and an airport. Half a dozen leisure centres and a golf course.

There are also plenty of items which may or may not be put to good use under council ownership. Land that may be providing use for enjoyable recreation or may be scuzzy bits of waste land. Many caretakers cottages which may or may not be occupied and if the are might or might not provide value for money. There are many community centres and youth centres - some may be fizzing with activity others may be drab and underused.

How much confidence should Manchester's residents have that there is really rigorous asset management to ensure that all are put to good use.

There are several children's homes (Manchester has an above average proportion of children in care in children's homes.)

Manchester City Council is increasing the Council Tax by 3.7%.

 

Two thirds of councils are cutting or freezing Council Tax

Seven out of 10 Conservative councils are freezing or cutting Council Tax, compared to only half of Labour councils. In addition, almost two-thirds of Conservative Police and Crime Commissioners in England are freezing council tax, but no Labour Commissioners.

The difference in terms of national policy is also stark. Chris Williamson, Labour’s Shadow Local Government Minister, has attacked it as "nothing more than a gimmick" and asserting there is "a real problem with the council tax freeze… taking the grant would clearly create significant problems."

Lord Beecham, Labour’s Shadow Local Government Minister in the Lords, has also attacked it, saying:

"A freeze builds up financial trouble for the future." 

He also says:

Left wing Green/Labour alliance defeats council tax freeze in Brighton & Hove

Cllr Geoffrey Theobald, the leader of the Conservative Group on Brighton & Hove City Council, on how the Left joined forces to increase Council Tax

There was a disappointing, but not surprising, end to the Budget Council meeting here in Brighton & Hove last week. Disappointing for the residents of this city who will now be faced with an increase in their council tax of just under 2%. Not surprising because the Green and Labour parties are natural bedfellows whose first instinct at the first sign of trouble is to turn to the taxpayer to bail them out.

Our relatively modest and sensible proposal to freeze council tax and claim the Eric Pickles grant by making an additional £780,000 of savings - largely by extending the council’s existing voluntary redundancy scheme – was voted down by the Greens and Labour on the grounds that it would lead to cuts to the frontline. This is a plainly ridiculous argument when you consider that £780,000 is just one one thousandth of the Council’s total budget.

This notion, widely pedalled by the parties of the Left, that the only way to protect frontline council services is to raise council tax, is fundamentally flawed. A growing number of Conservative councils up and down the country have shown that by thinking outside of the box, by being prepared to use private and voluntary sector providers and by showing ambition in working with other organisations, services can be maintained – even improved - at the same time as keeping the council tax low.

J P Floru: The City of Westminster keeps on cutting council tax in real terms – why don't other councils follow suit?

J P Floru is a Westminster councillor and Head of Programmes at the Adam Smith Institute. Follow J P on Twitter.

There is no excuse for Conservative councils not to cut their council tax.  Contrary to the laments about savage cuts, the size of government in this country actually grew last year.  Public spending increased from 48 to 49% of GDP.  The growth of Big Brother has been relentless: 14% in 1900; 37% in 1997; and today out of every £ spent, 49p is spent by the state.  Local government spends about one third of that total.  Complaints from local government associations that they should not have to save so much are nothing less than irresponsible. Nationally the Conservatives do not have a majority.  But in many local councils we do.  If we do not tackle the government obesity crisis at local level, who will?  Why are so many other Conservative councils so un-Conservative?  Profligate government is sadly not exclusively the socialists’ remit.

This week the City of Westminster set the lowest council tax in the country.  For the sixth time Westminster's 48 Conservative councillors (Labour 12) froze the council tax.  Flagship council Wandsworth used to be the lowest, but is increasing its council tax above Westminster this year.  With inflation, this means a real terms cut of about 23% over six years.  Every Conservative council could and should do the same.  But few do.  Some courageous Conservative councils are actually cutting the council tax, but start from a much higher base level.  In 2013/14 Band D properties in Westminster will be taxed at £377.74.