Showing posts with label Green Party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Green Party. Show all posts
Wednesday, 25 February 2015
If only Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett had had the figures at her finger tips
The Green Party proposed to spend £5 Billion on affordable housing for rent - that would be paid for by ending tax relief for buy to let and other landlords.
2013 figures from Her Majestys Customs and Revenue (HMCR) show that private landlords claim £5.31 billion a year in mortgage interest and other financial costs and £7 billion in other tax deductible cost including repairs, letting fees and insurance. So the green party could have got another £7 billion !
At the moment the Governments spends less than £1 billion a year on the affordable homes programme.
Typically Natalie was interviewed by a right-wing radio presenter who had no ideas about the figures either.
Who could imagine that the Government hands out £22 billion a year in Housing Benefit (largely to private landlords) and a further £12 billion in tax reliefs to private landlords yet spends such a piddling sum on houses for rent and most of them are at 80% market rent and not what used to be called affordable rents.
Friday, 9 January 2015
Let the Green Party join the debate
There is an air of absurdity to the Ofcom ruling that the Green Party are not a major political party but UKIP are.
Everyone seems to bring their own highly biased view of what should entitle a party leader to take part in a televised debate. Usually it is the qualification that ensures their own favoured party has a place and cuts off another party.
To my mind, the key determinant should be the number of candidates a party is standing. There was (and perhaps still is) a understanding that any party standing 50 candidates at a General Election is entitled to a party Political Broadcast.
The same principle should apply to the Leaders Debates. Not to do so gives a catch 22 situation where a party, particularly a smaller party is not given the opportunity to increase its support and then the failure to increase support is in turn is used as the justification for not giving it the Party the opportunity to increase support.
Everyone seems to bring their own highly biased view of what should entitle a party leader to take part in a televised debate. Usually it is the qualification that ensures their own favoured party has a place and cuts off another party.
To my mind, the key determinant should be the number of candidates a party is standing. There was (and perhaps still is) a understanding that any party standing 50 candidates at a General Election is entitled to a party Political Broadcast.
The same principle should apply to the Leaders Debates. Not to do so gives a catch 22 situation where a party, particularly a smaller party is not given the opportunity to increase its support and then the failure to increase support is in turn is used as the justification for not giving it the Party the opportunity to increase support.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)