Does it add up?

[Guest Tracker]

If, as the government claims, road transport is responsible for 22% of the UK carbon pollution and if, as the AA tells us, road transport pays a total of £60,000,000,000 (sixty billion pounds if you say it quick) in direct and indirect taxation does the remaining 78% of the country's so called polluters pay the government £213,000,000,000 in direct proportion to their own particular nasty pollution habits over and above income tax, national insurance, corporation tax, business rates and council tax which are not pollution related - yet?

 

Or are we the motorists of the nation single handedly being persecuted because we are easy targets?

 

I don't know - but I have my suspicions!

[howie]

Tracker - 2008-03-13 12:02 PM

 

If, as the government claims, road transport is responsible for 22% of the UK carbon pollution and if, as the AA tells us, road transport pays a total of £60,000,000,000 (sixty billion pounds if you say it quick) in direct and indirect taxation does the remaining 78% of the country's so called polluters pay the government £213,000,000,000 in direct proportion to their own particular nasty pollution habits over and above income tax, national insurance, corporation tax, business rates and council tax which are not pollution related - yet?

 

Or are we the motorists of the nation single handedly being persecuted because we are easy targets?

 

Possibly.

[Usinmyknaus]

Yes we are being hit because we are easy targets and crucially, there are no co-ordinated ,effective lobbies to represent us. The social security bill is £146 billion pounds and there is a further £19.1 billion in tax credits - disguised social security benefits. That money goes dis-proportionately into the pockets of Labour's key voters and is clearly aimed at bribing those people to keep voting Labour. A huge amount of additional taxpayers' money goes into the coffers of a vast range of hanger-on organisations who lobby to keep social security spending high and so perpetuate their own, highly paid, incredibly feather-bedded existences, not to forget their excellent pensions schemes too of course.

 

That is why, at a time when a little judicious fiscal loosening might have helped moderate the coming economic slowdown, the Chancellor, burdened by the need to maintain Labour's vast client state could only mumble incoherently for an hour or so and quietly increase taxes for the relative few who are still net contibutors, through the back door.

 

Bob

 

 

[pagey]

well said bob

[Robb]

mmmmmmmmmmm

so what as the humble motor driver can we do about it?

stop driving our cars---i don't think so

vote for another party that does the same whenst they get in---i don't think so

picket all fuel stations---i don't think so (that never worked)

We have to put up with what is thrown at us cos the politicians would not have the type of salary that they are accustom to, we ARE an easy target

GREED RUNS THIS COUNTRY

I've never seen so many politicians in the house as I saw the other day

[Usinmyknaus]

There needs to be a root and branch reform of both Houses of Parliament for a start, but especially the Commons. Once in, members (I omit the undeserved appelation "Honourable") lead an incredibly privileged existence, insulated from the real world.

 

Challenged on that latter point, MPs will cry "I hold regular surgeries for my constituents, my office communicates with dozens of them every day". True but the MP's input is superficial and almost voyeuristic, a bit like cellebrities wringing their hands as they gawp at the starving in Africa. The MP, like the celebrity, almost immediately returns to an excessively comfortable existence unknown to the vast majority on earth.

 

The current scandal about expenses is the tip of the iceberg, there will be much more to come. Funding for MPs had always been appallingly badly supervised and there must be many skeletons in the closet. Just think, anytime after voting for huge tax rises for the rest of us an MP could just put in any number of £250 claims for cash, no questions asked. Even under the new system post April they could still wack in a claim for £25 no questions asked. Would your boss accept that from you? I think not.

 

Just watch the revelations about expenses they can claim for "second homes" and compare it to any company move you ever had! Lookout too for interesting revelations about which taxpayer-gilded home they nominate as their "main" residence and see how much dosh they make from that little scam.

 

Most MPs have never had a "proper" job. Very many come up through the ranks of think tanks and quangos and party machinery, often topping off with the loathsome "special adviser" posts implanted into the Civil Service Departments. They then go on to be Ministers and Secretaries of State with the inevitable consequences. For example how confident are you that your economic future lies in the hands of a middling solictor from Edinburgh?

 

If you choke at the price of your pint next week in the local, spare a thought for your MP who will be agonising over the staggering choice of heavily subsidised eateries and bars exclusively for the use of MPs and their guests scattered around the Palace of Westminster (18 last time I was there, but that's a while a go - I'm not sure of the latest count) including a fabulous silver-service restaurant with a truly exceptional wine list. If I recall correctly the Commons even has a (positions greatly sought-after in view of the free tastings) committee of MPs who choose what wonderful vintages to invest your tax money in to stock the cellars for Members' indulgence.

 

Rather than allow MPs to base their salary (laughably) on the senior salaries review, we should force them to accept the average white-collar pay in the UK, with a 25% London allowance to reflect the higher cost of living. Reasonable and necessary constituency and London office expenses would be paid ONLY when supported by receipted invoices. They can have a 25% better pension than the civil service average to reflect the risk of only being in the House for 4 years or so, but that's it. Remember that the vast majority of MP's are just "lobby fodder" who do exactly what the party whips tell them, so they are worth precious little in terms of original thought or creative output! In fairness I acknowledge there are a few who do good work in the scrutiny committees but their effectiveness is constrained by the party system.

 

 

Bob