<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The cult of council tax cuts, by Heather Wakefield</title>
	<atom:link href="http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2010/02/the-cult-of-council-tax-cuts-by-heather-wakefield/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2010/02/the-cult-of-council-tax-cuts-by-heather-wakefield/</link>
	<description>Instant analysis from expert bloggers and highlights from Public Finance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:18:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: PaulR</title>
		<link>http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2010/02/the-cult-of-council-tax-cuts-by-heather-wakefield/comment-page-1/#comment-4745</link>
		<dc:creator>PaulR</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:13:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/?p=3051#comment-4745</guid>
		<description>I recognise that council services suffer the same inflationary increases in costs as other services or provision; I do not mind a reasonable increase in my payments to cover these increases, as long as the service level I receive remains the same or improves.  What I do mind, is that often the annual percentage increase in my council tax has exceeded my annual percentage pay increase as a council employee.  Time, I think, to replace the existing system, which has always been a poor substitute for the so-called &#039;poll-tax&#039; (itself fatally flawed in planning and implementation), with a much fairer &#039;local income tax&#039; based on a percentage of earnings - at least that way all those with lower incomes would not pay as much as those more able to afford it, and any annual increase in payments would mirror the same annual increases in pay received.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I recognise that council services suffer the same inflationary increases in costs as other services or provision; I do not mind a reasonable increase in my payments to cover these increases, as long as the service level I receive remains the same or improves.  What I do mind, is that often the annual percentage increase in my council tax has exceeded my annual percentage pay increase as a council employee.  Time, I think, to replace the existing system, which has always been a poor substitute for the so-called &#8216;poll-tax&#8217; (itself fatally flawed in planning and implementation), with a much fairer &#8216;local income tax&#8217; based on a percentage of earnings &#8211; at least that way all those with lower incomes would not pay as much as those more able to afford it, and any annual increase in payments would mirror the same annual increases in pay received.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gwydion</title>
		<link>http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2010/02/the-cult-of-council-tax-cuts-by-heather-wakefield/comment-page-1/#comment-4551</link>
		<dc:creator>Gwydion</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:24:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/?p=3051#comment-4551</guid>
		<description>I worry that this focuses too much on inputs and not enough on outputs - who&#039;s to say that funding a service more will improve it?  Perhaps that&#039;s just giving more resources to doing the wrong thing.   
For instance, there&#039;s plenty of evidence to suggest that a front and back-office split might not be the best way to provide a service, so &#039;hitting the back office&#039; might actually improve a service and make it cheaper to provide - I&#039;m not saying that it necessarily does this, but neither do I think that it&#039;s right to assume that increasing funding is necessarily the appropriate thing to do.
I agree that what are relatively small increases to individuals&#039; council tax bills can raise significant revenue, and that this should certainly be viewed as a viable option if funds are required.  However, I believe that, in many instances, we simply don&#039;t have the relevant information to be able to decide whether funds are actually required, or whether we could do what we do in a better way.
Gathering that information ought to be our starting point.  After that, we can discuss what needs to change in the design of our service, and the level of funding ought to be a part of that discussion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I worry that this focuses too much on inputs and not enough on outputs &#8211; who&#8217;s to say that funding a service more will improve it?  Perhaps that&#8217;s just giving more resources to doing the wrong thing.<br />
For instance, there&#8217;s plenty of evidence to suggest that a front and back-office split might not be the best way to provide a service, so &#8216;hitting the back office&#8217; might actually improve a service and make it cheaper to provide &#8211; I&#8217;m not saying that it necessarily does this, but neither do I think that it&#8217;s right to assume that increasing funding is necessarily the appropriate thing to do.<br />
I agree that what are relatively small increases to individuals&#8217; council tax bills can raise significant revenue, and that this should certainly be viewed as a viable option if funds are required.  However, I believe that, in many instances, we simply don&#8217;t have the relevant information to be able to decide whether funds are actually required, or whether we could do what we do in a better way.<br />
Gathering that information ought to be our starting point.  After that, we can discuss what needs to change in the design of our service, and the level of funding ought to be a part of that discussion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

