The Progressive

Councils should pass on the VAT cut

A forgotten player in plans to boost consumer spending are local councils, who charge VAT on a range of local services used by residents on a daily basis.  Sadly too many of them, including Conservative-Lib Dem run Camden Council, are not passing on the full benefit to local people.

The temporary VAT cut by 2.5% gives more money to the local consumer over coming weeks and months.  The support will not only help spending in local shops and services, but also applies for many 'paid for' public services people regularly use.  The benefit of the reduction should be felt in services ranging from swimming pools and leisure facilities, parking meters and car parks to building control services and licensing.

Since 1 December implementation has been piecemeal.  A poll of 34 finance officers by the Local Government Chronicle revealed that only one third of budgeters and chief executives are expecting to leave their prices unchanged, while another third will only pass on part of the cut.

The sums involved could be quite significant, and local government - now run in many areas by Conservative, Lib Dem or anti-Labour coalitions - should respond much more positively in giving people back what is theirs.

To give just one example from one such borough - Camden - where the total bill for council fees and charges is currently £85 million a year, there are currently no plans to pass on the benefit of the 2.5% VAT cut to local people.  As an opposition, Labour is asking the council to identify all VAT-rated services and pass on the full benefit either by reducing fees or by giving residents a one-off sum at the end of the year.  

If local shops are passing on the 2.5% then so should the council.  They shouldn't be hoarding cash at this time, they sure be giving it back to those who use our swimming pools, rent our community football pitches or pay to park their car for a couple of hours to do the Christmas shopping.  People will be increasingly concerned about the cost of living, and local authorities should also recognise this.

As a localist, I believe it is up to councils what they democratically decide to do and it is right to highlight those councils, like Camden, which don't or won't.  Not to pass this cut on to residents is quite untenable. 

Theo Blackwell is a Camden Labour councillor and opposition spokesperson on Finance.   http://regentsparklabour.blogspot.com

        

Labour in local government: how do rebuild our base?

Hazel Blears’ famed sunny optimism was sorely needed on a pretty gloomy day for Labour, and she didn’t disappoint with her contributions to a useful and timely debate on Labour in local government. With a few notable exceptions Labour’s performance in winning councils has been poor in the last few years, and the discussion aimed to examine what can be done to address this decline.

Gerry Stoker emphasised how central government needs to devolve more power to local government to demonstrate clearly Labour’s commitment to localism. By running locally-focused campaigns local Labour parties can demonstrate their relevance and independence to their communities.

Theo Blackwell also wanted the central party leadership to give local Labour groups more slack to innovate – giving the example of how Camden’s Labour Council had wanted to experiment with banning plastic bags several years before the current wave of local bans began, but were not given the freedom to get on and give it a go. Local experimentation can be the best way to develop and test experimental new policies.

Stella Creasy believed that articulating a clear local narrative can overcome national concerns. She gave the example of How Iain Duncan Smith has managed to paint himself as the ‘defender’ of her local hospital, despite everything Labour has done to invest in and reform the NHS. Labour activists have to show they are an effective agent for social change, and that Labour’s philosophy of working together is the best method for achieving social change.

Hazel responded to the other members of the panel by agreeing that it is vital to increase the solidity of Labour’s local government base, and its power to make decisions; both because experience on the ground shows that Tories and Lib Dems slash services for vulnerable people, and because having a strong local party is crucial for sitting Labour MPs’ campaigning work. She restated her view that most people join the Labour Party to ‘do’ something, not just go to meetings; and we have to change the way we organise to address this. Labour members have to have a strong presence in civil society and voluntary sector. Finally, we need to reinvigorate our political confidence; show passion, zeal and insurgency; and resist the temptation to become professionalised technocrats, talking in a language people don’t relate to.

Some comments from the floor complained about a lack of support for local Labour groups from the central Party, whilst recognising the severe strain on resources. There was discussion about whether local elections are dominated by national polling trends, with a majority believing effective local campaigns could buck these trends. The importance of selecting candidates early in the election cycle was stressed by many, as was the huge pressures on time and finances that being a councillor entails. Stella picked up on this, arguing that the expectations the Labour Party has of councillors and members are appallingly offputting to most people. She wants to see greater professionalisation of councillors, to recognise the massive amount of work involved. It is not acceptable to expect people to give up their social life, as one councillor in the room admitted he has done. It will be interesting to see what Jane Roberts – who chaired the debate and listened intently to contributions throughout – recommends on Friday in her report into barriers and incentives to people becoming councillors.

Labour in local government - How do we rebuild our base?

Join us tomorrow in Westminster for our event on Labour in local government.

Local election results for the party over the past couple of years have been fairly lamentable, with our share of the vote below 30% in both 2006 and 2007.

The worry is that losses in council seats will have a knock-on effect in a general election. Without foot-soldiers and infrastructure in whole regions such as the South East, Labour MPs and PPCs will surely be at a disadvantage when seeking election in these electorally crucial areas.

Perhaps the question is a more general one, however. Turnout is generally extremely low in local elections. One way to encourage people to vote and become involved in local politics might be to give local government more powers. And this means reforming local government finance, and allowing councils to raise - and spend - more of their own money.

Advocates of 'localism' and devolution have been saying this for years, of course. David Cameron's recent proposal - of local referenda on council tax increases - came nowhere close to really addressing these issues, as Chris Leslie, Director of the New Local Government Network and Progress Vice Chair pointed out on the Progress site last week.

Have your say tomorrow evening in Committee Room 9 of the House of Commons, 1800-1930. Speaking will be the local government secretary, Hazel Blears and Gerry Stoker, founder of NLGN, amongst others.

To register, please send your name and email address to [email protected] or call 0203 008 8180

Lib Dem council tax hypocrisy!

Yesterday the Liberal Democrats’ home affairs spokesperson said that residents in the capital had seen their council tax “skyrocket” under Labour since 1997. An assertion that she was too quick to make, because the highest bills in London are in Lib Dem controlled Kingston-upon-Thames.

She should never forget her party's record in places like Lambeth; when the Liberals were in charge they implemented the biggest rise that Lambeth had ever seen – 38% over their 4 years! All this whilst slashing services, signing profiteering contracts on parking (which the newly elected Labour Council has overturned) and wasting millions on fancy offices!

The facts are clear – Labour Councils are, on average, £161 cheaper that Lib Dem controlled London Councils and £23 less that London Tory Councils. The shameful record of the Liberal Democrats on this issue means that in future they should either practice what they preach or keep quiet. This is typical of Lib Dem scaremongering as they say one thins and do the other.

For more info see:
http://www.labourinlondon.org.uk/news/2006/03/labour-london-councils-better-for-less.htm

More mayors only good for Labour and local people

Today’s announcement by the Communities Secretary for less targets, more public accountability and better leadership for our local authorities should only be welcomed, especially by the left. They offer a new constitutional framework that will protect local government from a future “Thatcher” style centralising government and put services more truly in the hands of the people. It will give local Government the leaders to stand up to central government and focus on the local needs of their electorate.

Love him or hate him, the Mayor of London, has made London proud of its self and brought back the idea that who you vote for really does matter. Without Ken Livingstone there would be no mainstream leader would be sharing a stage with Hugo Chavez; without it being a Labour Mayor we would have not seen the support for record levels of investment into the public transport network, funding for LGBT Pride and the campaign for a living wage for Londoners. When Ken is involved you cant miss the MAYOR OF LONDON symbol on posters around London and the underground which makes clear where the accountability lies and where your taxes are going.

Mayors for the other great cities in the UK would do this as well and would in many places give people the Labour Leadership they voted for rather than the Tory/Liberal collusion we see in places like Birmingham. Decisiveness, leadership and accountability is what our cities deserve. We need to have direction and someone with the power, vision and structure to see it through. Directly elected mayors will make town halls more democratic, giving people real choice through their own form of PR – supplementary vote – and an option to elect the Executive and legislature separately.

Campaigns for a mayor for Liverpool supported by groups like the New Local Government Network are local people calling for change and better governance of the area. Under these Mayors, you will know who is responsible for any council tax rises, why strategic decisions have not been taken and have someone to hold to account!

This system will also make Labour better leaders locally, there will be rigorous accountability of the Mayor (if they are Labour), it will be a highly contested selection meeting unlike too many councillor seats and because a Mayor only needs a third of the council to see through proposals Labour Leaders will no longer be held to ransom by factions in the Labour Group intent on derailing the leaders agenda.

For more information on the White Paper see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6084998.stm or http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1002882&PressNoticeID=2271.