How the government has bounced this week’s tax hike through parliament like it bounced through the Brexit deals

9th September 2021

This week’s political excitement about social care and national insurance seems familiar.

*

If you set aside all the noise and drama, all that has happened this week is that the government has – at speed – got a huge tax increase past its political and media supporters.

Indeed, a number of those very political and media supporters have clapped and cheered.

There will be no meaningful reform to social care.

There has been no meaningful scrutiny of any proposals.

And, as this blog averred recently, it is political and legal nonsense to say that the extra revenue being raised will be ‘ring-fenced’ for health or social care.

Had this not been done at speed then the implications of the huge tax hike and lack of policy substance may have become apparent.

It has simply been a political smash and run.

A deft exercise in getting something unpalatable past your own political and media supporters.

And it has worked – if you understand it in these cynical terms.

*

What makes this seem familiar?

Well.

It is almost the same model of what happened with the Brexit exit and relationship agreements.

They too were rushed through parliament so as to prevent any useful scrutiny from the government’s media political supporters.

The brisk pace meant that many issues were hidden from view – until it was too late.

And, at the time, the government’s political and media supporters clapped and cheered too.

Many are not clapping and cheering now.

**

Hello there –  if you value this daily, free-to-read and independent commentary for you and others please do support through the Paypal box above, or become a Patreon subscriber.

Please do support this sceptical liberal constitutionalist blog – and do not assume it can keep going without your support.

***

You can subscribe for each post to be sent by email at the subscription box above (on an internet browser) or on a pulldown list (on mobile).

****

Comments Policy

This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.

Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated.

Comments will not be published if irksome.

59 thoughts on “How the government has bounced this week’s tax hike through parliament like it bounced through the Brexit deals”

  1. This Govt both fears and despises Parliament, and the courts. Boris has much in common wih the rulers of Hungary and Poland

    1. ‘Boris’ is the stage name of this Mr Johnson, deployed – like his tousled hair – to charm the innocent.

      1. And just how often is the public (and not just the UK) presented with some ‘chocolate-box’ ‘cardboard cut-out’ figure as the ‘acceptable’ face of politics?

        They are but the visual tip of the iceberg. (I have long referred to ‘iceberg politics’, to describe the reality of what is really happening in the country. It equally applies to the UK judiciary)

        (Reference to the stage is probably apt – Pantomime comes to mind- but bad as it is, you won’t get your money back!).

        1. Thank you for this concept. It is quite appealing. That is why I am SO dissatisfied with politics in the U.K. It is fundamentally dishonest.

    2. It must make our PM very happy to be referred to still, throughout these hellish events, as Boris. It confers affection, indulgence. It really must stop!

  2. But wasn’t there a saving of £350 millions a week, by leaving the EU ‘thanks’ to Brexit, to finance the NHS? Granted, my eyesight is not as sharp as decades ago and English is not my mother tongue, but I’m not senile and do remember reading that exhaustive statement on a red bus during the referendum campaign.

    1. Claudio, it doesn’t matter what language it was said in …
      Bus… EU…£350 million…NHS are quite easy words to con huge swathes of people. They could have put it it Russian and folk would have stiĺl understood.

      1. But where are all these people now, the ones who believed wholesale the nonsense on the red bus? The very same people whose vote for first the referendum and then the election brought the country to its knees? Why aren’t they rising up?
        It can only be that they’re comforted by the red tops instead, whose loyalty to “Boris” remains ever steadfast. God help us.

        1. But still don’t forget that Corbyn ruined the opposition, the Labour Party for a great many, including me. I wouldn’t vote Labour and didn’t vote Tory but a great many did.

          Also I’m sure many people think like my plumber who said, “‘Boris’ was the right man to get us through Brexit but is now useless,” so the 2019 vote may well have been won in favour of the act of Brexit rather than full-scale approval of a bus message. I don’t think my plumber believed a word of that message but had committed to the idea of being free of Voldemort.

      2. Yes, of course, Catherine. In my own insignificant way I was trying to be sarcastic. Regrettably, history has proved that sarcastic thinking – or just thinking – is a losers’ characteristic. Someone else recently recalled some words of Umberto Eco: “Thinking per se is emasculating” (pensare in sé è castrante).

        We sensible Italians are lucky and grateful to have a man like Draghi as PM but are appalled to see how many of our uncultured fellow countrymen are captured by the sirens of our fascist right, altogether not much different from yours.

  3. This is no way to govern. This is Johnson’s modus operandi but it is no substitute for reasoned debate and taxation decisions made following proper scrutiny of the options. We cannot continue along this vein. We are not addressing the actual problem and the tax burden is being unfairly placed on those least able to pay. This is wrong.

  4. The British House of Commons is increasingly like the Russian Duma: pliant representatives chosen for their loyalty and craven self-interest, unwilling and unable to hold the Executive to account. It is only in the Committees that the “Honourable Members” appear to have any teeth and even then they turn out to be dentures.

  5. You are right of course, I am amazed how many people jump to the rights and wrongs of how the tax is being levied, The real issue as you say is that Social care remains in a mess with no solution in sight. There has been no serious discussion of the preponderance of ownership by Private Equity using very high leverage, they depend on low pay and high fees, and are focused on profit maximisation, it is an approach to social care guaranteed to fail. No serious attempt has been made to regulate the sector. This is passing the buck politics, not caring politics, and for the most part the media and the opposition are letting them away with it.

    1. It’s very tempting to conclude that they deliberately put in their unfair funding proposal as a smokescreen, to divert attention away from the fact that they haven’t resolved the main social care issues at all, or even addressed them.

      1. You are off course right. They have not started to address the question of Social Care. What Johnson has done is announce a tax increase without any detail as to what is to be done about Social Care. This is not Government. This is bouncing the country into accepting a tax increase to deal with an as yet unspecified problem . This is NOT good Governance.

    2. With respect, people do not ‘jump’, they are pushed.

      As to your final comment, WE are letting them get away with it.

      Thousands, if not millions, of decent people are unhappy with the way they are ‘ruled’ in the UK (my particular concern is the blatant corruption in the UK courts by some judges, with no remedy for victims).

      Many individuals express this, but they are just individuals and who, by definition, are powerless.

      Is it not possible for some kind of united force against this (or are we all destined to be ‘shouting in the dark)?

        1. It is the burning question.

          How do people get heard in a fake democracy?

          Over history, I think decent oppressed people have tried – and likely get described as treasonous, rebels, and (possibly) even terrorists.

          (For those of an unbalanced mind, I’m not advocating terrorism)

          But surely if there is a collective view to take a stance against indecency and immorality, there must be a way.

          I do not shy away from speaking the truth – and have to deflect the odd bigoted view – but individuals are easily dispensed with.

          (I’ll let you know if I come up with the answer as to how)

  6. The lack of constraints in Parliamentary procedures on this kind of sharp practice is shown, again, to facilitate authoritarian behaviour. What next – 24 hours notice of a political, as distinct from a legislative, vote to approve the reinstatement of capital punishment?

  7. I admire those who express logical and rational views about how the UK ‘democracy’ operates, be that Brxit, tax increases etc., with a view of challenging ‘misdemeanors’.

    The mistake they make (with respect) is that there is a democracy in the UK. It is nothing more than a veiled dictatorship.

    What is the present issue about: the fact that there has been insufficient allowance for the input of others ahead of making important decisions.
    That is how dictatorships operate.

    Having experienced the UK justice system, where the dictatorship of fraudulent corrupt (incidentally masonic) judges are allowed to openly pervert justice in the most obscene and perverse way, with no remedy for victims, I have concluded that the UK, as an ‘establishment’ (like Natzi Germany) can, and does, do whatever it likes.

    There are no rules, no morals, no sense of decency.

    Unless this rotten base is dealt with, it will continue.

    And no one will deal with it.

    All we can do is shout from the sidelines while being appalled at the dirty tactics employed on the pitch.

    1. The “illusion of democracy” has been apparent to many of us for some years now. We do indeed live in a dictatorship and the turkeys not only continue vote for Christmas, but are happy to turn the oven on and self baste as well.

      One thing we can console ourselves with is that all dictatorships eventually collapse or implode. I can only hope it’s within my lifetime.

      1. Andrew, I’ve seen some of your comments previously. It is encouraging to know people like you exist and will speak out. Please continue to do so.

        Like you, I desire to change the false and improper conduct that I see and have personally experienced (which, if publicly exposed, would inevitably cause public outcry).

        I will never get remedy for the wrongs done to me (by the legal and judicial system in particular) but desire to try and stop same from happening to other innocents.

        How, remains the issue.

    2. I agree with John Brick. We have an illusion of a democracy in the UK.
      The “establishment” exists to perpetuate itself. There are SO many ways in which the UK has to change in order to become a fully functioning state. I am personally in despair. Worse, many of my life one friends do not see this, or do not wish to admit it.

      1. I heard a discussion this morning (On The Bunker podcast) partly on the subject of opinion polls and ‘what will it take to get people to wake up’ etc – the basic tenet of it was that many, if not most people, aren’t updating their political news every couple of hours, like I do, and so aren’t sensitive to the latest outrages (and even I miss a few when I really have to concentrate on work). Opinion polls are starting to show a drop in Tory support, and as the government makes more and more poor decisions and then overrides them, and then overrides the override, some of this will stick. The general trend could now finally be starting to move away from uncritical Tory support, particularly since the narrative of ‘delivering’ Brexit becomes less believable and the effects of same coupled with austerity and mismanagement/corruption during the pandemic catches up on people.

        In other words, if more Labour supporters could move on from the mire of the last few years and accept that there should be a better government and current Labour can lead it, we could be on to something. (reserves of optimism dangerously filling up once more)

        1. The problem the electorate have in the UK is that we do not understand the extent by which the population are being manipulated via Social Media and targeted messaging. In my view there is a gaping hole in UK election security. The Tories appear to be happy for this to continue – since they are currently the beneficiaries of whatever effect this has on the electorate. I think the FPTP voting system is particularly susceptible to this form of targeted voting irregularity, since small influence can have an outsize effect.

  8. Given that this legislation is in direct contravention of a manifesto pledge, one would think the Salisbury Convention would not apply.

    While HMG’s recent batch of nodding donkey nobles will slavishly toe the party line, I can imagine the Bishops, plus a lot of opposition and cross-bench peers, having some things to say…

  9. What is truly depressing about this wretched government is that it is not incompetent through stupidity, it is deliberately incompetent.

    1. I think to call the UK Government ‘incompetent’ is too charitable.

      Those who are really in control (and who may not be seen) know exactly what they are doing.

        1. I know – just emphasizing the point.

          But many do take the view of ‘incompetency’ This suits the manipulators very well. It serves to belittle what transgressors are doing. They can easily shrug off such harmless comments, rather than the reality of ‘white-collar/organized crime’.

    2. Exactly. This is not proper Government of the UK. This is raising taxes without a care for the people who are harmed, and without a thought for the correct way to deal with the important issue of Social Care in the UK. This is harmful to the future of the UK. I’m afraid Johnson is yet again King Clown.

  10. Given that it seems lots of Tory backbenchers (and presumably some ministers) are unhappy about this, how did this snap debate/vote convince them to vote this way? I’m far from a Tory, but I know that some of them have consciences and lots of them have now voted against their own beliefs. Are they being bullied/bounced into these situations over and over again? When will they turn around and and say ‘Enough’? I can’t believe that the trick of ramming through a shoddy Brexit hasn’t woken them up to this behaviour. Is there a gradual dissatisfaction among the parliamentary party with Johnson and his ‘style’ of ‘governing’ that’s building up and what will it take to make the dam break??? I’m running through my depleted stores of optimism and hope…..

  11. It is necessary for the people to decide in sufficient numbers that we need to change the political system in the UK. We need as a minimum to decide to introduce Proportional Representation.

    1. Yes, it is necessary – past necessary – for people en mass, to act. Otherwise, all we have is a talking-shop, for those who will be easily dismissed and ignored as ‘complainers’.

      The ‘democratic’ system (if ever it truly existed) is not working. In other words, it is a sham and a con; A pretence and control mechanism which bears little or no resemblance to its supposed intention.

      When enough people realise that what we have in UK is, to all intents and purposes, a dictatorship (much like Natzi Germany – no, it is not over-exaggerated!) then maybe something will change. Until then, the charade continues. The UK system is run by the few, for the benefit of the few. It is clear to see. It is the elephant in the room.

      I have seen the absolute pit of indecency in the UK legal and judicial system. Blatant deceit, fraud and corruption, by those paid to pursue justice (I do not think I am the only one). Nothing can be done about them because the ‘establishment’ protects them. I am prepared to put my head above the parapet.

      Does anyone else want to do anything – other than just ‘complain’?

      1. The Tories will totally fail to address the Social Care issue. They have no real plan, and no real intention to fix anything with this tax raising plan. There has been NO detail and no thought that I can discern, to address the problem. This is a Tax raising measure that will destroy jobs. The ultimate objective may therefore fail. This is NO way to address an important problem in this country.

  12. If you raise 12 billion pounds a year from a population of 65 million this is over 180 pounds a year from every man woman and child.

    Strip out pensioners and students and this figure increases for the working population in a system with an hourly minimum wage of 8.91p per hour and a limited social security net.

    You have a PM who has openly described a salary of 200k from a third job as chickenfeed and a Chancellor who just happens to be ex Goldman Sachs and from the fifth richest family in India.

    Two mornings ago the largely privately educated Cabinet did not seem to know what had been agreed and MPs were happy to vote things through they could barely have read let alone digested.

    Why not save hard working Brexit taxpayers a few bob by abolishing Parliament and auctioning off the decrepit Palace of Westminster with its German renovated Clock Tower ?

    All the ingredients are there for things to turn nasty very very quickly.

  13. “…It is almost the same model of what happened with the Brexit exit and relationship agreements.

    They too were rushed through parliament so as to prevent any useful scrutiny from the government’s media political supporters… ”

    Almost the same model…..dont quite ‘ buy’ this argument.

    Fully agree the tax increases have been rushed ( & pushed) through without close enough examination.

    The key challenge arising from Brexit ‘exit’ was the time limit set out in Article 50 – this led to agreed (finite) extensions by the European Council but the ‘cliff edge’ was never/could never be removed from the UKs negotiating strategy.

    The UK was always negotiating ‘against the clock’ which, to its credit, the EU used devastatingly against the UK.

    No such time constraints or ‘cliff edge’ existed to enact this Health & Social Care legislation, so far as I’m able to discern.

      1. That wasn’t my point of my post -Brexit was inevitably rushed through because of genuine time constraints underpinned by Article 50 of TFEU. The similarity ended there in my view.

        I acknowledge that I was not able to discern ( nor others by all accounts) why the H&SC act was rushed/pushed through.

        1. when i remember it right there was offered more time from the eu to negotiate the withdrawl agreement because of covid and the dissbelive that the uk would take such a rushed unorganized exit. But HMG was more concernd to GET BREXIT DONE. But true art 50 talked about 2 years as the british architect of art 50 seemed to not have anticipated why it should take any longer.

          1. It’s important to understand the chronology of the Withdrawal Agreement (WA) and the subsequent TCA inc the one or potentially two year grace period agreed as part of the WA . The WA was constrained by Article 50 but subsequently extended at request of both UK and the European Council.

            So, in the Withdrawal Agreement a one or possible two year transition period was agreed as part of the process.

            As many euro realits knew, the key rationale of the UK government not requesting an additional year to transition was because the EU would ( rightly and simply in its view) use the countdown clock to gain even greater advantages than it already had.

        2. In my view this is a tax raising measure in the name of addressing the Social Care problem, that has no intention of addressing stated problem, rather to raise taxes to fill the gap in funding caused by Brexit. Johnson is raising taxes to cover his failed Brexit project. The solution is to remove Johnson and rejoin EU.

  14. Cynical terms – totally correct. When thinking about government I go for the lowest interpretation I can think of and then expect a couple of steps lower.

    Much talk here and across most blogs of ‘how incompetent, how corrupt, what a rotten lot’ and so on ad nauseam. True enough but meaningless. The question is what would a competent capable government look like and would we the people like it?

    Looking around, something like the German setup or possibly the Chinese setup looks the direction of eventual travel. I can’t see how the careless laissez faire setup we have is going to last – cosy though it is – for some. Our easy going carefree way has served us well but constraints are hedging in that approach.

    A large company run like the UK is would go bust or suffer a takeover. Takeovers are out of fashion but going bust…. Mrs Patel visiting Mons Darmanin looks a waste of time, but President Xi might help her out – philosophy wise. We the people might not like it.

  15. The cap on care costs only starts from October 2023. Benefit will only be paid out once care costs have breached £86k. Is that adjusted for inflation? So the government won’t pay out for eight years maybe? And possibly someone has to submit a claim with care cost records for eight years. This my then be challenged before payments are made to the pensioner.

    The gov will be collecting the levy for ten years before paying any benefit.

    1. This would not surprise me at all. This whole scheme strikes me as another fraud on the British people. It is ill considered, and not thought through. It will be full of holes. I am not in favour.

  16. Surely the ‘Taxpayers’ Alliance’ will be protesting vigorously against this, no? Am I missing something?? ;-)

  17. Perhaps I’ve got this wrong, but all that has happened so far is a political announcement, and first reading of a bill in the House of Commons. Second reading, the committee stage and report stage are all scheduled for Tuesday 14 September. https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3041/stages

    Now, admittedly, the government has a large majority in the Commons, and it is unlikely the Lords will stand in their way for very long, but the legislative process has some way to go.

    What is extraordinary is how Conservative politicians and their allies have been swung behind increasing taxes on employment (a “Tory jobs tax” if you like – or rather two Tory jobs taxes, as the increase in the payroll tax for employers will just reduce wages in future), breaching multiple manifesto commitments from just a couple of years ago. But the £10 billion or so raised will make next to no difference to the ability of the government to spend £250 billion each year on healthcare, with next to nothing additional spent on social care, and no meaningful changes to the funding or delivery of social care either.

  18. The greatest impediment to a tax rise is his own back-benchers. If it’s a screw-the-poor kind of tax, that’s the only kind of tax he can hope to get past such a bunch of populist right-wingers.

    Mr Sunak has sitting on his shelf, completely unused, a very fine and detailed analysis of the most sensible ways to raise taxation in Britain. It’s called the Mirrlees Review. It was initially commissioned by a Labour government, but it’s completion was explicitly supported by the in-coming Cameron administration. It was delivered by an excellent team led by the (now late) James Mirrlees, whose Nobel Prize citation particularly mentions his ground-breaking studies in the best ways to tax people. But well-designed taxation is anathema to the rich. Which is probably why the report’s recipient, George Osborne, very quietly swept it a long way under a thick carpet.

    Bish bash bosh. That’s how Bozzas like to do things.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.