From The Citizen's Income Trust Newsletter:
Minister: Undersecretary …
Undersecretary: Yes, Sir?
M: What did you think of the Chancellor’s conference announcement?
U: Which one, Sir?
M: The one about Child Benefit.
U: Masterful, Sir.
M: I agree. Saves money, and it’s good for our social justice image.
U: We’re very pleased.
M: You are?
U: The Department, Sir.
M: How so?
U: We’re going to have to collect huge amounts of information on who’s living with whom. We’ve been doing that amongst the lower classes for years, but we’ll now have to do it for the wealthy as well. That will be interesting. And then we’ll have to connect that information with data on who’s paying higher rate tax, and on who’s receiving Child Benefit. Do you think we should ask the company which tried to computerize means-tested benefits if they can do it?
M: Shouldn’t it go out to tender?
U: Of course. I’ll see if anyone knows how to write a specification.
M: But do you think we need to do all that? Can’t we just ask Child Benefit claimants to tell us if they’ve got someone in the household who’s paying higher rate tax?
U: Yes, we could. But then we’ll need to check up on them. So we’ll need a wonderfully large fraud department, and we’ll need to train some more snoopers. Now that will be really interesting.
M: O dear, do you think so?
U: And we’ll need to collect millions of changes of circumstances every year. And we’ll need a department to look after underpayments and overpayments. We don’t have to worry too much about that at the moment.
M: Don’t HMRC have all that trouble with tax credits?
U: They do, Sir. I’m sure we could ask them to give us lessons. … And we’ll need tribunals, too. They take quite a bit of admin. So we’re really very pleased; and so are the unions, because we’ll be able to redeploy all the people we were going to have to get rid of.
M: I wonder if I should have a word with the Chancellor?
U: I think it was the Prime Minister’s idea, Sir. And they both thought it was a good one. But don’t worry. I’m sure we can manage it. I’ll have a note of the extra admin. costs for you by tomorrow so you can tell the Chancellor how much he won’t be saving.
M: It hope it won’t be too embarrassing.
U: I’m afraid it already is quite embarrassing, Sir. But at least we won’t need to employ consultants. We’ve all the all expertise we’ll need in the means-testing sections of this department, and in tax credits at HMRC.
M: I suppose that’s a help. … But the argument’s right, isn’t it? That it’s wrong for low earners to be paying for Child Benefit for the wealthy?
U: Of course, Sir.
M: Do you really think so? … You don’t, do you.
U: It’s as good as the argument that we should stop higher rate taxpayers using the NHS.
M: O dear … You’re really quite keen on universal benefits, aren’t you.
U: If I can speak in a personal capacity and off the record … It’s much more efficient to give Child Benefit to everyone. The wealthy are paying far more in tax than they receive in Child Benefit so there’s really no problem. But the Department rather you didn’t make that argument too clearly, Sir.
M: I can see that.
U: On the other hand, if you’re interested, there is another strategy. You could tell them how cheap Child Benefit is to administer and suggest that they turn tax credits into a universal benefit. But only do that if you can be sure that this department gets to run it. Which means that you’ll need to get the PM to understand, and not the Chancellor.
M: Do you think he will?
U: I think he can.
M: That’s not what I asked.
U: I agree, Sir
Diminished
1 hour ago
11 comments:
That one took some following.
Don't recall you name on the writer credits, where it should have been - natch!
Very good, seriously. BTW, some of us have sharper brains.......(joke, James)
JH, Citizen's Income Trust have a simple idea for welfare reform, that's the background.
WFW, I last did some writing for them a couple of years ago, I think this article was Rev Dr Malcolm Torry's fine work.
"If we find you've lied to us we'll kill your first-born" should do the trick.
D, were you ever a higher rate taxpayer while receiving Child Benefit for young Miss D?
I agree it's a disaster in the making. It's not due to come in until 2013 of course. Really, it's so astonishingly stupid that I wonder whether they have some kind of hidden agenda with it.
From the outset, the whole policy had all the hallmarks of the extensive planning and forethought that typified certain Blairite policy announcements.
Like the one about the Police dragging yobs to ATMs to pay on the spot fines.
AC, you're now Welfare Minister in my Bloggers Cabinet. You work it out. I can only assume it was naked politics, the measure is surprisingly popular in surveys.
FT, that's what I think.
AC, ANY discernable agenda or strategy beyond 'we made it up on the spur of the moment' would be good, let alone a hidden one.
There is a very simple explanation for this policy. There are three types of people in the world. Those you like. Those you don't like. And wankers.
This Universal benefit only works morally with an LVT.
With tax on peoples time it's akin to slavery.
Post a Comment