294 comments posted · 1 followers · following 1

2 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Huw Davies: As 'One Na... · 3 replies · +1 points

If done correctly a federal UK would be an improvement on the centralised redistribution state we currently have. In a federal UK England should not be a single entity - the north and midlands should be separated out. All regions and nations should be made fiscally autonomous and all UK liabilities decentralised to their respective region/nation.

2 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Richard Holden: Five i... · 0 replies · +1 points

Make the northern powerhouse and midland engine devolved entities raise taxation within their regions to fund their expenditure. You can't have decentralised decision making yet still raise 95% of taxes centrally.

3 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Reshuffle 1) The lesso... · 0 replies · +1 points

From the article:

"...the government said it plans to rewrite its rules to permit greater investment in areas such as the north of England and the Midlands.

Last month, reports emerged the Treasury will change the method of evaluating the economic benefits of spending"

Rewrite the rules. What rules? Those would be the rules of borrowing to fund capital expenditure - as I explained above - currently the rules state that a capital expenditure project must pay back all the money borrowed, plus the interest and additional payments to the treasury. The prospective funding rule changes would remove the need to make a profit - which will mean taxpayers (in London and the wider southeast) will have to foot the bill for investment in the north and midlands.

To simplify it even further for you: Transport funding in London and the Southeast is funded by borrowed money (and devolved taxes in London) and is paid back via fare revenue the project will generate by rail passengers not by taxpayers. The government borrows money based on the future profits that will be generated by fares.

The prospective funding rule changes will mean the government will borrow money to fund transport projects in the north and midlands that won't make a profit (pay back the money from future fare revenue) instead the borrowed money will be paid back by taxpayers in London and the wider southeast.

3 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Reshuffle 1) The lesso... · 2 replies · +1 points

It's costing taxpayers and business in London - nowhere else. Do you not understand that transport is devolved in London and that the mayor has devolved tax raising powers?

3 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - The Prime Minister's B... · 0 replies · +1 points

"Is its purpose to tax better-off voters in its south-eastern base in order to fund less well-off ones in its new northerly seats?"

This already happens on a vast scale. The Southeast (not including London or the East) has the lowest spending levels in the UK - 30% below the average. The Southeast pays more tax than the North East, Yorkshire and the East Midlands combined. The north receives £42 billion more in spending than it pays in taxes - yet northern propagandists keep pedaling the myth of austerity and underfunding in the north.

"Should Surrey South-West fund North West Durham?"

It's already happening. Surrey doesn't get any central government grants to fund its services. Surrey provides more tax revenue to the treasury than any other county. It is one of a handful of counties to make a net contribution. Southern counties are the most dependent on council tax to fund services in the UK. What right do northern councils have to taxes collected in the south to fund their services? None.

"And Tory Blue Heartlands stump up for the Red Wall?"

One of the main reasons for voting conservative in the south is as a defense against the profligate whims of Labour's heartlands in the north. To conserve the proceeds of our labour. What is the point in voting for the conservative party in the south if it is now dependent on serving the needs of the very people that have for decades sought to over tax us so they can live beyond their means using services and creating make-work public sector jobs they don't have to pay for themselves?

3 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - WATCH: Street demands ... · 0 replies · +1 points

The London Underground was funded by private companies up until the early twentieth century - when it was nationalised in the early 1930s. Central government should give the city regions tax raising powers similar to the London mayor to help contribute towards transport investment in their regions.

3 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Reshuffle 1) The lesso... · 4 replies · +1 points

Where did I write that councils fund all investments? I was stating the total amount of central government funding for regions. The South East England Councils (SEEC) website provides in depth information of the level of spending in the Southeast that central government provides the region.

Capital Expenditure projects are financed with borrowed money. No taxpayers money is used. The money will be borrowed and the project is required to pay back the loan plus interest - plus a contribution to the Treasury over the life of the project. It’s the same for all Capital Expenditure projects. Councils do make contributions to infrastructure through Community Infrastructure Levies, Section 106s, or from their general budgets. For Crossrail additional taxes are raised in London on businesses and taxpayers. For Crossrail 2 the current requirement is for London to raise half the money up front before construction is started.

3 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Reshuffle 1) The lesso... · 6 replies · +1 points

"As for the South having lower investment levels than the north, that is totally wrong. Otherwise, what is all this talk about leveling up the north and other poorer regions in the UK? Isn't Boris going to put that matter to right?"

The "level up" guff is playing into the erroneous belief of northerners that think London and the Southeast receive the majority of government spending - which they don't - the north does. The trope goes "northerners voted for Brexit because they weren't getting enough spending from the government - they were being ignored" - so Boris isn't going to argue with that (even though he knows it's nonsense) instead he will play into it and increase spending even further in the north to placate the ignorant.

You can find out the scale of the north's deficit at the Office of National Statistics website - for in depth facts about southeast spending levels you can visit South East England Councils (SEEC) website.

5 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Reshuffle 1) The lesso... · 8 replies · +1 points

"Jamehar. What a load of $h!t. You are only richer because of the money that has been pumped into the south and the destruction of northern industries and the lack of any meaningful investment."

Being rich will have more to do with educational attainment and entrepreneurial endeavours than government spending. The South has the lowest levels of government spending in the UK - the Southeast have spending levels 30% below the national average. The north - as of 2019 - received £42 billion more in spending than it paid in taxes.

A helpful reminder for you about your fabled "northern industries" - they were mostly nationalised industries - and it was taxpayers in the south that had to disportionately pay towards keeping them afloat while belligerent northern trade unions kept going on strike demanding ever higher pay for doing less and less work. Northerners destroyed the nationalised industries. Take responsibility.

5 days ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Reshuffle 1) The lesso... · 0 replies · +1 points

"Southern England could easily survive on its own and would probably per capita be one of the richest countries on the planet."

Yes, which leads to the question wny carry on as things are now? Why don't we "take back control" and run our own affairs?