Out of order outgoings...

Overspending but getting less in return: next year the UK's payments to the EU will increase by 60%, SIXTY per cent; according to the Daily Telegraph yesterday these figures are "buried in government documents". I disagree, because we knew, and the DT made it quite clear in 2005 ("Britain's net payments to Brussels will double to £6.4bn within four years, according to fresh figures from the Treasury") when Blair negotiated it, also in December 2005 when Brown showed that not only had he failed to budget for it but, with the lies and bluster that we have become used to, said

"...he would use the veto to protect the rebate, which was 'fully justified and not up for renegotiation'".

Quoted in the Telegraph the opposition chief secretary to the Treasury Philip Hammond, said "The consequences of Labour's rebate sell-out are becoming clear, if only in these buried figures. Gordon Brown and Tony Blair signed billions of pounds of our money away in return for absolutely nothing."

"At a time when our economy is in recession and public service budgets are under pressure, Labour's incompetence is allowing billions of pounds to be siphoned off to Brussels."

Siphoned off is right! Suffice to say I think it is very wrong and we should start to seriously debate whether we should be doing it (in or out!) In fact I'll go further, [stamps foot] reform of the EU is vital and if that means starting again so be it but the first move - if you'll forgive the tangent - should be to get OLAF to bite in the rights places, or to bite at all! They're celebrating 10 years this year, how many billions has been 'lost' in those 10 years? That and the failed accounts saga should be more of a cause for concern but it seems so "normal" now that we bearly notice...a dangerous state of affairs. Little wonder then that an "alarming" majority (66%) of the EU citizens believe there is corruption involved: from the European Commission Eurobarometer survey on the attitudes of Europeans towards corruption [PDF] from Stop Corruption. [Not] funnily enough, the lowest 'scores' were 50% from the group of those born outside the EU and 57% from students.

The EU is all funded with taxpaying citizens' money and in OLAF's own mission statement it says "

European Institutions have a duty to guarantee, with regard to the taxpayer, the best use of their money.

"...except if they don't want to, or they're told not to, or if they forget.

Out of order outgoings...

Overspending but getting less in return: next year the UK's payments to the EU will increase by 60%, SIXTY per cent; according to the Daily Telegraph yesterday these figures are "buried in government documents". I disagree, because we knew, and the DT made it quite clear in 2005 ("Britain's net payments to Brussels will double to £6.4bn within four years, according to fresh figures from the Treasury") when Blair negotiated it, also in December 2005 when Brown showed that not only had he failed to budget for it but, with the lies and bluster that we have become used to, said

"...he would use the veto to protect the rebate, which was 'fully justified and not up for renegotiation'".

Quoted in the Telegraph the opposition chief secretary to the Treasury Philip Hammond, said "The consequences of Labour's rebate sell-out are becoming clear, if only in these buried figures. Gordon Brown and Tony Blair signed billions of pounds of our money away in return for absolutely nothing."

"At a time when our economy is in recession and public service budgets are under pressure, Labour's incompetence is allowing billions of pounds to be siphoned off to Brussels."

Siphoned off is right! Suffice to say I think it is very wrong and we should start to seriously debate whether we should be doing it (in or out!) In fact I'll go further, [stamps foot] reform of the EU is vital and if that means starting again so be it but the first move - if you'll forgive the tangent - should be to get OLAF to bite in the rights places, or to bite at all! They're celebrating 10 years this year, how many billions has been 'lost' in those 10 years? That and the failed accounts saga should be more of a cause for concern but it seems so "normal" now that we bearly notice...a dangerous state of affairs. Little wonder then that an "alarming" majority (66%) of the EU citizens believe there is corruption involved: from the European Commission Eurobarometer survey on the attitudes of Europeans towards corruption [PDF] from Stop Corruption. [Not] funnily enough, the lowest 'scores' were 50% from the group of those born outside the EU and 57% from students.

The EU is all funded with taxpaying citizens' money and in OLAF's own mission statement it says "

European Institutions have a duty to guarantee, with regard to the taxpayer, the best use of their money.

"...except if they don't want to, or they're told not to, or if they forget.

Opposition opportunism...

No, but that's what a lot of people are saying - as you would expect - and over on the LFAT blog the Quote of the Day is Larry Elliott in the Guardian on David Cameron's "Progressive Conservatism". Now there seems to be some slight disagreement about the definition of "Progressive" and I added my tuppenyworth to what had been commented already. Lo and behold - albeit yesterday's news - from Benedict Brogan at The Telegraph for the "progressive" argument:

"Labour's betrayal of the poor is an open goal for David Cameron. The Tory leader can cast himself as a 'progressive' saviour."

I was led there thanks to a post on Raedwald's excellent blog:

"I commend Benedict Brogan's piece in the Telegraph this morning on how Labour have betrayed the poor. This is the most squalid and reprehensible failure in a foul spectrum of political self-interest, incompetence, sleaze, lunacy and sheer idiocy that has characterised Labour's term in office."

"...I would add those scores of venal and corrupt civil servants who have segued seamlessly from procurement and administrative incompetence in their ministries to fatly-remunerated board positions, picking up an 'honour' along the way..."

"What a damning indictment of utter failure." Brilliant, well worth reading the whole post [Link]

Back to the progressive debate: earlier this month George Osborne laid the groundwork for this progress...hehehe...and Brogan points out that a recent poll found that voters of all political hues didn't (or no longer) associate "progressive" with certain left-wing thinking or even liberal for that matter; not surprisingly they [now] take it to mean what I thought it always meant (???) i.e. reforming/modernising or just moving forward (presumably to something better!) Brogan adds that by happy coincidence these are all values that David Cameron hopes will define his leadership.

"The progressive label adopted by the leader is as much about posture as it is about principles of fairness, opportunity, greenery and security."

Opposition opportunism...

No, but that's what a lot of people are saying - as you would expect - and over on the LFAT blog the Quote of the Day is Larry Elliott in the Guardian on David Cameron's "Progressive Conservatism". Now there seems to be some slight disagreement about the definition of "Progressive" and I added my tuppenyworth to what had been commented already. Lo and behold - albeit yesterday's news - from Benedict Brogan at The Telegraph for the "progressive" argument:

"Labour's betrayal of the poor is an open goal for David Cameron. The Tory leader can cast himself as a 'progressive' saviour."

I was led there thanks to a post on Raedwald's excellent blog:

"I commend Benedict Brogan's piece in the Telegraph this morning on how Labour have betrayed the poor. This is the most squalid and reprehensible failure in a foul spectrum of political self-interest, incompetence, sleaze, lunacy and sheer idiocy that has characterised Labour's term in office."

"...I would add those scores of venal and corrupt civil servants who have segued seamlessly from procurement and administrative incompetence in their ministries to fatly-remunerated board positions, picking up an 'honour' along the way..."

"What a damning indictment of utter failure." Brilliant, well worth reading the whole post [Link]

Back to the progressive debate: earlier this month George Osborne laid the groundwork for this progress...hehehe...and Brogan points out that a recent poll found that voters of all political hues didn't (or no longer) associate "progressive" with certain left-wing thinking or even liberal for that matter; not surprisingly they [now] take it to mean what I thought it always meant (???) i.e. reforming/modernising or just moving forward (presumably to something better!) Brogan adds that by happy coincidence these are all values that David Cameron hopes will define his leadership.

"The progressive label adopted by the leader is as much about posture as it is about principles of fairness, opportunity, greenery and security."

Oostveen's oomph...

Erik Oostveen is a Dutch telecoms engineer who started a personal protest against the BBC soon after moving to the UK eight years ago. He is at the forefront of a growing 'community' behind the campaign against the BBC's licence fee. You may think it odd that someone who not only uses the BBC website a lot but who also lives abroad (me!) gets involved but, like Erik, my mother received several intimidating letters from TV Licensing (TVL, this is a private company that collects the fee on behalf of the BBC) demanding that she pay the fee...despite her not having a TV!! The letters continued despite her attempts to explain the issue.

"'The BBC is creating fear,' he says. "The letters have a harsh tone and even if you tell them you don’t watch live broadcasts they may still send someone round to check. That says: we don’t trust you; you’re breaking the law."

For that reason alone I commend Erik's campaign because he "was being forced to pay for a service I hadn't asked for and didn't want". Erik then disconnected and detuned his TV and stopped paying. "Resisting the BBC terror tactics": We're like the suffragettes, say a growing group of TV fee refuseniks [The Times]

Oostveen has set up a website, www.tvlicensing.biz, which campaigns for the abolition of the licence.

I'm sure that a number of people wouldn't mind if the BBC wasn't so high and mighty and paying themselves bigbucks at the taxpayers' expense. Another campign member said: "A TV tax shouldn’t exist. Debates aren’t working, lobbying MPs doesn’t work, so small people like us are making a difference. This is civil disobedience. I’m doing what the suffragettes once did."

Oostveen's oomph...

Erik Oostveen is a Dutch telecoms engineer who started a personal protest against the BBC soon after moving to the UK eight years ago. He is at the forefront of a growing 'community' behind the campaign against the BBC's licence fee. You may think it odd that someone who not only uses the BBC website a lot but who also lives abroad (me!) gets involved but, like Erik, my mother received several intimidating letters from TV Licensing (TVL, this is a private company that collects the fee on behalf of the BBC) demanding that she pay the fee...despite her not having a TV!! The letters continued despite her attempts to explain the issue.

"'The BBC is creating fear,' he says. "The letters have a harsh tone and even if you tell them you don’t watch live broadcasts they may still send someone round to check. That says: we don’t trust you; you’re breaking the law."

For that reason alone I commend Erik's campaign because he "was being forced to pay for a service I hadn't asked for and didn't want". Erik then disconnected and detuned his TV and stopped paying. "Resisting the BBC terror tactics": We're like the suffragettes, say a growing group of TV fee refuseniks [The Times]

Oostveen has set up a website, www.tvlicensing.biz, which campaigns for the abolition of the licence.

I'm sure that a number of people wouldn't mind if the BBC wasn't so high and mighty and paying themselves bigbucks at the taxpayers' expense. Another campign member said: "A TV tax shouldn’t exist. Debates aren’t working, lobbying MPs doesn’t work, so small people like us are making a difference. This is civil disobedience. I’m doing what the suffragettes once did."

Only one opener...

[Edit: 'dead' image removed THIS LINK left.] Everton 1, Arsenal 6. There can only be one opening game per club each year but what a way to do it: young guns open fire. Arsenal yesterday "equalled the biggest opening-day victory in Premier League history". Who would have thought it? Records show that Arsenal have won more opening day Premier League matches than any other team (11) and have not conceded more than a single goal in any of their opening matches since 1993 and also hold an unbeaten record of 12 away league games says Alan Hansen (whilst predicting a draw...well we all did!) The BBC say that Everton scored an "inconsequential" goal in injury time...but not so fast, inconsequential? But for that goal Arsenal would have beaten the record and not equalled it! In case you're interested the last time was in the very first Premiership season when Leeds Utd beat Tottenham 5-0, also on on August 15 but in 1992. Pub Quiz handy info is that in the same game Eric Cantona was the first player to score a hat-trick in the Premier League.

Only one opener...

There can only be one opening game per club each year but what a way to do it: young guns open fire. Arsenal yesterday "equalled the biggest opening-day victory in Premier League history". Who would have thought it? Records show that Arsenal have won more opening day Premier League matches than any other team (11) and have not conceded more than a single goal in any of their opening matches since 1993 and also hold an unbeaten record of 12 away league games says Alan Hansen (whilst predicting a draw...well we all did!) The BBC say that Everton scored an "inconsequential" goal in injury time...but not so fast, inconsequential? But for that goal Arsenal would have beaten the record and not equalled it! In case you're interested the last time was in the very first Premiership season when Leeds Utd beat Tottenham 5-0, also on on August 15 but in 1992. Pub Quiz handy info is that in the same game Eric Cantona was the first player to score a hat-trick in the Premier League.

Only one opener...

There can only be one opening game per club each year but what a way to do it: young guns open fire. Arsenal yesterday "equalled the biggest opening-day victory in Premier League history". Who would have thought it? Records show that Arsenal have won more opening day Premier League matches than any other team (11) and have not conceded more than a single goal in any of their opening matches since 1993 and also hold an unbeaten record of 12 away league games says Alan Hansen (whilst predicting a draw...well we all did!) The BBC say that Everton scored an "inconsequential" goal in injury time...but not so fast, inconsequential? But for that goal Arsenal would have beaten the record and not equalled it! In case you're interested the last time was in the very first Premiership season when Leeds Utd beat Tottenham 5-0, also on on August 15 but in 1992. Pub Quiz handy info is that in the same game Eric Cantona was the first player to score a hat-trick in the Premier League.

Osborne on optimum outcome...

Update: 1730BST: Osborne infuriates Labour and Lib Dems with claim Tories are progressive. Andrew Sparrow in The Guardian. Excellent, must be good if they're infuriated: clear blue water...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Progressive and radical...George Osborne is saying EXACTLY what he and the rest of his party should be saying and they should keep saying it every time they are asked, this is the only way to deflect Labour's smears and lies: he said (on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, to listen click here or on screen below) a couple of very important things: that the "progressive" Conservative Party (might sound wrong but it's right!)

...planned to reform public services such as schools in a way which could achieve necessary spending cuts without harming frontline services

and

...that people should not be "over-taxed" because of Labour's "overspending".

He also proposed something that may not go down well but is a clearly radical (although not original) should be a major improvement in the UK's steadily worseneing education system: da da daaarrr...by allowing independent providers into the state sector.

"It means the end of the state monopoly on the provision of state-funded education."... "Education is still free for people, for children and parents. It's just that not all teachers in the country are employed by the state."

Clear blue water...

Osborne on optimum outcome...

Update: 1730BST: Osborne infuriates Labour and Lib Dems with claim Tories are progressive. Andrew Sparrow in The Guardian. Excellent, must be good if they're infuriated: clear blue water...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Progressive and radical...George Osborne is saying EXACTLY what he and the rest of his party should be saying and they should keep saying it every time they are asked, this is the only way to deflect Labour's smears and lies: he said (on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, to listen click here or on screen below) a couple of very important things: that the "progressive" Conservative Party (might sound wrong but it's right!)

...planned to reform public services such as schools in a way which could achieve necessary spending cuts without harming frontline services

and

...that people should not be "over-taxed" because of Labour's "overspending".

He also proposed something that may not go down well but is a clearly radical (although not original) should be a major improvement in the UK's steadily worseneing education system: da da daaarrr...by allowing independent providers into the state sector.

"It means the end of the state monopoly on the provision of state-funded education."... "Education is still free for people, for children and parents. It's just that not all teachers in the country are employed by the state."

Clear blue water...

Ombudsmen over officialdom...

"YEARS ago the late Tory grandee Lord Hailsham predicted that if we carried on without govern- mental reform we would soon be ruled by what he prophetically called an elective dictatorship. He has turned out to be right." So says Frederick Forsyth in today's Daily Express, and Mr Forsyth is also right. [Link]

We all know what shallow, party-led cowards most Labour MPs have turned out to be - "timorous little serfs of the party machine" - everyone claims they speak for their constituents yet they bearly ever seem to manage it when 'whipped' elsewhere. Ows has long thought that to turn people off politics was a core intention of the New Labour Project, get power and do just anything to keep it - by hook or by crook - and they've been doing just that with ample evidence of both hook and crook and only recent events have finally managed to waken the latent concern of the dormant UK public (some of us knew before 1997!)

"...this sense of utter helplessness that caused the national 'turn- off' from politics. The expenses scandal was just an excuse for us to yell our outrage, not the cause of the outrage."

So we are asked, "by what authority have they become our masters and tyrants?" Frederick Forsyth's answer is: "restore the ombudsmen"..."the champion of the downtrodden citizen"

It was a brilliant idea, now knackered and eviscerated by triumphant petty officialdom.

FF suggests that The Conservative Party should bring back this idea making the idea of "a local champion, servant of common sense" a reality in each constituency and cover ALL issues.

Petty officialdom has convinced itself that it is our true master, forgetting that in the British system public service is supposed to be just that: service, not tyranny.

If Cameron could restore our right to be listened to and our wrongs righted at local level he would become the most popular politician in 30 years.

The point being of course, being able to avoid the "Dilemma of Democracy", how to prevent the 'elective dictatorship' that we seem to have foisted upon us!

Ombudsmen over officialdom...

"YEARS ago the late Tory grandee Lord Hailsham predicted that if we carried on without govern- mental reform we would soon be ruled by what he prophetically called an elective dictatorship. He has turned out to be right." So says Frederick Forsyth in today's Daily Express, and Mr Forsyth is also right. [Link]

We all know what shallow, party-led cowards most Labour MPs have turned out to be - "timorous little serfs of the party machine" - everyone claims they speak for their constituents yet they bearly ever seem to manage it when 'whipped' elsewhere. Ows has long thought that to turn people off politics was a core intention of the New Labour Project, get power and do just anything to keep it - by hook or by crook - and they've been doing just that with ample evidence of both hook and crook and only recent events have finally managed to waken the latent concern of the dormant UK public (some of us knew before 1997!)

"...this sense of utter helplessness that caused the national 'turn- off' from politics. The expenses scandal was just an excuse for us to yell our outrage, not the cause of the outrage."

So we are asked, "by what authority have they become our masters and tyrants?" Frederick Forsyth's answer is: "restore the ombudsmen"..."the champion of the downtrodden citizen"

It was a brilliant idea, now knackered and eviscerated by triumphant petty officialdom.

FF suggests that The Conservative Party should bring back this idea making the idea of "a local champion, servant of common sense" a reality in each constituency and cover ALL issues.

Petty officialdom has convinced itself that it is our true master, forgetting that in the British system public service is supposed to be just that: service, not tyranny.

If Cameron could restore our right to be listened to and our wrongs righted at local level he would become the most popular politician in 30 years.

The point being of course, being able to avoid the "Dilemma of Democracy", how to prevent the 'elective dictatorship' that we seem to have foisted upon us!

Opposing opposition II...

Seems Hugo the Clown just gets worse and worse: he is now taking over renowned coffee companies; when I first read this I thought they had discovered why such a massive amount of illegal drugs now passes through Venezuela - seemingly unhindered - but it was in fact just another example of the slow destruction of a country when thriving companies are squeezed until the pips squeak and then expropriated for not squeaking enough. To be honest though it's probably just a diversion to prevent too much investigation in to the oppression of the opposition: just this weekend we had news of 34 radio stations being closed, maybe hundreds more will be closed in the near future. Be in no doubt that none of these stations are pro-Chavez, purely coincidental of course. The move comes because the stations are in breach of registration rules (not handing in the papers on time). That may or may not be true but it is a worrying development in a country where bit by bit the opposition are being silenced. This, only a week before a new media law - the Special Bill Against Media Crimes - will be proposed under which journalists could be sent to gaol for publishing harmful material...sounds fair enough but we can all guess what "harmful" entails.

Not for want of supporting clowns we have Hugo's head of the national regulator and public works minister Diosdado Cabello saying "there was no evidence that the closures were against the law, adding that they were part of efforts to make the media more democratic."

"When we - the national government, the revolutionary government - took the decision to democratise the radio-electrical spectrum... we were speaking seriously,"

But Diosdado (God given...hahahaha) isn't the worst: higher on the list of supporting clowns is Venezuelan Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro. Chavez has decided to "freeze relations with neighboring Colombia and recall his envoy over accusations from Bogota that Caracas has links to Colombia's FARC Marxist guerillas." Ncholas Maduro said "Caracas would respond "at the appropriate time" to the "new lies" being leveled at Chavez's government." These lies were the Swedish government asking them how weapons Sweden had sold Venezuela were found in a FARC camp.

Officials in Stockholm confirmed that some arms produced in Sweden and sold to Venezuela were found in a FARC camp in Colombia, and the Swedish government called on Caracas to explain how the weapons wound up in the hands of the rebels.

(AFP - Google hosted news)

oops...

Opposing opposition II...

Seems Hugo the Clown just gets worse and worse: he is now taking over renowned coffee companies; when I first read this I thought they had discovered why such a massive amount of illegal drugs now passes through Venezuela - seemingly unhindered - but it was in fact just another example of the slow destruction of a country when thriving companies are squeezed until the pips squeak and then expropriated for not squeaking enough. To be honest though it's probably just a diversion to prevent too much investigation in to the oppression of the opposition: just this weekend we had news of 34 radio stations being closed, maybe hundreds more will be closed in the near future. Be in no doubt that none of these stations are pro-Chavez, purely coincidental of course. The move comes because the stations are in breach of registration rules (not handing in the papers on time). That may or may not be true but it is a worrying development in a country where bit by bit the opposition are being silenced. This, only a week before a new media law - the Special Bill Against Media Crimes - will be proposed under which journalists could be sent to gaol for publishing harmful material...sounds fair enough but we can all guess what "harmful" entails.

Not for want of supporting clowns we have Hugo's head of the national regulator and public works minister Diosdado Cabello saying "there was no evidence that the closures were against the law, adding that they were part of efforts to make the media more democratic."

"When we - the national government, the revolutionary government - took the decision to democratise the radio-electrical spectrum... we were speaking seriously,"

But Diosdado (God given...hahahaha) isn't the worst: higher on the list of supporting clowns is Venezuelan Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro. Chavez has decided to "freeze relations with neighboring Colombia and recall his envoy over accusations from Bogota that Caracas has links to Colombia's FARC Marxist guerillas." Ncholas Maduro said "Caracas would respond "at the appropriate time" to the "new lies" being leveled at Chavez's government." These lies were the Swedish government asking them how weapons Sweden had sold Venezuela were found in a FARC camp.

Officials in Stockholm confirmed that some arms produced in Sweden and sold to Venezuela were found in a FARC camp in Colombia, and the Swedish government called on Caracas to explain how the weapons wound up in the hands of the rebels.

(AFP - Google hosted news)

oops...

Observer obituary?...

Will The Observer, the world's oldest Sunday newspaper, shut down the presses? [The Times]. This is one option being considered by The Scott Trust - owners of Guardian Media Group - the Murdoch press are sure to relish publishing any details to get some revenge on the GMG for the NOTW/ Andy Coulson phone-tapping 'non-scandal'.

"Internal memo confirms The Observer may close", by The Times Media Editor Dan Sabbagh:

"A closure of The Observer, the world's oldest Sunday newspaper, is actively being considered, the chief executive of the company behind the 218-year old title told staff in an internal email sent shortly after 12.30pm today."

Observer obituary?...

Will The Observer, the world's oldest Sunday newspaper, shut down the presses? [The Times]. This is one option being considered by The Scott Trust - owners of Guardian Media Group - the Murdoch press are sure to relish publishing any details to get some revenge on the GMG for the NOTW/ Andy Coulson phone-tapping 'non-scandal'.

"Internal memo confirms The Observer may close", by The Times Media Editor Dan Sabbagh:

"A closure of The Observer, the world's oldest Sunday newspaper, is actively being considered, the chief executive of the company behind the 218-year old title told staff in an internal email sent shortly after 12.30pm today."

Open orifices

And now for something completely different… Interesting 'hole news' from Letters From a Tory and none of them are the black hole of MPs expenses!

This led me to look for other pictures and there are some stunners, especially futher images of the sinkhole which occured in Guatemala.

Open orifices

And now for something completely different… Interesting 'hole news' from Letters From a Tory and none of them are the black hole of MPs expenses!

This led me to look for other pictures and there are some stunners, especially futher images of the sinkhole which occured in Guatemala.

Overtly overdue...

Welfare state reduction: the one thing that is on everyone's list to be reformed, and drastically. "Total spending on social security will reach "unsustainable" levels this year, a think tank warns, as handout payments now equate to a quarter of the government's entire budget." reports Ian Johnston in the Daily Telegraph today. [DT] The UK benefit system has become extraordinarily complex that nobody doubts it's vast and gross expense to the taxpayer AND it is in fact 'damaging' to the claimants! So says leading tax specialist David Martin who demonstrates this what he says in a new report [Centre for Policy Studies] Benefit simplification: how and why it must be done.

"[He] illustrates the complexity showing how marginal withdrawal rates can be as high as 95.5%. For example, a single woman who works 30 hours per week, for every extra pound that she earns she pays a further 20p in income tax, 11p in NICs, and loses 39p in Working Tax Credit, a total of 70p. The extra net income of 30p (after these deductions from the extra pound) reduces her Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit by 85% of 30p, or 25.5p. Her marginal deduction rate is therefore 95.5% (70% + 25.5%)."

The main proposal for simplification and cost reduction would be a single agency with just 'one form for all benefits and a single website'. Any change for the better can't come soon enough, let's hope it's not just more thinking the unthinkable and then not getting the chance to do it!

H/T Conservative Home.

Overtly overdue...

Welfare state reduction: the one thing that is on everyone's list to be reformed, and drastically. "Total spending on social security will reach "unsustainable" levels this year, a think tank warns, as handout payments now equate to a quarter of the government's entire budget." reports Ian Johnston in the Daily Telegraph today. [DT] The UK benefit system has become extraordinarily complex that nobody doubts it's vast and gross expense to the taxpayer AND it is in fact 'damaging' to the claimants! So says leading tax specialist David Martin who demonstrates this what he says in a new report [Centre for Policy Studies] Benefit simplification: how and why it must be done.

"[He] illustrates the complexity showing how marginal withdrawal rates can be as high as 95.5%. For example, a single woman who works 30 hours per week, for every extra pound that she earns she pays a further 20p in income tax, 11p in NICs, and loses 39p in Working Tax Credit, a total of 70p. The extra net income of 30p (after these deductions from the extra pound) reduces her Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit by 85% of 30p, or 25.5p. Her marginal deduction rate is therefore 95.5% (70% + 25.5%)."

The main proposal for simplification and cost reduction would be a single agency with just 'one form for all benefits and a single website'. Any change for the better can't come soon enough, let's hope it's not just more thinking the unthinkable and then not getting the chance to do it!

H/T Conservative Home.