I watched, and tweeted, the Battle for Number 10 last night. Our next prime minister was interviewed and it seems almost everyone agrees Ed Miliband rose better to the occasion. So be it, that is not my reason for referring to that debate.
What struck me was two things. The first was how long it took for the NHS to even get a mention. It was well into David Cameron's questions before that happened.
The second was how little attention was, overall, given to tax. I recall little being said on it by Cameron, excepting his claim that millions of people have been taken out of the tax system, which is a straightforward lie. People who do not pay income tax are still vey much in the tax and national insurance systems, and in fact have overall higher tax rates than average in a great many cases.
For Ed Miliband, the focus appeared to be on why he was stigmatising higher rate taxpayers, which he handled well, and discussion of the 50% tax rate and the mansion tax, both of which would have done him no harm with a majority of voters and which weaved into the narrative he told of what he thought democratic socialism meant (which he conveyed with more conviction than many on the left have done for a long time).
But, and this is my point, there was no justification made of tax. And there was not even justification made of not taxing - because we might need to run deficits right now.
Nor were some very important tax issues, like avoidance and evasion, addressed at all (being just about mentioned but then not followed up in the Cameron interview).
We got immigration and food banks instead.
Both are symptoms. Both are in part well beyond government control. Neither are causes. That was disappointing. Is it really true that we have to decide issues at that level, and not at the point where politicians can really make a difference? Maybe so, but I craved more substance.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I agree this was a disappointing element but there was also no mention of housing and this Government’s major failings at every level in bogus attempts to tackle it. Given that at least an element of the financial crisis in 2007/8 was due to sub-prime loans in the US and the cause of the Northern Rock fiasco, one would have thought it would have entered the discussions as part of the continuing pressure on people to find decent housing at a decent price.
But there are more debates to come…..
Agreed
Spot on.
I turned it off after 10 minutes. It was unbearable. The whole thing was an intellectual desert. You could call it a (lack of) substance abuse!
Yet on the radio this morning the polls are saying the Cameron did better. Really?
As for the NHS, what we could be seeing there is an unwritten agreement by the main parties that we just can’t afford it anymore? So let’s not go there – it’s bad news – anyhow that nice Richard Branson will sort it out. (no NI increase from Labour……..hmmmm).
To me tax was there Richard. It was looming in the shadows because basically that’s how politicians compete now – they promise less taxes but ‘high qualty public services’ to the thick electorate in order to get power……and then work out that they can’t really fund public services or the NHS as a result. How strange?
I’m struck by the lyrics of Lou Reed’s song ‘Last Great American Whale’from his New York album. I’ve anglicised it but it sums what is going on for me at least.
“Well Britons don’t care for much of anything
land and water the least
And animal life is low on the totem pole
with human life not worth much more than infected yeast
Britons don’t care too much for beauty
They’ll poo in a river, dump battery acid in a stream
They’ll watch dead rats wash up on the beach
and complain if they can’t swim
They say things are done for the majority
Don’t believe half of what you see
and none of what you hear
It’s a lot like what my painter friend Donald said to me
“Stick a fork in their bum and turn them over, they’re done”
Yep. Seems like it to me I’m afraid.
Not quite sure that ‘almost everyone agrees Ed Miliband rose better to the occasion’. All the polls, including the ICM/Guardian poll, said that Cameron edged it. Whilst I appreciate that this was not the purpose of your blog, the fact that tax was not really mentioned is surely an indication of how little the general public actually care? It’s all about money in the pocket at the end of the month. Although I agree that these are related, isn’t it obvious that your message is not getting through yet?
That’s only reading of the polls
And very obviously the second comment is crass
Maybe you haven’t noticed how often tax is in the press
Perhaps you live in your own little bubble?
You may think that my comment was crass but let’s look at the real world and not the bubble that you live in. If tax was so high on voter’s agenda’s why is;
1. Apple is on course to be the biggest company in world. You yourself are a devoted user of Apple products, a company you despise. There are plenty of other phones, laptops and tablets for you to use, but you choose not to.
2. Amazon continues to be a huge company. Maybe they use creative accounting and profit shifting but do ‘normal’ people care? You certainly don’t as you use them to peddle your books. You say it’s your publishers’ choice? Change your publisher instead!
3. I’ve never walked past an empty Starbucks.
You may be right in all your protestations but, as I said, isn’t it obvious that your message is not getting through and there are more important things for people to worry about?
1, If I do not use Apple I can use Google, Microsoft, Dell at al. Some choice
2. Try being a publisher and ignore Amazon
3. So? They did suffer. But I never expected a total boycott
But the point is that you now know about these issues
And didn’t
You make my case for me
1, If I do not use Apple I can use Google, Microsoft, Dell at al. Some choice
Richard – There are plenty of UK home brand product alternatives. Choosing Apple is a choice.
2. Try being a publisher and ignore Amazon
Richard. Why not try it? That would be courageous. Something you suggest others be.
3. So? They did suffer. But I never expected a total boycott
Richard. I’m not sure they did suffer. Overton’s window and all that.
Overall, I’m sorry Richard but I can’t see Ghandi or Pastor Niemoller saying “hey, I’ll use the products and services of those I criticise and despise because that benefits me financially”.
Can you?
KRs
Tim
Tim
I live in the real world and seek to change it at a macro level
The reality is that you are asking me to take actions that would make my campaign harder to deliver but which would go unnoticed otherwise. For example, the IT issue cannot be avoided somewhere along the line and it is disingenuous of you to suggest it is unless I am to carry a portable Raspberry Pi running Linux
I am sure that would please you, but with the greatest of respect I’ll sweat the big stuff and you can stick to the pedantry
Future offerings of similar ilk will be considered time wasting
Richard
Then I will stick to the macro level and your view of the ‘real world’.
How on earth can you criticise any business for making use of the tax system as it is when you defend your own use of the business world as it is.
You talk of morality and responsibility but when it comes to your own benefit you sweep these requirements under the carpet.
KRs
Tim
Utter nonsense
I cannot wish the world was different now
I deal with it as it is as the basis for starting the process of change
Any thing else is a recipe for failure
I am not interested in that
Among voters who were undecided before the ‘debate’ – surely the most important group for Labour or the Tories if they want to win the election – ICM had Miliband beating Cameron by 56% to 30%. The 54%-46% overall split mostly reflects people who had already decided how to vote before the event – and we know that Cameron is more popular among Tories than Miliband is among Labour supporters, so that helps explain the Cameron lead on that overall measure.
The whole programme was stacked in favour of Cameron with a papered audience and Paxman openly being a down right Tory. How anyone sane person could say that Cameron came off better when he didn’t answer any question properly. The benal questions from the audience were pitiful and I can only suggest that Sky had some say over them.
I thought that Paxman and the woman were totally un professional and down right rude in the attack on Milliband’s family affairs that have nothing to do with a politicak debate. Ed was the best I have seen and cameba cross as being authentic. At last someone from The Labour Party has had the courage to apologise for the Iraz war, even if he didn’t support it himself. If he is unpopular with certain members of his party it is because he is trying to regain true labour values. He can’t do it alone and if his party don’t get behind him they don’t stand a chance.
It appears that all the politicians think Keynesian economics is too complicated for the public and that they cannot adequately describe the vicious cycle of decline caused by public spending cuts. Sadly Labour feel that they are incapable of challenging the narrative that a whole world recession could be caused by one little Government in the UK.
This is why the issue of tax justice is so important. I doubt that even the best government could entirely eliminate the tax gap. It would still not cover the whole of the deficit, so I would like a good dose of Keynesian stimulus as well.
But the recoverable part of the tax gap is a huge amount of money that could make a massive contribution to the public finances. And it is easily understandable and a potent rebuttal of the wail about “wher will the money come from?”
While I agree that Labour have not challenged the astonishing proposition that they caused the recession etc, I am not at all convinced that they do not robustly promote a keynesian approach on grounds of it being too complicated. I think it is far simpler than that: they do not promote it because they do not believe it. They are neoliberals to their core
I detect a deeper malaise in Labour.
I think that they think that they have lost the British people to neo-liberalism so they are reduced to doing neo-liberalism around the edges – playing with it etc., whilst still trying to get some progressive policies through.
Therefore the problem with Labour might be that they no longer believe in people anymore – the British people. This is why some of us (many of us?) are so frustrated with their timidity when it comes to putting forward an alternative view of what life could be like.
That added to old fashioned British hypocrisy and a cynical press who won’t even give a bona fide politician a fair hearing makes a for toxic political environment.
I think that labour should go for broke and put clear blue water between themselves and the Tories. They should put up NI to pay for NHS and promise to ring fence that for example. And they should tell us what is at stake and remind people just how expensive this country is to live since so many of the utilities for example have been privatised.
Some hope, but I think that this is what they should do.
The show was an entire waste of time. The questions about David Miliband were especially vacuous – we are where we are and to talk about electoral prospects in that way is daft as I am sure the Tories would be better off under Boris than they are under Dave.
But what struck me was that Miliband had no grasp of detail. He said he would match Tory spending cuts (and announced a pledge today to “balance the books”) but when asked how suggested cutting winter fuel allowance for rich pensioners, upping the tax rate on those earning £150k+ and something else fairly minor.
If I was Miliband I’d be suggesting the introduction of a sizeable wealth tax on those with more than (say £5m), including non-doms. And if I was Cameron I would be targeting inequality, as it is impossible to have a thriving economy if a large part of the working population is impoverished. What about a surcharge of 3% on corporation tax for any business that exceeds a certain ratio between executive and median pay?
But instead I can sense the election will be dominated by an attempt to avoid gaffes and smear the opponent, rather than to come up with ideas that might make a better country. So Ed will be painted as chaotic, Dave as a toff, and each party will lie about the other’s intentions.
Richard,
You are, of course, spot on in your analysis of the appearances last night, and the complete lack of discussion, insofar as I could deduce, regarding tax.
I think we should look at this an opportunity. I have long felt, and continue to do so, that the issue of ‘tax’ should be removed from being looked upon as an economic construct and placed, properly, into a social construct.
The word ‘tax’ itself is one which, unfortunately, is frowned upon by society. We should look at this process for what it truly is, a societal obligation. These societal obligations are mandatory for society to operate in a plentiful and just manner. There is no room for an economic concept of these societal obligations. What is best for society should be used in determining not only the amount of societal obligations due but also the manner in which, and from who, it is collected.
To view societal obligations through the prism of economics is to find ourselves trapped in a dogmatic neoliberal Hegelian dialectic.
I’m sorry but I cannot see any hypocrisy in using the products of companies that one can and must be critical of.
Once again only the neo-liberal mind-set could conflate two separate issues in order to try to make a rather hollow point.
Firstly no-one is saying that Apple products aren’t of value or desirable in their own right. If I could afford one, I’d have an Apple lap top tomorrow.
However, how Apple conducts is business (as opposed to the excellent products it produces) is a cause for concern that I share with many here.
I’ll make another observation if I may.
During World War II, the Nazi’s actually had much of the best equipment in that conflict.
They made the best tanks (unlike the coffins on wheels we sent our men to fight in) had some of best aircraft and what they were doing with aircraft design and rocket systems towards the end of the war was year’s ahead of anyone else.
However, the technical attainments become irrelevant when you consider that they were part of one of the most evil, brutal, corrupt, infamous and necrotising political regimes ever to walk the earth. Sort of takes the shine of the wonderful equipment when you think about the concentration camps or the death squads in the Ukraine and Belarus doesn’t it?
Now I’m not saying that Apple are like the Nazis. But even though I like Apples’ products and admire their innovation, there is something that makes me uneasy about them as a Company. I’d much rather that they paid a fair tax and also paid a fair wage to the workers they employ. And I mean ALL their workers.
I deliberately did not watch last nights program and from what I’ve read I didn’t miss much either.
That tax was not mentioned at all is appalling, but to be honest it really does not surprise me at all because for most people it is way too complicated. I have said this before, that Richard has a rare talent in breaking down huge amounts of information and portraying it in terms that anyone can easily understand. This is why I support and often reference Richard’s work in some of the work I do outside of our profession.
Tax is a very if not the most important subject considering the state of our public finances. But unfortunately it is just too far out of reach for the vast majority of British people to both understand and comprehend it’s importance.
In my opinion the NHS should and will be the most important topic in this election campaign and am greatly saddened tot learn that there was not more of a focus on it in last nights debate. It is a topic that affects us all and everyone can easily understand, so I am baffled as to why it was not discussed more.
I recently learned of a charity that will be fact checking sound bites from politicians and the media over the 6 week election. This is not something I would normally do, but I hope Richard you won’t mind if I add a link to their website.
http://www.fullfact.org
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/katie-hopkins-promises-to-leave-the-uk-if-labour-get-elected-wins-ed-miliband-the-battle-for-number-10-10138526.html?fb_action_ids=796491680444675&fb_action_types=og.shares
Well… I was undecided, but that is an offer I may find difficult to refuse!
I thought Ed Milliband was terrible except when under the greatest pressure he did revive somewhat. He certainly lived up to the North London geek image. But the whole show was bizarre and I think you were right about the tax content.
But ignorance of tax is true of most MPs of most parties. Where I think UKIP is right is that we have a closed community at the top of UK politics.
You watched through dark blue tinted glasses
I’m still surprised that many express disappointment with the ritual dumbed-downers of the debate. I didn’t watch it because I new this would be the case and I find these farces depressing and yet another reminder that we are in a neo-lib one-party state with, effectively a neo-lib coalition of the the three parties still pretending to be different.
As for the grotesque parody of an interviewer that Paxman has become-he is a mere neo-lib circus master, a Tory supporter and representative of ‘Paxman PLC.’