Sir, – When it came to making a decision whether or not to divert from Tory austerity policies and increase the top rate of tax for those with an income above £150,000, SNP Finance Secretary Derek Mackay seems to have bottled it.
He has given in to the scare stories that increasing the top rate of tax will reduce the Government’s tax income. No wonder the rich get richer and everyone else has to pay more for the services they need.
At the height of the financial crash, Labour Chancellor Alastair Darling, in his 2009 budget, decided to increase the top rate of tax to 50%. But he made the fatal error of saying that the increase would only apply from 2010. Some of those affected by the rise brought forward their income the year before the tax rise came into force; according to HMRC figures, up to £18 billion of income was brought forward in this way. No conclusions could be drawn about the revenue collected in the first year of the tax because the means to get around the new rate could not be used again.
Despite that, and in defiance of popular opinion, in March 2012 George Osborne reduced the top rate to 45%, saying that the increase to 50% had produced little extra revenue, totalling ignoring the fact that higher-rate taxpayers had been given 12 months to reorganise their finances, and many did so with alacrity.
A confidential study that had previously been brought to his attention said top earners using aggressive avoidance schemes were bringing their income tax rates down to just 10%.
It is about time the SNP grasped the nettle and increased the top rate to 50%.
The idea that people will incur the enormous cost of moving house and changing jobs just to save a bit of tax is a fallacy.
For a supposed socialist party their budget, instead of soaking the rich, drenches middle earners instead, and leaves hard-pressed Scottish workers to pick up the cost of maintaining the NHS, educating our children, and providing all the other services necessary for a good life.
Phil Tate.95 Craiglockhart Rd, Edinburgh.
A lot of wailing over very little
Sir, – Much wailing from the “Nasty” party with regard to an increase for some in tax.
They claim businesses and people will leave in droves as a result of the increase, and Scotland will be headed for the poor house.
Let’s just stop and think about these ridiculous claims from the “Nasties”.
Seventy per cent of taxpayers won’t pay any more than they are currently paying, some on low wages will pay slightly less.
For those who will pay slightly more – do the Tories really believe they are all going to leave and business will go south over a few quid?
House prices in Scotland are lower, council tax on average is lower, university fees are subsidised, saving families around £9k a year, prescriptions are free, bus travel for seniors is free – and the list goes on.
I think anyone considering abandoning Scotland over a few quid a week in tax would be cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Of course, the only policy or social improvement put forward by conservatives has been to say no to a second referendum.
If polls are correct, people are beginning to see just how limited and vacuous they really are.
Bryan Auchterlonie.
Bluebell Cottage,
Ardargie,
Perth.
Salmond can’t, Cameron can?
Sir, – Former First Minister Alex Salmond was roundly criticised by his political opponents for agreeing to produce a television show for RT, the Russian state television propaganda network.
The Conservatives in particular angrily alleged that he was degrading the office of First Minister by taking Vladimir Putin’s shilling and lending legitimacy to an authoritarian, undemocratic regime.
Oddly, there was deafening silence from those very same individuals when it was revealed last week that former Prime Minister David Cameron is to lead “a new UK-China bilateral investment fund”, thereby presumably degrading the office of Prime Minister by taking President Xi’s shilling and lending legitimacy to an authoritarian, undemocratic regime.
David Kelly.
17 Highfields,
Dunblane.
V&A offices a terrible idea
Sir – It is with dismay I read that a five-storey office building is planned to be erected right opposite the V&A Museum in Dundee.
The whole ambience of the waterfront will be spoiled if this goes ahead.
This is going to be a wonderful area in the centre of the city. To make the V&A stand out it needs the space around it, to make it look spectacular.
I have a challenge for Dundee City Council’s executive director of city development, Mike Galloway.
There are more than 68 vacant units in the city, waiting to be filled. Technology Park (once the perfect spot) is waiting to be filled. Office spaces at the waterfront stand empty. Yet he still wants to build more.
Fill the existing office blocks first.
If Mr Galloway is desperate to spend £15.5 million, spend it on something worthwhile, such as schools or the NHS.
There are a lot more needy causes.
Marguerite Whitehurst.
321 Queen St,
Broughty Ferry,
Dundee.
True cost of grit bins decision
Sir – It seems to me that the first duty of the council is to keep its residents safe.
By removing 200 grit bins and prioritising roads, it left people to skid and slide their way round Cupar and other towns and villages on pavements that had turned into ice rinks.
That is clearly a failure in decision-making and all bins should be immediately reinstated – not only by request, as the current policy advises. This is also hopelessly short-sighted.
A friend of mine in his 70s fell on the ice in Cupar on Thursday, broke his hip, and has now had it replaced. This is an unwanted trauma for him and his family, and a cost to the taxpayer of tens of thousands of pounds.
Multiply his experience by 100-plus and you have a rough estimate of the avoidable cost to the council budget. The bins were removed to save £125,000. A simple cold snap has cost many times that amount. Reinstate all bins now, and apply common sense in future.
Cllr Tony Miklinski.
Whitehill Farm,
Cupar.
A question of perspective
Sir, – Regarding Michael Mulford’s letter (Letters, December 16), defending the Christmas menu for inmates against criticisms of it being lavish, I cannot comment on prison conditions, having never been in one.
However, having spent the first nine years of my life as a son to a war-widowed mother, sleeping rough and nearly starving to death on many occasions, save for my maternal grandmother’s sacrifices, I can empathise with those who sleep rough and rely on foodbanks. Believe me, the prison fare Mr Mulford describes is lavish to them.
Even now, my daily diet is: tea and toast for breakfast, cuppa soup for lunch and perhaps black pudding and sausage for my main meal. Black pudding and sausage for breakfast –that is lavish where I come from!
Mr Mulford noted: “Prisons are sombre places.” No need to cry into your porridge, Mr Mulford. Think how bleak a Christmas must be for the loved ones of a murder victim, with an empty seat at their table? I lost my wife last year and if prison is as sombre as my Christmases are now, there would be no crime!
No, I do not begrudge prisoners their festive fare. I merely wish to point out to the obviously well-fed, well-heeled Mr Mulford that lavish is a relative term, and I rather think those he berates were speaking from the point of view of the less well off in our society.
Leslie Milligan.
18b Myrtlehall Gdns,
Dundee.
