council tax dilemma

[marky]

I think we can learn a lot about the thinking within the Kremlin from the current dilemma being played out over next April's council tax rise. It's looks pretty certain now that there were no plans to take up the Governments offer to freeze council tax for a third year but instead to go ahead with the planned 2.5% increase. Now another spanner has been thrown into the works by the Government which has decided that any authority intending to increase council tax by 2% or over must first put it to the people through a local referendum.

God forbid!

So now we have Plan B (or is it Plan C) and a suggested rise of 1.99% - the lowest it can implement without being forced into asking the people if they are actually prepared to pay it.

This is a time when the chickens come home to roost. HBC knows that if it were forced to put it to a referendum that the people would vote against it. I believe they would do so principally because the public aren't in any way convinced that the council has done all that it can to keep its costs down. Some of the reasons for this are the way it is currently being dragged through the bushes over the declaration of interests issue, the symbiosis going on between certain community groups and some councillors, and the obvious reluctance to adopt a true culture of openness and transparency.

I've scanned through the present delarations of interest and frankly, they are a joke. What's more, hearing of councillors trying to find ways around the 'freedom of information' act hardly encourages trust in these people who now want to slap us with a maximum council tax increase.

The chickens really are starting to come home to roost so it's little wonder that allowing the electorate a voice through a referendum is something to be avoided at all costs.

[SRMoore]

Labour can argue till the cows come home but they'll always be wrong to call for a council tax increase this year and I'll make dam sure everybody knows it.

The argument to increase it is based on the fact that it has been frozen for 2 years and they must now 'catch up' to and make up the difference.
This -like most of what Labour say- is bull poo. It's assuming that running costs, staff wages and departmental budgets have all been increasing whilst the CT freeze has been in place. This is of course wrong, as we know.

Hartlepool Borough Council have significantly reduced their staffing costs by making a number of redundancies and merging department heads. There has also been a pay freeze in place for public sector workers during the same time. So staffing costs haven't been rising.

As we all know, the overall running costs of HBC have rightly been reigned in and reduced across the board. So no increase in operational running costs.

As above, Departmental budgets have all been reduced.

I would also remind people that despite the taxpayers of this town feeling the effects of  £10m worth of cuts, HBC have for the past 2 years at least ran a £4m underspend. That's £4m each year that despite departmental budget cuts and the rest of it, HBC has not spent from its overall budget. (It's worth adding that this is in part due to the good work of officers in identifying and reducing costs)

There are a hundred and one reasons why Labour shouldn't increase your council tax but they won't tell you one of them. Why? Because. Other than raising taxes, it takes a bit of get up and go and forward thinking to raise income for a local authority. Something I fear we currently either lack or we simply have a large number of lazy gits who'd rather steal more of your wages so they don't have to do any work.

[steveL]

Aren't we being a little unfair here or at least a little premature? According to The Mail, we are talking about the opinions of two cabinet members, Cath Hill and Paul Thompson - both Independents (well almost, anyway) and Stuart Drummond. I don't think we've heard a true Labour input as yet - not that I'm optimistic for when we do 

[SRMoore]

I've heard the opinion of a number of Labour councillors on this subject and they have all supported the increase for the reason I mentioned above.

Remember, there is no election this year so they aren't obliged to "accept the tory bribe" of a council tax freeze.

[steveL]

Well I'm sure we can all look forward to Cllr Wells standing up in the council chamber and supporting his party's view. The question is, which party is that exactly?

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

Well I'm sure we can all look forward to Cllr Wells standing up in the council chamber and supporting his party's view. The question is, which party is that exactly?

The one with jelly and ice cream ... and maybe a conjuror or two? 

[SRMoore]

SRM - Difficult to find fault with your logic and reasoning.
However, let's see if your argument changes,....

I can promise you that my argument will not change.

w

[steveL]

We were third highest in England during 2010/11 and had moved up to 2nd highest during the current year largely through the number of other authorities freezing their council tax which had a disproportionate effect, even though Hartlepool froze its own.

This is the 2012/13 chart: (click to enlarge)

[The Great Dictator]

Third highest number of scroungers as well.

[marky]

Does that mean if Rutland freeze their council tax next year and Hartlepool increases it by 1.99% we will finally take the Number 1 slot?

[steveL]

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[stokoe]

can someone explain to me in a non political way ? why some of
the poorest areas (5 out of the first 11 ) in the north east. have the highest council tax.

[The Great Dictator]

Thats a true assessment Perseus, we get it in other ways..

[steveL]

People who don't personally pay all or part of their council tax have it paid for them by the Government so it's not the case that people who do pay, pay more to make up for those who don't. Even if everyone paid their council tax directly HBC would still end up with the same amount of money. You could argue, of course, that any Government contribution is also paid by the raising of tax largely from those who work but the point is HBC doesn't lose out because of the high number of JSA or other benefit payments.

High numbers of low band properties affect the revenue raised and in Hartlepool this includes not only Victorian/Edwardian terraced housing but relatively modern terraced housing such as you find on the 'council estates' of Owton manor and West View.

This is one of the reasons HBC is keen to demolish old housing and replace it with higher value housing which attracts higher banding. Ditto for the newly built estates at Bishop Cuthbert and the proposed 2,500 houses at Claxton. The same is probably true in the other authorities mentioned to a varying extent.

Interesting to think that the council tax raised from Bishop Cuthbert didn't exist a few years ago - it's additional money HBC is receiving yet it's still in a financial mess.

Towns like ours also have a high number of funded 'community groups' supposedly to address issues of deprivation but it's a bit like putting a sticking plaster over a severed artery. The real answer is and always has been to have more jobs in the town so that people can support themselves.

It's one of the great ironies in Hartlepool that areas paying the most council tax have the least of it spent on them.

[The Great Dictator]

Not really, the government pour in millions every year to pay benefits, we'll only get it one way or another..
If unemployment was 2% we would get allsorts of extra grants and more to support a council tax reduction.