Another letter

Sir,                  

                 As imposed cuts bite harder and newly announced ones line up to diminish funding of public services and assets further, politicians on all sides are clamouring to score points in the taxation debate. 

                 With skillful spin, expressing outrage and injustice, calls for wealth, tycoon and mansion taxes are argued for and against. Arguments though prejudicial they are convince many yet serve to reaffirm only one fact. Political cowardice is as rife in this government as it was in the last when it comes to addressing taxation. Two points. First, it is reasonable to expect that everyone liable for tax, individual or company, pays their fair share, no more no less. Secondly, through taxation, we the electorate charge our government with responsible stewardship of a range of public services and infrastructure that are integral to a stable, inclusive and caring society. Politicians of the major parties purposely muddy the waters arousing envy across society, creating a smokescreen for the real issue, corporate tax evasion. According to the taxman, HMRC, annual corporate tax evasion costs our country £70bn. Employing armies of accountants and lawyers, corporations use offshore tax havens to hide vast profits and evade taxes due to the Exchequer. A practice the coalition showed, in this budget, it encourages, appeasing corporate greed whilst simultaneously betraying the British people and its hard won public services.

                  The politicians won't challenge them. Why ?, because they say, corporations provide jobs, stability and wealth! Really?, consider Arcadia, owners of Topshop and Boots among others. Last autumn they announced plans to shed upto 3,000 jobs over the next 2 years. Why, explained Arcadia's head Sir Philip Green, a legendary tax dodger in his own right, because profits were down to just £132m and shareholders demand profit. So, his organization's contribution to our economic recovery is to sack the very people who earnt him that profit. That's upto 3,000 people not paying tax and many of whom will need a period of welfare support to which the government's corporate chums will contribute little or nothing whatsoever.

                  The financial services sector, unsurprisingly, opposes imposition of the "Robin Hood" or Financial Transaction Tax, irrespective of the fact that they can easily afford it  and bear a considerable responsibility for our current difficulties. Mr Cameron, in true "world leader" fashion, supports their resistance arguing that even if Europe were to implement the tax the rest of the world would not. The coalition argues that the financial sector would desert the city though that is questionable. Whilst the financial services sector contributes between £20-25bn pa in taxes, we the British taxpayer in turn, by underwriting loans for the banks, effectively provides an annual subsidy of around £100bn. They used to call us a nation of shopkeepers, perhaps it's time we called their bluff and became a nation of small businesses once again.

A letter

Sir,

          I read with interest the article by Mr John Sharman of Unison, Letters and Opinion Lincolnshire Echo 15-21st March and offer the following thoughts. The Neo-Liberal model of economics which now blights the world economy was unleashed proper with the arrival of Mrs Thatcher as Prime Minister in our country and Ronald Reagan to the presidency of the United States. As national assets were sold off into private ownership, proponents of neo-liberalism argued that government "interference" of any kind was harmful and that free unregulated markets are natural, fluid and would bring about a natural order.

          From the late 90's on, Messr's Bush and Blair stoked the fires of neo-liberalsim encouraging the illusion of wealth through credit debt. U.S, lobbyists spent billions of dollars encouraging politicians to do their bidding whilst at home"Quangos", remember that term? commissioned by the government, paid for by the taxpayer, and headed by businessmen whose sole aim was to de-regulate in favour of their own business interests, fed off the public purse whilst trying to help themselves to the family silver.

          At this juncture I have to disagree with Mr Sharman, he is wrong to argue that it is the capitalist system not its operators who are at fault. That is akin to suggesting that because a car can be driven wrecklessly, it's not the driver's fault if it crashes. Following the financial crisis of 2008, it was widely anticipated that lessons would be learned and new regulation would prevent such a repeat. Clearly they haven't, nothing has changed significantly, the bankers and corporate elite get richer and have continued to manipulate the world's economy to suit their own ends galloping along in denial of the suffering and hardship they have brought about.

          I state the obvious, businesses of this nature exist to make profit for shareholders and shareholders demand profit.Whilst free markets do have a role to play in our economic growth and development there are areas of modern society in which profit driven performance has no place. Health and social care, education and the rule of law are of prime concern and must be protected by government. Health and social care because, and don't confuse this with the desire to be effective and efficient, caring for our sick and needy should not be compromised by economically driven targets. Education because it is through the guarantee of an equal opportunity to learn that we all grow, develop and are valued as members of a society in which our involvement is positively encouraged. The law must remain free of private interests because if government cannot guarantee that citizens are treated equally regardless of their financial wealth and social position we should be concerned that civil unrest such as that witnessed last summer will likely become more commonplace.

          Last week it was disclosed that Devon NHS Trust has put its children's services out to private tender. Can any right thinking person truly believe that young people trying to cope with varying degrees of personal trauma will be best served by a target and profit driven company. The NHS isn't perfect, it's a massive and expensive organization but it does pay its way, it's ours, it does work and it's a world envied national asset. If it wasn't any good why would private business want to be involved?