bbc.co.uk Navigation

Those taxing Tories (part 2)

  • Nick
  • 25 Jan 06, 11:20 PM

The other day I quoted the Cameroonians' defence of their caution on tax cutting. They say, I reported, that Margaret Thatcher did not pledge to cut taxes in her 1979 manifesto. I should, more accurately, have reported them as saying that she did not make specific costed tax pledges like those which the Tories have offered in their last two election campaigns. One of my more rigorous collegaues dug out what the 1979 Tory manifesto actually said : *

"CUTTING INCOME TAX

We shall cut income tax at all levels to reward hard work, responsibility and success; tackle the poverty trap; encourage saving and the wider ownership of property; simplify taxes - like VAT; and reduce tax bureaucracy.

It is especially important to cut the absurdly high marginal rates of tax both at the bottom and top of the income scale. It must pay a man or woman significantly more to be in, rather than out of; work. Raising tax thresholds will let the low-paid out of the tax net altogether, and unemployment and short-term sickness benefit must be brought into the computation of annual income.

The top rate of income tax should be cut to the European average and the higher tax bands widened. To encourage saving we will reduce the burden of the investment income surcharge. This will greatly help those pensioners who pay this additional tax on the income from their life-time savings, and who suffer so badly by comparison with members of occupational or inflation-proofed pension schemes." *

It left you in little doubt what they intended to do BUT was not a specific, costed and timetabled pledge like those made by William Hague or Michael Howard. It was a pledge to reform the way taxes worked and not a pledge to cut the overall burden of tax which is lucky because Thatcher put up the tax burden in her first few years in office. Expect Team Cameron to use this as a model when they come to write their manifesto.

Showdown at PMQs

  • Nick
  • 25 Jan 06, 01:08 PM

Who's fallen into whose trap?

David Cameron's question today was set as a trap. He invited Tony Blair to confirm that all the most controversial parts of his education White Paper would survive when the legislation itself is published. If Mr Blair said "yes" then he could not back down. If he said "no" then he would be caught doing it. Tony Blair said "yes". But then he responded with a trap of his own. Would Cameron give his support to the bill because, if so, he'd welcome it. Yes, said Mr Cameron.

My guess is that Tony Blair's calculation is that the Tories will hate the idea that their votes may save the government from defeat so much so that DC is forced to change his mind - confirming Labour's allegations that he's always chopping and changing. If he sticks to his guns, DC may split and demotivate his party.

TB's other gamble, I supect, is that the public, and even many in his party, are much too confused by his proposals to be able to judge whether he has or hasn't backed down from what he originally said he'd do. Thus he will be able to compromise while claiming he's not moved at all.

(You can watch today's PMQs here...)

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk