Friday, July 03, 2009
Cardiff Council's cash giveaway
What is most bizarre about the Western Mail's latest exposé about Assembly Members' expense claims is not that some AMs failed to apply for a 50% rebate on their Council Tax but that the rebate is available at all.
In actual fact this is one of the tamer revelations, not just because there is no personal gain involved but that it is easily put right. Now that he or she is aware of the discount an Assembly Member can easily apply for it retrospectively and give the backdated money to the Fees Office. Thus the Assembly itself will not lose out though Cardiff Council will. It is in effect a transfer of public funds from one body to another.
The questions that need to be asked however is why an Assembly Member might know that the rebate is available in the first place and why Cardiff Council offers it?
Cardiff must be one of the few Councils that still offers a 50% rebate on second homes. Swansea for example charges 100% Council Tax on a furnished second home and I believe that they are typical of most other local authorities. It is also the fact that if you look at Cardiff Council's website there is no reference to the availability of this discount.
An AM whose main home is in one of the more sensible Council areas therefore may have claimed the 25% single person's discount but might not even think to check for the more generous rebate. Why should they?
Secondly, why is Cardiff (and the Vale of Glamorgan) giving away public money? In these stringent times surely they need every penny that they can get. In that case it would make sense that they use the discretion available to Welsh local authorities and charge second home owners the full 100% Council Tax. Those owners may not make full use of Council facilities but their absence for large parts of the year has other social costs on the local community. I am astonished the Western Mail did not ask these questions.
Update: It seems that I am being very unfair to both Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan Councils. A bit of research (well one phone call and an e-mail anyway) reveals that the impact of the 50% discount for second homes is cost neutral because it is accounted for in their grant from the Assembly.
If they were to do away with the discount and charge 100% Council Tax then the additional revenue they get would be wiped out by a consequential and equal reduction in grant. It is therefore the Assembly Government that loses out from these discounts as if they were not offered then WAG could give less grant to the Councils concerned.
It is also the case that the legislation does not distinguish between a second home and an empty property so any regime you apply to one affects the other too. That must give pause for thought in how we can use Council Tax as a social engineering tool.
Apologies to both Cardiff and Vale of Glamorgan Council but could you please make your websites more user friendly and ensure that they are more comprehensive in the information offered in future?
In actual fact this is one of the tamer revelations, not just because there is no personal gain involved but that it is easily put right. Now that he or she is aware of the discount an Assembly Member can easily apply for it retrospectively and give the backdated money to the Fees Office. Thus the Assembly itself will not lose out though Cardiff Council will. It is in effect a transfer of public funds from one body to another.
The questions that need to be asked however is why an Assembly Member might know that the rebate is available in the first place and why Cardiff Council offers it?
Cardiff must be one of the few Councils that still offers a 50% rebate on second homes. Swansea for example charges 100% Council Tax on a furnished second home and I believe that they are typical of most other local authorities. It is also the fact that if you look at Cardiff Council's website there is no reference to the availability of this discount.
An AM whose main home is in one of the more sensible Council areas therefore may have claimed the 25% single person's discount but might not even think to check for the more generous rebate. Why should they?
Secondly, why is Cardiff (and the Vale of Glamorgan) giving away public money? In these stringent times surely they need every penny that they can get. In that case it would make sense that they use the discretion available to Welsh local authorities and charge second home owners the full 100% Council Tax. Those owners may not make full use of Council facilities but their absence for large parts of the year has other social costs on the local community. I am astonished the Western Mail did not ask these questions.
Update: It seems that I am being very unfair to both Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan Councils. A bit of research (well one phone call and an e-mail anyway) reveals that the impact of the 50% discount for second homes is cost neutral because it is accounted for in their grant from the Assembly.
If they were to do away with the discount and charge 100% Council Tax then the additional revenue they get would be wiped out by a consequential and equal reduction in grant. It is therefore the Assembly Government that loses out from these discounts as if they were not offered then WAG could give less grant to the Councils concerned.
It is also the case that the legislation does not distinguish between a second home and an empty property so any regime you apply to one affects the other too. That must give pause for thought in how we can use Council Tax as a social engineering tool.
Apologies to both Cardiff and Vale of Glamorgan Council but could you please make your websites more user friendly and ensure that they are more comprehensive in the information offered in future?
Comments:
<< Home
Are you talking about caravans and tent pitches?
That's all I see as exempt on the Cardiff site.
Post a Comment
That's all I see as exempt on the Cardiff site.
# posted by 
: 1:07 PM
: 1:07 PM<< Home
