Birmingham City Council yesterday said that due to cuts in central government funding for council tax benefit, it would have to find nearly £12m. Their preferred proposal for this would be to make claimants pay 20% of the council tax due on their property except disabled people and families with children under the age of 6. The ConDem coalition have already said that pensioners cannot have their council tax benefit cut.
18 Jul 2012 1 Comment
Another interesting post from Birmingham Against the Cuts. In the city this week one of the big stories has been the prospect of savage cuts in council tax benefit, money that right now the Labour council is discussing how to save. None of the solutions appear very good, and all will end up hurting those with the least the hardest, with possible £200 rises for people quite possibly simply unable to afford such an increase. No change there then from a government happy to introduce tax cuts for the rich but cut services for the most desperate to the bone. It’s a worrying story, and it’s worthy of note examining the way that the local paper (which has a track record of being pretty right-wing) has spun it. Whilst the story details the actual facts of the situation, the headline and presentation is a little misleading: COUNCIL TAX BOMBSHELL FOR CITY POOR. Now at first glance at this would suggest that the council was of their own accord planning a huge council tax hike. That isn’t the case and I think it’s a poor way to present it, and I worry that the decision was a deliberate one. The local Labour Party, that has introduced a few tentatively progressive policies like the Living Wage, is clearly in a bind. I’m guessing that they are deeply uncomfortable having to do this as they know the effect this policy will have. It’s a cynical, cowardly move by the government to pass responsibility for the implementation of this cruel, vindictive and unnecessary policy on to local authorities, and as luck would have it in Birmingham we have a newly elected Labour Council that will get the blame instead. But Labour still plan to implement it one way or another and in the final analysis that is all that really matters. They will say they have no choice but I disagree. This must be opposed and my one criticism of the article I’m re-blogging is that a strategy isn’t laid out to try and stop this. Complaining loudly and waiting for an incoming Labour government to reverse this isn’t good enough (in the first instance there is no guarantee they would anyway…..) It appears that councils up and down the country are all going to be in the same position. So the (Labour, but I suppose anyone else willing to join them…..) councils should stand together, organise a mass grassroots campaign against this and defy the government. Labour councillors have a democratic mandate and I’m sure none of them were voted in to introduce these types of policies. We have seen previously that the government does buckle under pressure. If the Labour councillors are good little boys and girls and dutifully rubberstamp this then one can guarantee that nothing will change. But if they take a stand, then who knows? Now of course I’m not seriously expecting this to happen, but I simply don’t accept that the willingness of many Labour councils and councillors to implement the cuts and privatizations demanded of them by the centre is the way forward. It means changing generations of thinking and considering again the importance of bottom-up campaigning of extremely dubious legality. So be it.