The unfair Council Tax must end

On the eve of Edinburgh’s crucial budget meeting, JIMMY BURNETT argues that the SNP government must end the Council Tax freeze – NOW

cityskyline

Local Government is in crisis. And it is a crisis for which councils bear little or no responsibility.

The Scottish Government has made successive cuts in support for local government, culminating in this year’s savage £550 million reduction. This coupled with the continuing imposition of the SNP-enforced nine year long council tax freeze, has forced local councils, like Edinburgh, into implementing cuts on a scale, never before envisaged.

And to make matters worse, the council tax freeze has seen the better off benefit by three times as much as people at the bottom of the scale – and of course the poorest section of society, who receive full or partial council tax relief, save not one penny.

In addition, as pointed out by Unison, councils, in dire need of alternative resources, have partially plugged the gap, by increasing service charges. Charges which of course, hit the lower paid harder, as the recent “ Close the Gap” report highlighted.

Since 2007, 40,000 jobs have gone in local authorities across Scotland.
Vulnerable and older peoples service have been particularly hit. 13,000 fewer people receive a Home Care Service than was the case a mere six years ago. Service charges for vulnerable people have risen by 11.5 million since 2010.

Here in Edinburgh, the Council is being forced to inflict almost £90 million cuts on crucial services. Yet they cannot even consider raising their council tax , without immediately receiving further cuts in resources from the Scottish Government.

Lets have a quick look at the figures. A council tax rise of 3% in Edinburgh would raise 7 million, a relatively small sum, but still enough to make some contribution to saving crucial services. This would cost Band A households 45p per week, Band D householders 67p per week and Band H householders – those in the highest valued houses – £1.35 per week.

Surely not too much to ask, when people are dying in Edinburgh while waiting for care packages to be provided?

But there is a catch. A 3% rise would in reality, unless the Scottish Government chose to lift their penalty system, would raise precisely nothing for services: the Scottish Government would immediately claw back £7 million from the council. So much for local democracy and accountability!

Since 2,007, the Scottish Government, have chosen to earmark a staggering £2.5 billion to finance the council tax freeze. This is public money. Money being spent on services , but only if councils agree to freeze their council tax. As a result councils across Scotland have been denied their democratic right to raise taxes locally and be accountable to the electorate for that rise.

So the council tax freeze is unfair. The better off have had savings three times the level of the less well off.

The council tax freeze has deprived councils of their democratic right to raise much needed resources for local services.

The Scottish Government-imposed council tax freeze is anti democratic, as it removes local accountability.

Even at this late stage, the Scottish Government, AT NO COST TO THEM WHATSOEVER, could choose to end this unfair freeze. And they could, and should, allow councils to raise their tax with no penalty clawback.

But they are unlikely to do so. And have said as much. This is an election year, and therefore, it appears, that because they believe the freeze to be popular, they are prepared to see services sacrificed, jobs lost and people suffer.

And the irony is that they appear to be able to do so, with virtually no criticism, whilst it is councils, who they are forcing to make cuts, who are bearing the brunt of the ire of the general public!

Jimmy Burnett was Housing and Finance Chair of Edinburgh District Council

Are we more progressive or politically blind?

Broughton High School student Ross Cowper-Fraser says it’s now time that sixteen and seventeen year olds get to vote in all elections:

referendum flags

The referendum may be over, but the question of whether 16 and 17 year olds are to gain the vote in the UK general and Scottish elections continues to loom over the politicians at Westminster and Holyrood.

According to the official count 3.6 million Scots engaged in the vote on 18 September: 100,000 were 16 & 17 year olds voting for the first time

A poll of young voters conducted by Lord Ashcroft found that 71% voted yes.
Since the group was gathered relatively quickly only a modest number was interviewed and this does not show the main view of this age category in its entirety. It does raise a question: are the younger members of the Scottish public more progressive than others, or is it that most do not have enough life experience to make an informed decision?

image002 (1)I discovered this when I was taking pictures on the night of the referendum vote when these three girls were shouted at for looking: “f**ck**g twelve!” Similar comment came from both sides of the debate and struck me as quite bigoted from ‘adults’, yet the media cameras flocked in like hawks towards the three girls! This was either for the abuse or the speck of red white and blue (Three young girls are highlighted within a sea of yes voters at the Scottish Parliament., above).

This was the first time many young Scots have voted, and many sceptics have spoken out on this. Nevertheless it has been well documented that the level of engagement has been of a high standard: I know myself from fellow senior peers in my year and at least three years below in S3 (although they could not vote) have all been engaged in discussion.

Not only do I think our age group far exceeded the participation of the vote from sceptical people, I also think that some young people’s knowledge surpassed the awareness of plenty of adults, from watching Andrew Neil on Daily Politics to discussing the papers in the morning. This may be partly to the use mass of the social media platform: young people gained their information most of the time probably used links, friends and posts to gain knowledge.

Then there were the door to door talks, public meeting and school debates across the country as Scotland prepared for possibly the biggest decision of its people for many years.

This may be all well and good but now, how will the franchise age be lowered?  At the age of 16 you can do things like pay taxes, join the army and get married, but without having any right to vote how the country can be called fully democratic?

I emailed Alison Johnstone, Green MSP for Lothian asking what she and her party thought of widening the electorate, and she replied: “After their brilliant contribution to the referendum debate, no-one can seriously argue that 16 and 17 year old’s should not get to vote in all future elections.

“As the debate around more powers for Scotland continues, the Scottish Greens want the rules to be changed in time to allow 16 and 17 years old’s to vote in the Westminster election next year, and certainly for the 2016 Scottish Parliament elections.”

“It has long been Scottish Green Party policy to extend the franchise to 16 and 17 year-old voters and we would like to see this happen in time for the UK General Election next May and 2016 Holyrood election.”

At Westminster, the Conservatives do not believe that this group should gain suffrage, and the UK independence party follow the Tories in this belief: funny really when the don’t agree on much more that not giving young the vote! This could work against them in the future: it may give a foundation of disconnection between them and future voters. Parties like Labour, Greens, SNP and the Liberal Democrats may become the main choice: either way, Scotland and especially the UK could change dramatically.

So essentially the youth vote could be a source of political advantage for the future – David Cameron may have to resort to swearing again so he can try and relate to the ‘impressionable youth’!

However less than half of 18 to 24 year olds voted in the last UK general election: this was much lower of the nation’s average voters. And there is nowhere in the UK where there is a huge number of young people centralised within one area, so spread out like this, can young people make much of a difference to the current flows of decision-making? For years youth groups have tried to be heard and get noticed, so it can be said that many do take an interest in politics. And due to recent events the youth voice may become a more important and relevant factor in current affairs.

I also contacted MSP Sarah Boyack to find out Scottish Labour’s position. She responded: “In the final months before the referendum I met young voters on both sides of the campaign who were keen to debate the issues and play their part.

“It was really exciting to see young people keen to engage in politics and it’s important that we do not allow that enthusiasm to disappear. Many young people are already active in our communities and we need to make sure that their skills and knowledge are fed into decision making.

“I believe that the time is right to extend the voting age for all elections to 16 and 17 year old’s and Labour is committed to this step at a UK level too. It is also important that this is backed by an extensive programme of civic education in schools and work to encourage more involvement in initiatives such as the Scottish Youth Parliament.”

So no-one under the age of 18 will vote in next May’s general election, but if you are an optimist then this may change depending on the party elected in 2015. Say Labour achieved this, then the voting age may be lowered for future Westminster elections. Meanwhile in Scotland this looks like a real possibility for the upcoming elections in 2016, as most parties agree to this movement for change.

Westminster may be left behind, swaying from the road to total democracy. Finally will the irony of placing total focus upon the Smith Commission place this matter in the dark? Let’s hope not.

Ross Cowper-Fraser

 

NEN passing three cyberspace milestones!

Some statistical information for all you cyber-geeks out there – the NEN blog will pass three important (for us, anyway!) milestones over the next day or so.

We’re getting very very close to 750 posts, 50,000 all-time views and 250 comments! We think that’s not too bad for a wee community newspaper and it’s nice to be able to shout about it!

The blog was born on 19 January 2011, with a post to introduce the NEN and to welcome readers. There was an understandable silence shortly after that as the NEN’s funding was discontinued, but now – slowly but surely – the figures are creeping up.

Our thanks to you for your contributions and your comments, to our old friends for sticking with us and our new followers who are now beginning to share their stories. Our thanks to you all for helping to keep the blog fresh, interesting, topical and, hopefully, fun to read.

And thanks to our readers, wherever you come from – but a special mention to our loyal friend in Moldova!

Next target? 1000!

A Ragged Trousered Appreciation

A Timely Reminder

On Saturday 21 April at North Edinburgh Arts Centre the audience was treated to a brilliant performance by two magnificent actors playing all the characters in Robert Tressell’s classic story ‘The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists’.

The subject, of grinding exploitation of workers employed by a building and decorating firm, was played with emotion, seriousness and a good deal of humour. The confusion and self-interest of some of the characters has its modern counterparts, but so does the message of what must still be done.

The actors, Rodney Matthew and Neil Gore, will be giving performances of the play at the Edinburgh Fringe at Venue 2 this August. It deserves to – and should – play to packed houses.

A Delahoy