THE NEW COMMUNITY CHARGE: SOME PERTINENT LESSONS FROM AFRICA
| Date | 01 March 1988 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1988.tb01750.x |
| Published date | 01 March 1988 |
| Author | J. W. R. Katalikawe |
THE NEW COMMUNITY CHARGE: SOME
PERTINENT LESSONS FROM AFRICA
INTRODUCTION
AT
long last the Tory Government is about to implement one
of
its
long-standing election pledge-the abolition
of
the domestic rating
system-first mooted as long ago as 1974. The Party’s manifesto for
that year loftily proclaimed that: “Within the normal life-time of a
Parliament we shall abolish the domestic rating system and replace it
by taxes more broadly based and related to people’s ability to pay.”’
Subsequent Conservative Party election manifestos have retained,
albeit in modified form, the same theme. However, the latest
government offering is a radical departure from previous proposals
and a far cry from the 1974 posture. The proposed community
charge, which the Prime Minister proudly refers to as the “Flagship
of
her Party’s programme,” will be a flat-rate capitation tax which,
like the existing domestic rates, will be unfair, unpopular and
unrelated to the taxpayer’s ability to pay. It is envisaged that the new
community charge will be payable at the same rate by
all
adults
regardless
of
their ability to pay. Those on maximum social security
will be liable to pay a minimum
of
20
per cent. of the local
community charge, but will, more or less, be able to recover the
same from the Department of Health and Social Security receiving
20
per cent. the average national community charge. The
80
per dent.
rebate will be tapered off by the current means test applicable to
supplementary benefits, until the whole
of
the community charge is
payable. The implications
of
this have not yet been worked out, but
the concomitant bureaucratisation can hardly be over emphasised.
Moreover, these tax rebates do seriously undermine the government’s
case for tax reform, they negate the whole purpose
of
the new
community charge, the aim of which is to make those who vote for
profligacy to foot the bill, or better still, from the government’s point
of
view, vote out of office high-spending Labour Councils and
so
change the balance
of
power in local government in favour
of
low-
spending Tory controlled councils. The community charge thus will
not achieve one
of
its fundamental objectives and it is contended that
it is unlikely to achieve any
of
the others either.
The aims of this paper are, first
to
examine the rationale behind
the Government’s proposals and their likely impact on the family, the
young and the poor; and secondly, for illustrative purposes,
to
look
at some real, as opposed to hypothetical, examples
of
the impact of
the Poll Tax in Colonial Africa where it was for a long time the
centrepeice
of
both central and local government revenues. By
’
The Conservative Manifesto, October
1974.
This Manifesto was approved by the
full
shadow cabinet, including Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, the then Shadow Secretary
of
State
for
the Environment.
173
To continue reading
Request your trial