Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B892 - The Alternative Tax (Repeal) Bill (Resubmission) watch

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    An amendment was tried and failed, and believe me when I say that I did try very hard.

    However, this bill loads some very undeserving people with a huge bill every year at the tune of 5% of their land's value, which for people living in cities, is just too heavy a burden for them to bear. Not all opf the tax will be passed on, that's granted, but thousands of pounds will. This isn't progressive, and it isn't needed. I'd rather we worked to cut council tax and business rates along with increasing the minimum wage and just repeal the damned ATA altogether, it's not worth the farce.
    Riiiight. Ok.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Riiiight. Ok.
    It didn't even get the majority of government on side.

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=3873517
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Understandable, but a complete repeal is wrong - if the proposers believe it should have been amended by now, why haven't they submitted an amendment instead?
    If we pass this bill, and someone attempted to pass a new, better Alternative Tax Bill there is a high chance that the people who proposed to repeal of this bill will not support it.
    Perhaps because we do not believe it should be amended, rather repealed, and the basis of the failure last time was the promise of amendment, which it should be noted was voted 2:1 against

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    DMcGovern, I've been convinced that the ATA is worse than the status quo before it, and I voted no last time around because it was suggested that an amendment with something very specific (a tax only on empty properties) would be forthcoming, and also that if the repeal passed, it wouldn't be permissible to put something which enacted the amended content before the House.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    The bill that is trying to be repealed comes into force on the 6th April, limiting the time to amend or repeal the bill before the poorest in society see a substantial increase in annual taxes.
    I would then suggest a motion to push back the bill, and then tackle this after the election, rather than in the last days of a sitting parliament
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Aye
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I would then suggest a motion to push back the bill, and then tackle this after the election, rather than in the last days of a sitting parliament
    Translation "please try to push it back in the hopes we will win more seats to defend our regressive trash"

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Translation "please try to push it back in the hopes we will win more seats to defend our regressive trash"

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That is you putting words somewhere you do not belong.

    I'm merely saying I would have had no issue with this being resubmitted next term, and I think the speaker's decision to allow it before then wasn't the right decision, when Nigel mentioned the reason why you pushed for it to be resubmitted I simply replied with what I would have done had this been the opposite way round
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    That is you putting words somewhere you do not belong.

    I'm merely saying I would have had no issue with this being resubmitted next term, and I think the speaker's decision to allow it before then wasn't the right decision, when Nigel mentioned the reason why you pushed for it to be resubmitted I simply replied with what I would have done had this been the opposite way round
    Do you have any understanding of how much simpler it is to repeal it before enactment, this is before considering the fact it prevents families being forced onto the street, something TSR Labour it seems are going to not care about for a third time.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Do you have any understanding of how much simpler it is to repeal it before enactment, this is before considering the fact it prevents families being forced onto the street, something TSR Labour it seems are going to not care about for a third time.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I don't see it as being much simpler, however I'm willing to be told why it is. As far as the economics, I'm not the one to talk to, my expertise in this field are very slim, but I hope it does not offend if I trust my party over members from others
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I would then suggest a motion to push back the bill, and then tackle this after the election, rather than in the last days of a sitting parliament
    If you submit an amendment, not a motion, BEFORE this goes to division, you have my vote this time.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    If you submit an amendment, not a motion, BEFORE this goes to division, you have my vote this time.
    I hope you don't mind me using this as a chance to bring United1892 in as he is the chancellor after all
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I don't see it as being much simpler, however I'm willing to be told why it is. As far as the economics, I'm not the one to talk to, my expertise in this field are very slim, but I hope it does not offend if I trust my party over members from others
    It is because repeal before enactment nullifies the repeals, doing it after repeal would either leave a council tax sized hole in council finances, or require legislation as part of it reinstating council tax

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    It is because repeal before enactment nullifies the repeals, doing it after repeal would either leave a council tax sized hole in council finances, or require legislation as part of it reinstating council tax

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If you push back the enactment, then surely there shouldn't be such a hole in council finances?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    If you push back the enactment, then surely there shouldn't be such a hole in council finances?
    No, but that is why it is much much easier to repeal before enactment, it's also worth noting that you would be pushing it back a year

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    If you submit an amendment, not a motion, BEFORE this goes to division, you have my vote this time.
    Because? This government has had ages to produce an acceptable amendment and failed, you have failed yo produce even an unacceptable amendment, and we may have a government who can brute force a repeal in a month

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Because? This government has had ages to produce an acceptable amendment and failed, you have failed yo produce even an unacceptable amendment, and we may have a government who can brute force a repeal in a month

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Because I like the spirit of the ATA, just not the implementation. The government has had ages, and I'm giving them a deadline as far as I'm concerned.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Because I like the spirit of the ATA, just not the implementation. The government has had ages, and I'm giving them a deadline as far as I'm concerned.
    In other words you're wanting them to give you another year not to produce an amendment?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Because I like the spirit of the ATA, just not the implementation. The government has had ages, and I'm giving them a deadline as far as I'm concerned.
    I think it's been mentioned by myself before, that you can get rid of the bit about the LVT without getting rid of the Wealth Tax.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    In other words you're wanting them to give you another year not to produce an amendment?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Wait what? No, I'm asking for the government to produce an amendment if they stand behind the ATA.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 27, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.