We just can’t win.

Vince Cable has ‘revisited’ Mansion Tax, which has been coined the ‘Lib Dem price’ for the party to remain a ‘willing coalition partner’ by the media.

The policy would mean that those who own properties worth £2 milion would have to pay tax on that property, which would also go hand in hand with a reform of the Tax System altogether. The content of the article rather than the context is why I am writing this post.

In relation to the Mansion Tax policy the article discusses the reasoning behind pressing for a policy which was not in the Coalition Agreement following the 2010 General Election. The ‘Lib Dem price’ is, apparently, the party’s terms on which they would apparently remain as Coalition partners for the duration of Parliament. As Cable reinforces a strong party and party supporter argument;

“No, I’m not threatening to walk out, I don’t think that’s the approach we should adopt. We have got a massive task and we have got to work on it and as Liberal Democrats we’ve got to fight our corner in the arguments, but that’s a national problem that we’ve got to deal with as a team.”

The word ‘price’ implies that the party leadership is bargaining with the Conservatives in order to gain power and selfishly implement policy – which is a common rhetoric of the media and opposition. It’s important that the Liberal Democrats do implement long-standing Liberal Democrat policies – such as the tax cut for those on lower incomes (which we have already implemented and intend on furthering) and the mansion tax. When the economic situation is stable, it’s vital that the party presses ahead with alternative Liberal policies (not just acting as a buffer to Tory policy) to demonstrate what the party stands for and that we are able to form a credible, accountable and reliable party in government.

“We are where we are – we’ve learned lessons from this campaign, and we’ve got to stay where we are within the Coalition, make it work, get the economy moving, promote the Lib Dem policies and values within the Coalition Agreement – we shouldn’t be embarrassed about that. We’ve achieved a lot, we’ve got a lot still to achieve.”

We entered government with the Conservatives on the basis that we would ensure that the country’s economic situation was addressed and stability was re-established, and many will see the stabilising of the economy as a sign for the Liberal Democrats to leave government, but we also have a duty to ensure that Tory policy is progressive – not ‘revolutionary’; as Nick Clegg put it over NHS Reform – and to demonstrate what the Liberal Democrats could achieve in government. Our chance to prove that we can be an accountable, responsible and credible part in government and in opposition.

25,700 receiving an Income Tax cut in Ynys Mon

25,700 receiving an Income Tax cut in Ynys Mon.

From 6th April 2011, around 700 people in Ynys Mon will no longer have to pay Income Tax and a further 25,000 will get £200 extra in their pockets.

Liberal Democrats in Government secured a rise in the Income Tax threshold, the point from which people start paying their taxes, of £1,000 to £7,475 which comes into force today.

Across Britain nearly 900,000 people will be lifted out of paying Income Tax while around 23m basic-rate tax payers will get an extra £200 in their pockets.

This increase is the first step toward the Liberal Democrat commitment to raise the Income Tax threshold to £10,000, with a further rise of the threshold was announced in the budget for 2012.

Commenting, Ynys Mon Assembly candidate Rhys Taylor said:

“At a time when people are worried about their personal finances, this tax cut will help millions of people.

“In Ynys Mon, 25,000 people will get an extra £200 to spend this year and I know this will make a real difference.

“I am proud that thanks to Liberal Democrats in Government, almost a million people will be lifted out of paying tax altogether across the country, while 23m people will get a tax cut.

“One way we are paying for this is by taxing the banks more, £10bn more, so they pay their share.”

“This tax cut is straight from the front page of our manifesto to the pockets of 23m tax payers.”

Commenting further, Deputy Prime Minister and Liberal Democrat Leader, Nick Clegg said:

“We have to make difficult decisions but we can still make life fairer and that’s what Liberal Democrats in government and across Britain are doing.

“From today Liberal Democrats have delivered a £200 income tax cut to every basic rate taxpayer, and there’s more to come – our ambition is a country where no one pays any income tax on the first £10,000 they earn.

“These are the kind of decisions Liberal Democrats are making in Government to make life just that little bit easier for people who are facing difficult times.”

2015 and party grassroots.

I had been thinking about putting a post together on where the party can go from here and how the party should approach the 2015 General Election and then I came across this on Lib Dem Voice, and decided to use this to emphasise my argument.

People – generalisation intended – have criticised Liberal Democrat MPs for voting for, then against government reforms for the NHS, calling it a ‘u-turn’, an attempt to gain public approval, and an attempt to show that the Lib Dems are different from their Conservative coalition partners. As Mark Thompson says however, that view undermines people’s understanding of Liberal Democrat politics and party politics as a whole.

The reason the Liberal Democrat stance on governmental reforms of the NHS changed was because of grassroot politics, which has seen a massive influx during recent years – even if it’s campaigning for certain policy areas or topics such as Voting Reform in May. The party’s grassroots gave party leadership the real view of NHS reforms – and as the party’s grassroots decide on party policy – the party leadership had to acknowledge party activist’s stance on the reforms. When we first entered government it was paramount that we dealt with the economic climate, putting political differences aside – which the majority of the party’s grassroots agreed on.

That is how we progress and tackle the next General Election – the party’s grassroots must be at the centre of the campaign, in terms of where the party was right, where it went wrong, and where it can improve. We take, what are normal people’s view, of this government and emphasise what we have done well over the course of parliament.

We emphasise the difficult decisions that we have made, and the impact that we have had on government policy, making sure that the coalition’s disagreements are known and how we would have done things if we had been in government. It is possible that the next campaign should outline plans for the net government, but should have far more emphasis on our first chance at governance and what we have done. Use our experience to prove that we can be trusted on more than constitutional reform and opposition.

Full Article: Party Popularity or the country?

Business Secretary, Vince Cable writes in the Financial Times on the Coalition Government’s deficit reduction plan, following the International Monetary Fund’s endorsement of the Government’s Plan A. Cable, as do the majority of the Liberal Democrats, still believe that the only sensible – as Cable called it – policy is the one that the government is following; “The only sensible macro-economic policy stance is a tight fiscal policy combined with a loose monetary one: Plan A.”

Now I don’t claim to understand, at all, what the differences between fiscal and monetary policy are. Economic policy full stop is all a bit of a blurr when it gets detailed and specific. I’d rather look at the, already analysed, effect of financial policy on the Liberal Democrats – or my view of the affect.

There’s no denying that the Lib Dem’s support of the Government’s deficit reduction plan hasn’t fared well with voters or party members. The majority of the swing voters the party won during the General Election have been lost on the basis that (on what party members and supporters argue) the party has (by supporting the government’s economic policy) proved that it could be responsible, could be accounted for on practical areas of government, and could tackle the deficit head on, in spite of party support and approval.

Voters and those who are politically attuned have more often that not claimed that the Lib Dems have wholly agreed on the Conservative’s economic policy, despite the figures released by the BBC which claim that 75% of the Liberal Democrat manifesto has become government policy, whilst only 60% of Conservative manifesto policy has actually been implemented. Cable’s argument was – which shows some policy differences between the two coalition partners;

“Co-operation between the coalition partners remains vital for the good of the economy. While there is much common ground there are differences of emphasis. Liberal Democrats prioritise radical banking reform, progressive taxation and the green economy. Conservatives set greater store by corporate tax cuts and labour market reform. We agree on the need for more house-building, which will push down prices, but we have long argued that the boom-bust cycle in property will remain unaddressed until we develop a more economically rational and progressive approach to taxation.”

Having said that I don’t understand economic policy, I can’t comment on the affects, only that I agree with the need to cut the deficit sooner rather than later so the next generation isn’t paying for this generation’s mistakes, whilst ensuring that the most vulnerable in society are protected – which the Liberal Democrat tax cut – and further tax cut – [would] promote(s).

The party’s decision to enter a coalition with the Conservatives was ‘bad for party’. The party’s decision to support the deficit reduction was ‘bad for party’. And the party’s delayed response to government policy – meaning peers’ willingness to oppose some government policy – was ‘bad for party’. But, in times such as this, should politicians be putting party politics before the needs of the country and economy? It’s time politics became about society and people, and not about party approval and popularity.

Even to keep the current levels of support for the party the Liberal Democrats need to emphasise what they have done in government to show that they can be trusted on a wide range of government policy, and can be trusted to act responsibly and to make difficult deicisons. If the party fails to emphasise this, I believe that the party could fall back to the levels of support during the 90s, which would be dissapointing with what the party has been through and what the party has proved it can do, by putting the country before party politics.

You can read the full article over on Politics Student.

1 Year of Praise for Nick Clegg: His strengths and achievements in 1 year of being Deputy PM

Just a quick link to an external article on Nick Clegg’s first year as Deputy Prime Minister and the positive things that the press has been saying about Clegg over recent months – although we have, as a party, had a battering from the media, there are positive things being said by the media that have gone unnoticed to those who would love – more than anything – to rant about what they see as the ‘u-turns’, lies and general disgrace of the party.

1 Year of Praise for Nick Clegg: His strengths and achievements in 1 year of being Deputy PM.

We should not be declaring victory on NHS reforms.

As Norman Lamb said on the Politics Show, the concerns over Health Secretary Andrew Lansley’s proposals, have been addressed, and there have been significant changes to the reform bill after concerns from Liberal Democrat MPs. The BBC has already released an article claiming that Nick Clegg will “claim NHS changes victory for Lib Dems”. The opening sentence of the article is;

“Deputy PM Nick Clegg is next week expected to claim the Lib Dems have got their way in coalition battles over a planned shake-up of the NHS in England.”

Without going into detail over the changes that have been made to the original reform, it’s clear that there have been significant changes to the reforms. Eleven of the thirteen demands (including democratic accountability and preventing private firms “cherrypicking” services) – have been secured, and alternative solutions need to meet the remaining two concerns.

“This is not a case of triumphalism. This is a case of improving the policy”

Whilst these changes have come following demands and pressure to ensure that the changes address the concerns people had of the reforms, declaring ‘victory’ and becoming triumphant will do nothing for party support. It would be easy for opposition to label the whole thing as hypocrisy. Whilst we judge Labour for their triumphalism and tribalism (particularly in Wales) we do the same.

This is the opportunity we have been looking for since joining the Coalition; to prove that we are a party that can be trusted on key government policy, that we can be counted on to act responsibly on key government policy and we can form a credible part of governing both as part of a coalition and as a single ruling party. As a party, we have repeated that the reason that we are in government is to address the key issues such as addressing the economic situation and reform of public services, and to act as a ‘buffer’ (or ‘safety valve’ as Norman Lamb called it) against Conservative policy, and we have achieved that – and that is what we should be talking about; the improvement of the NHS reforms and our achievements in government.

“I think actually this is a good demonstration of why the Lib Dems are currently in government. We can be effective in government achieving changes and acting as a sort of safety valve.”

Party members have outlined what they believe should form the party’s strategy in the 2015 General Election, which includes the need to demonstrate where the party has had an affect on government policy, how we can be trusted to act responsibly, and how we have made real progress and gained real achievements in government. And the moment we claim victory over policy reform and become triumphant, is the time when those arguments become flawed and we lose support.

Taxes and pensions. Lib Dem policies in the Coalition.

Embargo: None

 

25,700 receiving an Income Tax cut in Ynys Mon

From 6th April 2011, around 700 people in Ynys Mon will no longer have to pay Income Tax and a further 25,000 will get £200 extra in their pockets.

Liberal Democrats in Government secured a rise in the Income Tax threshold, the point from which people start paying their taxes, of £1,000 to £7,475 which comes into force today. Across Britain nearly 900,000 people will be lifted out of paying Income Tax while around 23m basic-rate tax payers will get an extra £200 in their pockets. This increase is the first step toward the Liberal Democrat commitment to raise the Income Tax threshold to £10,000, with a further rise of the threshold was announced in the budget for 2012.

Commenting, Ynys Mon Assembly candidate Rhys Taylor said:

“At a time when people are worried about their personal finances, this tax cut will help millions of people.

 

“In Ynys Mon, 25,000 people will get an extra £200 to spend this year and I know this will make a real difference.

“I am proud that thanks to Liberal Democrats in Government, almost a million people will be lifted out of paying tax altogether across the country, while 23m people will get a tax cut.

“One way we are paying for this is by taxing the banks more, £10bn more, so they pay their share.”

“This tax cut is straight from the front page of our manifesto to the pockets of 23m tax payers.”

Commenting further, Deputy Prime Minister and Liberal Democrat Leader, Nick Clegg said:

“We have to make difficult decisions but we can still make life fairer and that’s what Liberal Democrats in government and across Britain are doing.

“From today Liberal Democrats have delivered a £200 income tax cut to every basic rate taxpayer, and there’s more to come – our ambition is a country where no one pays any income tax on the first £10,000 they earn.

“These are the kind of decisions Liberal Democrats are making in Government to make life just that little bit easier for people who are facing difficult times.”

 

Can you really blame someone for that?……..

You’ll have to ignore my bad wording on this one. If it makes no sense then, I apologise – it’s 14:20 and its already been a very long day. And this is my personal view on the matter.

The Coalition (or the Lib Dems, seeing as it’s a LD policy) have announced that they want to open up internships to individuals who would otherwise not be able to access such opportunities. But for some reason people are calling Nick Clegg hypocritical for endorsing a policy like this when his father helped him achieve his first internship. At least Clegg has been open and honest about it!

From my perspective, unfortunately that’s how the system works. If you know someone, it’s going to help you get places. It’s never going to change. Anyone who knows anything about sociology in education will have heard of Bourdieu’s Cultural Capital. It’s a given.

If your background, or parents, are able to assist you, why should you not make the most of that? Everyone should take any extra help they can get. What this policy tries to do is enable individuals of a different social background to those who are usually accepted for internships to have easy access to them – again coming back to the old Lib Dem ‘fairness’. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t agree with the fact that, based on your family’s background and social status, individuals are given priority over others of a different social background and are, to put it in simple terms, given everything. Things like internships should be readily available to everyone – why should it matter if you’re accepted based on the fact that you could get it through a family connection, or through an application form?

People should not be blaming Clegg, or anyone else for that matter, for the family he was born into. This policy is all about fairness and giving everyone an equal start, either from birth or when they’re sat in an interviewing office; it’s high time people stopped picking at anything and everything in order to ridicule individuals and influence how people think.