Council Tax

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by jaysay

I hate to sound boring but Graham still hasn't answered my post on his alternative budget proposals for 2008/9

He also hasn't responded to me to tell me which of my figures were wrong.

I wouldn't hold your breath over the budget, the Labour group didn't even propose one, the independents did though.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by claytonender

The budget for 2008-2009 financial year was debted and passed at the Council Meeting held on 28th February. This meeting was open to the public.
Council
Items 12 and 13 were the Budget proposals
The minutes of the Meeting held 28 February will be availabale to view oline, when the agenda etc for the Meeting on 22 April 2008 is avaialble online (link to this meeting is Council

Thanx ... and also to Cyfr.

[g jones]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

He also hasn't responded to me to tell me which of my figures were wrong.

I wouldn't hold your breath over the budget, the Labour group didn't even propose one, the independents did though.

50% wage rises. I have got an accurate figure on mine from 2000-2008. 23.4% About 8% more than inflation or a 1% rise over inflation each year because the ecomomy has been doing so well

BUDGET - You seem to be mixing things up and got confused about what went on.

1) Our budget was 2% by putting less away. There is £1.8million in the bank, well over the 5% required (£15m=750k). So why tax people for nothing? Our borrowing rates now are low. Rainy day = money out of people's pockets and I never thought I would hear Tories say that. Or that they suggest we subsidise nationalised industries.

2) It is not necessary, nor more importantly prudent to vote through a wish list on the night. Tories have the Council's full time officers 5 days a week doing theirs. We don't and I want our policies to be discussed by members of others parties and improved where a better idea exists. Voting through opposition policies on the night is yesterday's politics.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by g jones

50% wage rises. I have got an accurate figure on mine from 2000-2008. 23.4% About 8% more than inflation or a 1% rise over inflation each year because the ecomomy has been doing so well

BUDGET - You seem to be mixing things up and got confused about what went on.

1) Our budget was 2% by putting less away. There is £1.8million in the bank, well over the 5% required (£15m=750k). So why tax people for nothing? Our borrowing rates now are low. Rainy day = money out of people's pockets and I never thought I would hear Tories say that. Or that they suggest we subsidise nationalised industries.

2) It is not necessary, nor more importantly prudent to vote through a wish list on the night. Tories have the Council's full time officers 5 days a week doing theirs. We don't and I want our policies to be discussed by members of others parties and improved where a better idea exists. Voting through opposition policies on the night is yesterday's politics.

My inflation figure was a national average and it is accurate. You can't just pick your own wage and say that it doesn't fit it hence my figures are wrong. Not even sure if that is your correct percentage, because on page 1 you said it was 18%


1) When you say 'required' what is it required for? You say rainy day is money out of peoples pockets, Gordon Brown didn't do it and look where thats got us. You should save in the times of plenty like other big countries. It's irresponsible to not plan for the future.

2) So you don't think an opposition should propose a budget? Three independents managed to produce a budget and I presume they're not allowed to use the full time officers either. In fact some of the independents ideas were included in the budget that was passed.

Since the only proposal in your 'budget' was a 2% tax rise rather than a 5% rise, I presume you agree with the rest of the budget? And what do you do next year to sustain it? Do you increase taxes by much more than 5% to make up for the shortfall, perhaps when the economy is worse off, giving people a real tax burden.

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

My inflation figure was a national average and it is accurate. You can't just pick your own wage and say that it doesn't fit it hence my figures are wrong. Not even sure if that is your correct percentage, because on page 1 you said it was 18%

Whist I appreciate that your wage inflation was the national average, I don't think that you can apply the natioanl average to one specific area of the country.

As you are well aware, Hyndburn is a 'low wage area' with most people earning well below the National Average Wage. In fact there are many people in Hyndburn who have not had a pay rise for over 12 months.

Can you please supply the figures for average wages in Hyndburn for the last 10 years. (Always bearing in mind that most people will be earning much less than the average).

As a matter of interest I was listening to 2BR the other night, there were a series of job adverts on, most of the office jobs were advertised at £6.00 an hour, the only jobs advertised at jobs with 'reasonable' rates of pay were for motor mecahnics paying approx £10.00 an hour. I have just looked on Job Centre Plus and the highest rate of pay I could find for office work, was for someone to work in HR and they were offering about £7.20 an hour.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by claytonender

Whist I appreciate that your wage inflation was the national average, I don't think that you can apply the natioanl average to one specific area of the country.

As you are well aware, Hyndburn is a 'low wage area' with most people earning well below the National Average Wage. In fact there are many people in Hyndburn who have not had a pay rise for over 12 months.

Can you please supply the figures for average wages in Hyndburn for the last 10 years. (Always bearing in mind that most people will be earning much less than the average).

As a matter of interest I was listening to 2BR the other night, there were a series of job adverts on, most of the office jobs were advertised at £6.00 an hour, the only jobs advertised at jobs with 'reasonable' rates of pay were for motor mecahnics paying approx £10.00 an hour. I have just looked on Job Centre Plus and the highest rate of pay I could find for office work, was for someone to work in HR and they were offering about £7.20 an hour.

I only defended it in my last post because g jones said my figure was incorrect.

I found out Hyndburn household income average from 2000-2006 is 52.7% increase.
I'm using household income because council tax is based on households.

Lancashire County Council: Lancashire Profile

Thats only 6 years not 10, I know, but its not easy to find this data. 52% over 6 years is good to say our council tax has increased only 45% over 9 years.

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

I only defended it in my last post because g jones said my figure was incorrect.

I found out Hyndburn household income average from 2000-2006 is 52.7% increase.
I'm using household income because council tax is based on households.

Lancashire County Council: Lancashire Profile

Thats only 6 years not 10, I know, but its not easy to find this data. 52% over 6 years is good to say our council tax has increased only 45% over 9 years.

From this website it shows the average gross household income (in 2006) in Hyndburn as being under £28,000. It would be interesting to find out how many Acctwebbers have a gross income anywhere near to £28,000 (in the current financial year).

I post my households gorss income tomorrow (when I have added it all up) and give you the comparable figures for 2000.

[andrewb]

That's household income mind. So if its two people living together they only need to earn £14,000 each to have an average household income in Hyndburn.

Quite realistic if you have a job isn't it?

[claytonender]

If you go to

http://www.lancscc.gov.uk/office_of_...gePayHours.xls

This gives you the figures from 2002 to 2007 for all areas of Lanachire and shows the average pay for all residents of each part of the county.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by claytonender

If you go to

http://www.lancscc.gov.uk/office_of_...gePayHours.xls

This gives you the figures from 2002 to 2007 for all areas of Lanachire and shows the average pay for all residents of each part of the county.

So if you take 2006 (since that's where the 28k figure comes from)... anyone in full time employment living with somebody else in fulltime employment will easily have enough income to meet the average household income in Hyndburn (which has gone up 52.7%).

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

That's household income mind. So if its two people living together they only need to earn £14,000 each to have an average household income in Hyndburn.

Quite realistic if you have a job isn't it?

There are many households with only one earner (because there is only one person living in the household) or with one person working full time and the other part time.

If there is a husband working 37 hours a week and earning £15930 per annum (which is the average for all residents as per LCC figures for 2007) and a wife working 20 hours at minimum wage (20 x £5.52 = £110.40 per week) £5740.80 per annum, the annual household income would be £21670.80. Even if the wife was working full time (37 hours at £5.52 =£204.24) £10620.50 the total household income would be £26550.50 per annum.

It is a sad fact of life that women are still paid less than men, even for doing the same job. Men are given job descriptions with fancy titles, such as 'assistant accountant', and women are given job descriptiosn such as 'accounts clerk'. It is very difficult for a woman to prove she is doing the same work as her male co-worker. Also in many companies there is not a proper pay structure, so you have no idea who is earning what amount of pay - unless you actually ask someone.

I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think that two people would both be earning £14000 in the majority of households in Hyndburn.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by claytonender

There are many households with only one earner (because there is only one person living in the household) or with one person working full time and the other part time.

If there is a husband working 37 hours a week and earning £15930 per annum (which is the average for all residents as per LCC figures for 2007) and a wife working 20 hours at minimum wage (20 x £5.52 = £110.40 per week) £5740.80 per annum, the annual household income would be £21670.80. Even if the wife was working full time (37 hours at £5.52 =£204.24) £10620.50 the total household income would be £26550.50 per annum.

It is a sad fact of life that women are still paid less than men, even for doing the same job. Men are given job descriptions with fancy titles, such as 'assistant accountant', and women are given job descriptiosn such as 'accounts clerk'. It is very difficult for a woman to prove she is doing the same work as her male co-worker. Also in many companies there is not a proper pay structure, so you have no idea who is earning what amount of pay - unless you actually ask someone.

I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think that two people would both be earning £14000 in the majority of households in Hyndburn.

Your £15930 figure is an average of full and part time, but someone working 37 hours is full time.

So..
Man working 37 hours in 2007 (and this is working within Hyndburn not outside of it): £21,622
Woman working 20 hours a week on minimum wage (20 x £5.52 = £110.40 per week): £5740.80

Which is £27,362.80

If the woman works full time at minimum wage that's £10620.50 so works out to be £32,242.50

In a band A house this would mean that if the woman was working 20 hours, council tax would be 3.4% of their income or 4.2% if they lived in a band B property (the majority of which is county council tax).

If there's only one earner, then they get discounts on council tax. The £28k figure is perfectly plausible even if two people don't work full time. As it says on LCC website, 52.7% is the amount household income has increased in 6 years, I think that this is good as its inline with the national average, and means that we have a very good deal where it comes to council tax since that has only gone up 45% in 9 years.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by jaysay

I hate to sound boring but Graham still hasn't answered my post on his alternative budget proposals for 2008/9

I'm cut to the quick, Graham still hasn't replied to my post

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

Your £15930 figure is an average of full and part time, but someone working 37 hours is full time.

So..
Man working 37 hours in 2007 (and this is working within Hyndburn not outside of it): £21,622
Woman working 20 hours a week on minimum wage (20 x £5.52 = £110.40 per week): £5740.80

Which is £27,362.80

If the woman works full time at minimum wage that's £10620.50 so works out to be £32,242.50

In a band A house this would mean that if the woman was working 20 hours, council tax would be 3.4% of their income or 4.2% if they lived in a band B property (the majority of which is county council tax).

If there's only one earner, then they get discounts on council tax. The £28k figure is perfectly plausible even if two people don't work full time. As it says on LCC website, 52.7% is the amount household income has increased in 6 years, I think that this is good as its inline with the national average, and means that we have a very good deal where it comes to council tax since that has only gone up 45% in 9 years.

Ok

Whilst I agree the £28,000 figure is perfectly plausible, my arguement is that most households in Hyndburn have income of less than this. It is an average, and as you know averages are inflated by people who earn higher wages (I know there are some in Hyndurn - but my argument is that the majority earn much less).

It would be interesting to see the average wage broken down by ward (and polling district within each ward). I think then you would find that in most wards (whre the Band A properies are situated) the household and per capita income is much smaller).


Your average wage for a man working within Hyndburn in 2007 is £21662 (which is £11.26 an hour). I think you will find that most jobs in Hyndburn are paying much less than this. Averages will always be just that, can you please show me evidence of adverts for jobs that justify your figures.

Also single person households only get a 25% reduction in Council Tax, which you have failed to mention in your post.

You have also failed to take into consideration households where there are 2 pensioners. If there joint pension Is £192.37 a week (£10,000 per annum) with modest savings, they would get no help with Council Tax. You have to remember that whilst State Retirement Pension is increased every year, many private pensions do not increase from the level that they when they were first paid.

I appreciate that you are a student and used to doing research, so you must excuse a 'poor' pensioner for trying to dissect your arguments.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by claytonender

Ok

Whilst I agree the £28,000 figure is perfectly plausible, my arguement is that most households in Hyndburn have income of less than this. It is an average, and as you know averages are inflated by people who earn higher wages (I know there are some in Hyndurn - but my argument is that the majority earn much less).

It would be interesting to see the average wage broken down by ward (and polling district within each ward). I think then you would find that in most wards (whre the Band A properies are situated) the household and per capita income is much smaller).


Your average wage for a man working within Hyndburn in 2007 is £21662 (which is £11.26 an hour). I think you will find that most jobs in Hyndburn are paying much less than this. Averages will always be just that, can you please show me evidence of adverts for jobs that justify your figures.

Also single person households only get a 25% reduction in Council Tax, which you have failed to mention in your post.

You have also failed to take into consideration households where there are 2 pensioners. If there joint pension Is £192.37 a week (£10,000 per annum) with modest savings, they would get no help with Council Tax. You have to remember that whilst State Retirement Pension is increased every year, many private pensions do not increase from the level that they when they were first paid.

I appreciate that you are a student and used to doing research, so you must excuse a 'poor' pensioner for trying to dissect your arguments.

It was an average figure of people working WITHIN Hyndburn not people who live in Hyndburn and work outside in say Manchester or whatever. I know some people will earn more than average, hence the name, but its Hyndburn I don't think theres hundreds of people earning £100,000+ skewing the statistics. The vast majority of people live in bands A&B, hence the average will be more representative of them, not the 11% of people that live in bands D, E, F, G & H.

As you will appreciate it is very hard to find these specific figures but I'm trying my hardest.

I can only get ward figures from 2001 and 2004. The 2004 figures include merged wards and things for all except Rishton, so I've used Rishton because the two data years are directly comparable.
In Rishton the average household income has increased 15% over 3 years which is 5% per year, so if that were to continue it would be 45% from 1999-2008, obviously the 45% figure is an estimate, but it's a fairy accurate one since it goes along with all the other statistics I've posted.

Here are the first 5 permanent full time jobs from fish4jobs within 10miles of Accrington:

Welder/Fitter: £20,000
Customer account manager: £18,000 + OTE £23k
Payroll Administrator: £15,000-£19,000
Skilled CNC Turner: £25,000-£27,000
Project Engineer: £22,000-£25,000

Of course you won't jump into high earning jobs right away, they need skills and experience, but that's just the way the world works.

Pensioners get all sorts of other benefits, and they get help with council tax unless they have over £16,000 saved. Even then they're still entitled to a 25% discount if they're on their own. If you still don't think the additional benefits pensioners get outweighs them having to pay full council tax if they have more than £16,000 saved and are living together, then you can advocate increasing the state pension or reducing further the amount pensioners have to pay for council tax.

My argument is that the 45% rise in council tax has been less than the rise in earnings for the vast majority of people. Therefore we have it quite good in terms of how much we're having to pay compared with the rest of the country who are experiencing rises of more than 100%. I know they earn more, but this is in terms of percent. I only wish we could have a unitary authority so we didn't have to pay county council.

I'm having fun doing all this research even if I am supposed to be on holiday. I was trying to keep my posts short, but I haven't been able to manage it with this one, sorry.