Scrap council tax?

#1
I pay roughly £1200 per annum in council tax, I had a look of how the money is spent, little if any applies to me.

I don't have a child in state education, I haven't had cause to call the Police since I realised many years ago they are slow to react and impotent, and I've never had reason to call the fire brigade. I have had cause to visit the council run planning office recently though, where I had the privilege of paying hundreds of pounds having a bungalow designed for my parents to their (the planning officers) specifications only to have it turned down at later dates by different planning officers.

Apart from having my bins emptied (if the bin men feel like turning up this week) what do I get for it exactly.

The local council has managed to waste quite a lot though, apart from losing 40 odd million in an Icelandic bank long after the market knew they were unsound investments, they manage to host bullsh1t multicultural festivals at every given opportunity they manage to waste millions installing a millennium eye type wheel and installing an outdoor Ice-rink right next to one of the best in-door ice stadiums in the country.

I'd be much happier paying a private company to empty my bins, a call out charge if I have the stupidity to call the filth and a call out charge if I'm stupid enough to set myself on fire.

Some might see this as a bit of a Tory/ Right-wing way of looking at things, but whilst old people cannot afford to eat and pay their council tax on a pension to pay for utilities they rarely use, and local councils have the right to charge whatever they want for their utilities (having a complete monopoly) whilst wasting the budget, private companies seems a far fairer way of doing things.

Anything not covered (like street sweeping) could be taken out of the central government pot.

Could it ever work?
 
#2
Income tax to central government, then it gets doled out on a person by person rate....

And the councils shouldn't be 'investing' in Iceland, the money should have stayed inside the UK borders.
 
#3
mark1234 said:
I pay roughly £1200 per annum in council tax, I had a look of how the money is spent, little if any applies to me.

Apart from having my bins emptied (if the bin men feel like turning up this week) what do I get for it exactly.
The pleasure of knowing that about 30% of it goes towards paying the final salary pensions of your former local council employees.

msr
 
#6
lsquared said:
......... replace it with?
What about a "person tax"? Each person (over 16 years old) could contribute a share. Two people in a home pay two shares, people in multiple occupancy premises pay a share each. That way every user pays their way = less per person. Can't think of a name for it though. :)
 
#7
DemsMaShoes said:
lsquared said:
......... replace it with?
What about a "person tax"? Each person (over 16 years old) could contribute a share. Two people in a home pay two shares, people in multiple occupancy premises pay a share each. That way every user pays their way = less per person. Can't think of a name for it though. :)
It was called Poll Tax and was a spectacular failure.
 
#8
So I pay for Me, my wife and my son even though we use the same amount of utilities as a single person??
 
#9
And how would adding a layer of bureaucracy make anything better value for money, let alone cheaper?

Central Government would probably love to hold the local purse strings, but the problems with the quota not covering the cost of services is bad enough already and I shudder to think of the consequences of making it larger.

Solution is more efficient councils: try the examples of Westminster and Chelsea, or Wandsworth for services well up to the norm at a much lower than average cost.
 
#10
CQMS said:
DemsMaShoes said:
lsquared said:
......... replace it with?
What about a "person tax"? Each person (over 16 years old) could contribute a share. Two people in a home pay two shares, people in multiple occupancy premises pay a share each. That way every user pays their way = less per person. Can't think of a name for it though. :)
It was called Poll Tax and was a spectacular failure.
Because a load of free loaders suddenly discovered they would have to pay something for a change.
 
#11
It failed because it was unfair, I don't see my idea for paying what you use as unfair.

I think people would end up paying less overall, there would be less local government bureaucracy for one which is notoriously expensive.

Local councils have become huge bloated monsters who charge whatever they want with impunity.
 
#12
vampangua said:
And how would adding a layer of bureaucracy make anything better value for money, let alone cheaper?

Central Government would probably love to hold the local purse strings, but the problems with the quota not covering the cost of services is bad enough already and I shudder to think of the consequences of making it larger.

Solution is more efficient councils: try the examples of Westminster and Chelsea, or Wandsworth for services well up to the norm at a much lower than average cost.
How would it add a layer, it would take away a layer of bureaucracy.

It would of course mean a few people working for the local council will have to get jobs. :D
 
#14
MSI64 said:
So I pay for Me, my wife and my son even though we use the same amount of utilities as a single person??
If your wife son and you use the same as a single person you would pay the same, if you produce extra waste, and call the police when your cat goes missing you would pay more.

Simple. :D
 
#15
So you don't use the pavements or road surfaces, will not go out after the lampposts come on, will never age and want a bus pass, meals on wheels or other care, you're going to opt out of the electoral register (but then you couldn't go in to a polling station anyhow), nor will you ever have to register a death or seek planning permission. You will howver be able to continue with the schools as most of the funding for young people's services comes from the quota already.
 
#16
vampangua said:
So you don't use the pavements or road surfaces, will not go out after the lampposts come on, will never age and want a bus pass, meals on wheels or other care, you're going to opt out of the electoral register (but then you couldn't go in to a polling station anyhow), nor will you ever have to register a death or seek planning permission. You will howver be able to continue with the schools as most of the funding for young people's services comes from the quota already.
1)Road tax.

2)See above about things not covered coming out of the central pot.
 
#17
mark1234 said:
MSI64 said:
So I pay for Me, my wife and my son even though we use the same amount of utilities as a single person??
If your wife son and you use the same as a single person you would pay the same, if you produce extra waste, and call the police when your cat goes missing you would pay more.

Simple. :D
Sorry was answering the post from demmashoes
 
#18
Why not replace it with a system where local government simply collects a yearly tariff for each residential property based on the nominal rental value of that property. And that money is ploughed into local infrastructure by local government on the old Tory principle that it is far more accountable than distant Westminster.

I know we could call it The Rates. Catchy isn't it.
 
#20
But who would run them? Are your potholes or broken lamppost to be reported to central Govt? Will it take fewer people to physically issue bus passes, and will the data be safer in Whitehall? Who will run the Registey Office? Process planning applications etc? Who would really get the push? A few posts might move from you council to a new Govt Dept (which will be housed where?) And how much additional work will be required to bid for central funds, set targets, follow latest policy fads on accountability etc? I see your aim; efficiency at the local level: but the proposed means - mass centralization - is not the answer.

I know schools aren't your thing, but the example of changing the relationship to the centre of locally provided services in education has had a mixed reaction at best and had not produced savings.
 

Similar threads