Borwick targets Livingstone's council tax rises

The red haired Conservative candidate for London Mayor Victoria Borwick has attacked red Ken Livingstone’s plans to increase his share of council tax. If implemented, it would increase the average council tax bill by £304 which would amount to a 147% tax rise in his share of the council tax since he took over the City hall. She reminds us that last year Livingstone said that council tax was ‘as high, in real terms, as people can probably bear’. The plight of low income earners was her main concern as according to her, such taxes fall disproportionately on the poor and thus they will be most affected by the Mayor’s plans.

Borwick identified areas where Livingstone has wasted taxpayers’ money such as hiring consultants at a cost of five million pounds a year whilst also having an economics unit with sixteen members of staff. His trip to Venezuela also came under fire. Before the trip, he was boasting about getting a bargain oil deal with Venezuela but later returned empty-handed after spending £41,000 of tax payers’ money. She further pointed out that he had spent over one hundred million pounds on publicity and public information.

She said that she also agreed with Livingstone that these taxes are unbearable but while she intends to do something about it, the Mayor has done nothing. She has highlighted the Conservatives’ alternative budget that offers to freeze council tax for a year while still providing an extra six hundred British Transport Police.

A full account of her criticisms can be found in her dossier which she published today titled: The Cost Of The London Mayor.

Comments

[Jane Carter]

Wrong "dossier" title. Wrong person (if anyone takes any notice, which is doubtful, some people might get the idea that she might actually have a chance of being our candidate). Wrong subject: the votes that we need to win on 1st and 2nd preference are not from those whose #1 issue is council tax.

[Henry Mayhew]

Victoria is bang on the money. Conservatives have a great chance to make Council Tax a hot button issue in London. Good job.

[Matt Davis]

Council Tax is only going to work as an issue for us if we can promise those disproportionately affected by it that we will, if elected to the Mayoralty, actually significantly reduce their bills. Freezing it at an already unacceptable level just isn't going to cut it.I find it hard to understand how, with all of Livingstone's excessive spending, massive waste and hard left propaganda at our expense, the Conservatives can only manage to offer a freeze and not an actual reduction.Never forget either that a large number of the poorest voters don't actually pay their Council Tax themselves, it is paid for them by means of Council Tax Benefit.Therefore they don't really care about how much it is since it won't be coming from their pockets.

[Ex candidate]

The sad reality is that Victoria Borwick is a lightweight with little experience of real and meaningful delivering change. All talk and no action!

[Peter Turner]

Jane Carter has a point. How many of London's electorate actually pay Council Tax - a minority? Is this the reason why Livingstone was re-elected last time and may well be elected again. To be allowed to vote when one does not have to suffer the consequences is wrong. Maggie had it right with the Community Charge but she did not get the support she deserved.

[Jane Carter]

If you must focus on this as opposed to the issues at the top of people's agenda in London, at least have the sense to call your document "The Cost of Mayor Livingstone."

Don't we have any candidates ready for prime time? Sadly, it doesn't look like it.

[Graeme Archer]

Am not impressed by this evidence about either how much intellectual effort Ms Borwick is putting into her case against Livingstone (council tax has exploded under a socialist mayor? Really?!) or her vision for London (Tory candidate promises to cut council tax - like that's a massive differentiation from other Tories: where are the Tory candidates promising to increase the tax?).

[Robert Freeman]

The Cost of the London Mayor is a well written and carefully considered paper. It is also very alarming. Whether or not you pay council tax, as a Londoner you are entitled to receive, quality, good value for money services. If you read the paper you will see just what poor value Londoners are receiving.

Thank you to the Centre for Policy Studies and to Victoria Borwick for producing this thoughtful and well timed paper.

[Martin]

At the risk of being accused of being 'Anti-Tory' again wouldn't this line of campaining just allow Mayor Ken to claim funding for essential services and projects would be cut under a Tory Mayor?

I'm not convinced the public listen to tax debates long enough to hear the response to - for example - a claim that a reduction in CT by X equated to a loss of Y number of police officers.

[Helen Wright]

"Keeping the Cost of Ken's precept down - Ken is now costing every London household almost £300 a year - and what is going to happen when we have the Olympics bill to pay as well. We have had enough of Ken's taxes."

This (above) is from Victoria's under-visited website. Let’s leave aside the poor grammar. Perhaps someone can help Victoria with some message development—-a basic campaign essential for someone claiming to be able to take on Britain’s most enduring politician. Calling him "Ken" defines him by his personality rather than his performance. That is exactly how he wants to be defined, and how he chooses to define himself.

Also, as someone else said in this tread, the Conservatives need to criticise his job performance without giving the impression that they question the need to have a Mayor. That is why a title like "The Cost of the London Mayor" is very sloppy communication.