What's more important to Cameron: actual fairness or presentational fairness?
Peter Hoskin 6:41pm
James has already blogged the Sunday Telegraph's interview with David Cameron, but some other things stand out from it
— and not just the PM's unthinking attack on Ed
Balls either, for which he has since apologised. Take these paragraphs on tax, for instance:
True, none of that is particularly suprising. Nick Clegg has, a few days ago, already played down the prospect of a mansion tax or any wealth tax at all. And last November Cameron suggested that the 50p tax is a ‘fair’ policy.‘The Prime Minister effectively rules out any move towards a “mansion tax” — a levy on high-priced properties proposed by the Liberal Democrats — or indeed any new tax on wealth. “I don’t believe, generally speaking, we should be looking at endless additional taxes.”However, he signals that the 50p top rate of income tax, on earnings above £150,000, will remain for the time being, despite calls from leading Tories to scrap it on the grounds that it penalises enterprise.
Mr Cameron says ministers “have to go on demonstrating” that they are making those with the broadest shoulders accept the greatest burden in reducing the deficit.
“When you’re taking the country through difficult times and difficult decisions you’ve got to take the country with you. That means permanently trying to make the argument that what you’re doing is fair and seen to be fair.”’
Yet it does illustrate the muddle that Cameron could get into when it comes to tax and ‘fairness’.
His position, at the moment, appears to be that the 50p tax is a keeper — and presumably because it's ‘fair’, in that it theoretically raises revenue at the expense of the most, rather than the least, well-off.
But how does that chime with the Treasury's official position, which is to judge the 50p tax on the basis of a review into its revenue-raising potential, expected in April? It could be that it does raise more revenue for the Exchequer than a 40p rate — which is fine. But it's also feasible that it could raise less money; creating a shortfall that would need to be made up by tax hikes or spending cuts elsewhere, perhaps falling on the less well-off.
And then how would Cameron respond? Would he scrap 50p on the basis that it's ‘unfair’ overall? Or would he keep it for the presentational reason that it's ‘seen to be fair’? From what he's said today it's unclear, although it does sound more like the latter.
These are important questions less because of the 50p rate itself, and more because of what they mean for Cameron's general case for fairness. I wrote about how the coalition could develop that case back in August 2010, and still the main confusion exists: between actual fairness and presentational fairness. In the next few months, we could find out which side of that divide is really more important to Cameron.
UPDATE: Monday morning's Daily Telegraph reports that the HMT review into 50p is ‘expected to show a “surge” in revenues’ — so the government is expected to keep it, and this won't be the test case I suggested it might. But that divide between presentational and actual fairness is still worth keeping an eye on, as it will crop up elsewhere. Do those income decline charts represent actual fairness, for instance? Or presentational fairness?
Previous
Heartless Curmudgeon
January 8th, 2012 6:49pm Report this commentWho cares? - it's all PR piffle!
Rhoda Klapp
January 8th, 2012 6:56pm Report this commentHmmm. So does the ex-PR man favour presentation or actuality??????
Well, I'm stumped.
Mr. Bubbles
January 8th, 2012 7:09pm Report this comment'insensitive and unthinking' - can you grow up and get real? Such PC bullshit. It was a joke (and a pretty astute one at that). I do wonder if you political journos live in the real world sometimes.
David Ossitt
January 8th, 2012 7:21pm Report this commentThe two paragraphs below are taken directly from the Telegraph Web Page.
"He just annoys me," Mr Cameron said of Mr Balls — whose gestures and comments aimed at the Prime Minister have become a well-known feature at question time sessions.
"But I’m very bad, in the House of Commons, at not getting distracted, and the endless, ceaseless banter, it’s like having someone with Tourette’s permanently sitting opposite you."
So we are in such a politically correct state where offence can be taken by anybody over what is nothing more than an honest truthful remark.
Nothing in his comments derides or seeks to belittle or minimise the problems of those unfortunates that suffer from having Tourette’s syndrome, only a cretin would suggest otherwise.
But in Britain today we have created a Medusa’s head with a myriad ways whereby offence can be pretended and the snakes and tendrils of this monster have wriggled and writhed their way into every area of our lives.
Cameron should not have apologised, in fact the next time he is at the Despatch Box he should point a finger at fat Ed and repeat his assertion.
Happy days.
Shinsei67
January 8th, 2012 7:23pm Report this commentHow does it penalise enterprise ?
Entrepreneurs don't pay themselves £150k+. If they run successful companies they can either sell out for millions (so CGT is important) or pay themselves through dividends.
The people who pay the 50% tax rate are bankers, lawyers, accountants etc. Not people who create new businesses or jobs.
Shinsei67
January 8th, 2012 7:28pm Report this comment" It could be that it does raise revenue for the Exchequer, which is fine."
More likely is that the Treasury review will show that it currently raises money (too soon for high earners to move abroad) but that it won't in years to come as high paid bankers gradually drift off to the Far East or Dubai.
AY
January 8th, 2012 7:52pm Report this commentBleating about "fairness" is seemingly last resort for that mollusk-in-chief.
More socialism means less honesty.
More capitalism means less humanity.
Ruling class succeeded having more of the both for decades, and here are the results. The new man has been born - lazy, greedy, ignorant and cowardly.
Then they brought beauties of the bigger world, - African tribal wars (aka "gangs"), oil-and-terror Islamism, Asian-style corruption, creeping Gramscian totalitarianism, madness of outsourcing.
Now normal productive people are forced to live with huge and ignorant bureaucracy, Goebbelsian MSM, self-censorship, constant threat of riots, and and parasite talking to parasite at every corner.
Sure, "fair" person won't ever mention any of the above. That is all becasue of fat white pig goldmen saks banksters.
TomTom
January 8th, 2012 8:14pm Report this commentCameron is a busted flush. His Honours for Tory Donors reveals everything known about Cameron. This is simple Displacement as The City prepares it Bonus Payments and the media taunt the Paying Public with Cameron's Classmates rolling in Cash Bonuses
Haldane
January 8th, 2012 8:37pm Report this commentAh fairness! How truly fair is it to sequester 50% of some citizens income but tax others less?
Radford NG
January 8th, 2012 9:05pm Report this commentFair Tax would be a single rate on all income above £13,280(minimum wage+40hrs.per.wk.+5% Times 52wks.)with the abolition of Nat.Ins.
Magnolia
January 8th, 2012 9:11pm Report this comment@David Ossitt
Cretin.
Medicine, dated (I'm middle aged), a person who is deformed and mentally handicapped because of congenital thyroid deficiency.
What is wrong with you using the less offensive word stupid instead?
I've also read the word 'lame' on this site today implying stupidity.
Lame.
A person who is unable to walk without difficulty as a result of injury or illness affecting the leg or foot.
Can't we be truthful and honest without subjecting those with disability to further slights and torments because of our paucity in vocabulary and why does our determination to be rude have to be at the expense of people who are in a position of weakness?
Mudplugger
January 8th, 2012 9:26pm Report this commentShinsei67......
If you think lawyers, bankers and accountants pay the 50% rate, you must only know some very unsmart lawyers, bankers and accountants.
disenfranchised
January 8th, 2012 9:35pm Report this commentpresentational fairness. next question.....
Dimoto
January 8th, 2012 9:37pm Report this commentTourette's with it's sudden noises and twitches, is rather disconcerting for those nearby .... or would the PC chaps disagree ?
Ah! that old pot-boiler the 50% tax.
Cameron can't get rid of it without LibDem agreement, whatever the studies show.
At the moment, that would cost far too much in concessions (i.e. a "mansion tax").
Cameron/Osborne have to wait until something turns up which the LibDems desperately want, and the Conservatives can easily concede.
David Ossitt
January 8th, 2012 11:48pm Report this commentMagnolia
“@David Ossitt
Cretin.
Medicine, dated (I'm middle aged), a person who is deformed and mentally handicapped because of congenital thyroid deficiency.”
Magnolia you know quite well I was not referring to anyone who suffers from a thyroid deficiency, and your intervention to find fault with my comment “only a cretin would suggest otherwise” only helps me make my case that we live in a world where anyone can and will take offence at anything, as you have so succinctly demonstrated.
You ask me “What is wrong with you using the less offensive word stupid instead?” nothing wrong apart from the fact that it did not suffice to convey my exact meaning, that being a person of subnormal intelligence a half-wit an idiot.
Verity
January 9th, 2012 3:45am Report this commentMagnolia, the word catty has its uses, but English is a vast language and we have a gigantic (if that's not an insult to people who suffer from giantism) choice of words for whatever we want to convey. To suggest that we dwarf our choices or be crippled by exquisite sensitivity in avoiding moronic phrases is thought fascism.
I do not accept that Magnolia has better judgement than I have. She can bugger off. (If that is not an affront to innocent buggers everywhere.)
Shinsei67
January 9th, 2012 9:34am Report this commentMudplugger:
"If you think lawyers, bankers and accountants pay the 50% rate, you must only know some very unsmart lawyers, bankers and accountants."
So explain why tax revenues have surged if all these clever professionals are avoiding tax ?
Mr Danger
January 9th, 2012 10:03am Report this commentOf course the 50p rate will work in the first year, nobody has had a chance to respond to it yet.
General Zod
January 9th, 2012 10:21am Report this commentMudplugger, the vast majority of City lawyers pay the 50p tax. We're all in LLPs now with published, audited accounts. We have clever tax lawyers who save clients millions, but for UK-resident and domiciled partners, the only ways to reduce the 50p tax are through EISs, pensions, ISAs etc. HMRC is looking very hard at City firms.
Mudplugger
January 9th, 2012 1:25pm Report this commentGeneral Zod.....
Methinks he doth protest too much...
El Sid
January 9th, 2012 2:34pm Report this comment@David Ossitt
Surely it's highly offensive to compare anyone or any group of people to Ed Balls?
The Tourette's people should sue for defamation.
David Ossitt
January 9th, 2012 4:04pm Report this commentEl Sid
“@David Ossitt
Surely it's highly offensive to compare anyone or any group of people to Ed Balls?”
Hello I agree with you it would be offensive to compare any group to The Fatty Ed Balls.
But that is not what Cameron said or did; he likened Fatty’s antics in the House of Commons to that of a sufferer of Tourette’s.
A question, your alias El Sid, might you be naming yourself after the Great Christian, Castilian Knight, Don Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar who was called “El Cid”?
Or possibly some lesser mortal?
General Zod
January 9th, 2012 4:35pm Report this commentWish I did, Mudplugger, but the tax bill I received instead of a new year card from HMRC says otherwise.
Cynic
January 9th, 2012 6:46pm Report this comment"And then how would Cameron respond? Would he scrap 50p on the basis that it's ‘unfair’ overall? Or would he keep it for the presentational reason that it's ‘seen to be fair’? From what he's said today it's unclear, although it does sound more like the latter." I am amazed that you even consider he'd scrap it. Cameron is letting the left set the agenda because he's terrified that the Tories will be branded the 'nasty party' again (and also because he is somewhat left-leaning himself). Cameron is as much a tax and spend merchant as any Labour PM. The one thing he isn't (and I was prepared to give him at least the benefit of the doubt at the beginning) is a Conservative.
Pedantic Virgo
January 9th, 2012 6:54pm Report this comment@Magnolia, isn't it a bit ironic that you're taking David to task for his use of strong terms by quoting the dictionary definitions when you're named after a tree?
Cynic
January 9th, 2012 6:57pm Report this commentRe the comment about Balls; I see the BBC wheeled out some woman who has a child with Tourette's to talk about her "rights" and the offence she felt. How predictable.
Back to top