Michael Lyons's review into local government finance was a damp squib. Council tax should be scrapped, not tweakedby Harvey Cole / April 29, 2007 / Leave a comment
Published in April 2007 issue of Prospect Magazine
Michael Lyons’s report on local government finance, delivered on 21st March, was reminiscent of Horace’s quip, “The mountains were in labour and gave birth to a ridiculous mouse.” The expected roar of the Lyons turned out to be an impotent squeak.
The report had twice been postponed, in order to extend its scope to consider aspects of the role and function of local authorities as well as their financing. But the main thrust of its 400 pages turned out to be a series of tweakings of council tax rather than bold moves to replace, restructure or supplement it.
Along with the introduction of three new council tax bands, one at the bottom and two at the top, Lyons suggested a revaluation of house property—the current bands are based on 1991 prices—a move which the government promptly rejected. Scratching around for ways of widening the council tax net to scrape up additional revenue, Lyons also proposed removing the current exemptions of farms and farm buildings (to raise £450m); of property occupied by charities, including their shops (another £724m); and to end the relief for empty and derelict property (£1.3bn). All that would have increased the total yield of council tax by about 10 per cent. The government grabbed at the last of these—and it was largely included in Gordon Brown’s swan song budget. But the other suggestions will be the subject of—probably lengthy and indecisive—consultation.
Most of Lyons’s other proposals were immediately shot down: levying by councils of additional charges for refuse collection; a so-called “bed tax” on hotels (mainly aimed at foreign tourists); and a supplementary rate on businesses to help pay for major infrastructure projects.
Even if implemented, the Lyons proposals on council tax—together with his optimistic suggestion that central government should relinquish its powers of “capping” the rate charged by individual authorities—would do nothing…