A blog by Jaimie Kaffash, Accountancy Age’s tax reporter
|
|
09 Oct 2008
Just what is the influence, positive or negative, of the Taxpayers' Alliance?
Ross Clark has a crack at registering the campaign body's impact on public discussion over at the Spectator.
It's something I think about occasionally. I wouldn't say we use a lot of their press releases, but occasionally - in part because the fuss they are kicking up becomes an important political tax event in itself - it's unavoidable. Should we use them more, or less, I wonder?
The body is undoubtedly interesting. And as Ross says, it's very one-sided:
It is so one-sided that one almost yearns for some opposition on the subject.
But I don't think, as he says, that the reason it is doing well is because the political parties are not talking about tax. Or that tax has reached 'saturation point' - even if we were pretty lightly taxed relative to where we are now, there is always a market for 'waste of taxpayers' money' stories. Dislike of elements of the public sector runs pretty deep.
I'd argue, as he mentions in passing, that the Alliance is just filling a gap where investigative journalism used to be. Without indulging in dewy-eyed nostalgia, surely it is the duty of local papers to be highlighting a lot of this stuff? Being understaffed compared to where they were, they can't (the same might be said of national newspapers' coverage of tax, frankly).
Of course, were the papers highlighting the 'waste' of government funds, arguably there might be more balance to it. Newspapers have forums for people to bite back and claim, to use an example the Alliance has got hot and bothered about, that Paul Gray was doing a good job at HM Revenue & Customs despite the data scandal.
Personally, I think the Alliance provides a worrying sign of the likely future of public debate, where PRs and well-funded interest groups, rather than traditional media (for all their faults), dominate debate. It won't make for sensible public discussion.
Visitor comments
Alex
You're right
The TPA is misinformed propaganda that exploits the small budget of newspapers with acres of space to fill
But there is opposition - try the Tax Justice Network.
The real problem is that the Mail likes the TPA message - biased, misinformed, downright wrong as it is.
And that makes that sort of media part of the assault on democracy that the TPA really is - because the ballot box is the place to resolve these issues
Posted by: Richard Murphy , 10 Oct 2008
Yesterday, the Daily Express had a story about the renumeration of Peter Mandelson and his
"pay-off" and pension from the European Union. The amount is printed in the 'paper as being £1Million. And that money is aquired after just four years work(??) at the EU. Then it goes on to detail all the other bits and pieces, OF Taxpayers money he is to be given.
It is a total insult to the very young of this Country, just starting out in life yet Taxed and charged NIC. as soon as they are paid £5,000 a year. And then the old and retired, living on a state pension and perhaps a small income from savings. Why should they be forced to submit to the stupidity of Westminster and Whitehall?
Regards, ATFlynn "Norfolk's Mutineer"
Posted by: ATFlynn , 14 Oct 2008
I am happy for the TPA to be accused of propaganda - not so sure about the misinformed (don't know that biased can mean much - we don't like big government and we don't like high taxes and we don't hide that view of the world).
We're always being asked for comments that attack waste and silly spending; but in reality we are much more serious about the growth of government, the damage this does and what it does to the less well off. We research the facts and we publish the inefficiencies and unjustified "takings" of big government.
We are deadly serious about the damage that big government does and the intellectual nonsense that comes out of the Whitehall village. See:
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/opinion/Eben-Wilson-We-need-tax.4584423.jp
Eben Wilson, Editorial Director, TPA
Posted by: Eben Wilson , 19 Oct 2008
1]
Having spent years visiting local authorities, often confronted by an almost perverse/reverse commercial polarity of thinking.EG some £30 to £60 of budgeted product is used costing £400-750 plus a time to place, only to fail prematurely, when spending £50 to £150 on a durable product whose natural recyclability would save 20 to 40 times its cost yet is largely ignored - failure provides a workflow it seems and always blame the budgets for limiting their actions
3]
Whatever one's view, the end result of a "death of a thousand cuts taxation system" is that the recipients both national and local seem to exist in a world that cannot/will not understand their income from a wealth creation system strangled, yet extorted to breathe must run into the sand...
4]
Until Local Government is reconfigured as a social business to work as part of the same economic system that the rest of us have to, preferably with a commercial template from a government working likewise, the economy is unlikely to function properly with financial life support systematically taxed out of it.Reality is spelling it out in spades
5]
The joint desire to spend freely by unfettered exponentially and cumulatively increasing taxation undermines all as customer and voter. The belief persists that more can always be extracted from business & private customers with no real rights locally or nationally.Is it any wonder voters are disillusioned with little or no positive incentive to earn,save, spend, or vote as those who prefer to wallow in our taxes consume more.. result..... creeping paralysis of economic endeavour and confusion to the people??..those who can used to do now they are taxed,they apparently can't, don't or won’t!
Posted by: stephen shaw , 07 Jan 2009
Andrew Lis on Information vacuum will not help the taxman
Neverwas on Protestors should cut out attacking public servants
taxcrusader on We're not going on an NI holiday
santosh on Bank account in Singapore, anyone?
Search thousands of financial jobs:
Search thousands of financial jobs:
Adding your comment