Council tax in Weymouth and Portland highest in the country

Council tax in Weymouth and Portland highest in the country

Council tax in Weymouth and Portland highest in the country

First published in News
Last updated

RESIDENTS of Weymouth and Portland are paying the highest rate of council tax in the country, according to government figures.

Information from the Department for Communities and Local Government shows that Weymouth and Portland is the most expensive location for council tax in 2014/15, with the average for a Band D mid range property of £1,726.04 - more than £1,000 higher than the lowest in the country in Westminster in London.

Weymouth and finance spokesman has challenged the figures, claiming Weymouth and Portland’s council tax was not even the highest in Dorset.

Briefholder for finance and assets Colin Huckle was also keen to point out that the borough council’s portion of the council tax was only a small part of the total bill, with the county council accounting for the majority of the bill and precepts from the police and fire services also included.

The figures show two other areas of Dorset in the top ten most expensive locations, with East Dorset coming in fifth place and Purbeck in sixth.

Weymouth resident Michael McManus accused the borough council of being ‘greedy’ and said they did not appreciate the struggles many people faced to make ends meet.

He said: “I have always stated that I think Weymouth and Portland Council is greedy, that’s my opinion.

“If they actually took time out to ask people how they manage and if they are struggling they would find 98 or 99 per cent of them would say they are struggling.”

Weymouth and Portland outreach worker Angie Barnes says there is 'no justification' for the extortionate council tax rates.

She said: “I know the costs of services have to be covered but there is no justification for the extortionate rates.

“The town is slowly dying economically, corporate wages are far too high.

“Available Jobs are far too scarce for available workforce.

“We risk exceptionally high homelessness due to high taxes.”

County councillor Daniel Brember, who represents Rodwell, blamed the national government for the high level of council tax.

He said: “If Dorset received a fairer share from central government, it would be better able to meet the service level needs of the local population.

“Dorset has been one of the poorest funded counties in the country, in terms of the settlement grants issued by central government.

“Under Eric Pickles, local government and community services are on a knife edge.

“Though it may seem high at the moment, local government cannot sustain the current level of cuts and maintain current service level provisions.”

Cllr Brember added that the demographic in Weymouth meant service level needs were greater and ‘more complex’.

He said: “Weymouth has acute needs and therefore needs to raise a considerable amount more via council tax.”

Cllr Huckle said he had seen other figures for ten towns across the county that showed Weymouth was actually the eight highest in terms of council tax, meaning it was actually the third lowest in Dorset.

He added that, while Weymouth and Portland Council was the billing authority, Dorset County Council accounted for 70 per cent of the council tax bill, Dorset Police 11 per cent, Dorset Fire and Rescue Service four per cent with the borough council accounting for the rest.

Cllr Huckle also pointed out that many properties in Weymouth and Portland were in the A or B council tax bands so they paid less.

Comments (40)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:14pm Sat 2 Aug 14

annotater says...

Cllr Huckle also pointed out that many properties in Weymouth and Portland were in the A or B council tax bands so they paid less.
Less than Londons A and B rates, No, that statement is untrue and misleading.
Cllr Huckle also pointed out that many properties in Weymouth and Portland were in the A or B council tax bands so they paid less. Less than Londons A and B rates, No, that statement is untrue and misleading. annotater
  • Score: 21

5:29pm Sat 2 Aug 14

iansedwell says...

And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho
.co.uk/news/11116015
.Dorset_workers_stru
ggle_to_make_living_
wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax. iansedwell
  • Score: 47

7:29pm Sat 2 Aug 14

islandman says...

Portland Bill, please don't mince your words.
Portland Bill, please don't mince your words. islandman
  • Score: 9

8:02pm Sat 2 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

I keep saying we have the worst council in England and I stand by that, this is just more proof, how much income do they need?

Sack these part timers on 10k to 15k for these councillor jobs of which we have far too much, half them, and pay them 20k to 30k and a get a decent job done.

Decision after decision is wrong, they have endless meetings about changing the roads, and they finally decide to put a "painted hatched area" and put up more signs it's terrible.

Shocking they are, and as they read this, yes you can ALL glow with embarrassment, as being the worst council in England.....well done.
I keep saying we have the worst council in England and I stand by that, this is just more proof, how much income do they need? Sack these part timers on 10k to 15k for these councillor jobs of which we have far too much, half them, and pay them 20k to 30k and a get a decent job done. Decision after decision is wrong, they have endless meetings about changing the roads, and they finally decide to put a "painted hatched area" and put up more signs it's terrible. Shocking they are, and as they read this, yes you can ALL glow with embarrassment, as being the worst council in England.....well done. MrTomSmith
  • Score: 42

10:29pm Sat 2 Aug 14

cosmick says...

MrTomSmith wrote:
I keep saying we have the worst council in England and I stand by that, this is just more proof, how much income do they need?

Sack these part timers on 10k to 15k for these councillor jobs of which we have far too much, half them, and pay them 20k to 30k and a get a decent job done.

Decision after decision is wrong, they have endless meetings about changing the roads, and they finally decide to put a "painted hatched area" and put up more signs it's terrible.

Shocking they are, and as they read this, yes you can ALL glow with embarrassment, as being the worst council in England.....well done.
Well Tom who did you vote for. If you really think they are so bad stand yourself.
I agree that some of them are poor at the job just like sheep, they follow the leader.
[quote][p][bold]MrTomSmith[/bold] wrote: I keep saying we have the worst council in England and I stand by that, this is just more proof, how much income do they need? Sack these part timers on 10k to 15k for these councillor jobs of which we have far too much, half them, and pay them 20k to 30k and a get a decent job done. Decision after decision is wrong, they have endless meetings about changing the roads, and they finally decide to put a "painted hatched area" and put up more signs it's terrible. Shocking they are, and as they read this, yes you can ALL glow with embarrassment, as being the worst council in England.....well done.[/p][/quote]Well Tom who did you vote for. If you really think they are so bad stand yourself. I agree that some of them are poor at the job just like sheep, they follow the leader. cosmick
  • Score: -13

12:04am Sun 3 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

cosmick wrote:
MrTomSmith wrote:
I keep saying we have the worst council in England and I stand by that, this is just more proof, how much income do they need?

Sack these part timers on 10k to 15k for these councillor jobs of which we have far too much, half them, and pay them 20k to 30k and a get a decent job done.

Decision after decision is wrong, they have endless meetings about changing the roads, and they finally decide to put a "painted hatched area" and put up more signs it's terrible.

Shocking they are, and as they read this, yes you can ALL glow with embarrassment, as being the worst council in England.....well done.
Well Tom who did you vote for. If you really think they are so bad stand yourself.
I agree that some of them are poor at the job just like sheep, they follow the leader.
Cosmick, I normally like your posts, but come on, you dont't surely think that because you disagree with something you need to stand or be in charge of it do you? Thats not right.

I dont agree with Putin or Roy Hodgson but I can have opinion without having to take over their jobs............ mind you :-)

I am not going to say who I voted for, because I don't think that will help, I have been damming on the council and that goes for them all, not for just the one person.

Getting back to the subject while I am here, and I think my point was that the system as it stands means we get IMPORTANT positions being paid peanuts 10k to 15k is not enough. But we have far too many councillors , 38 I think it is. We only need about 15 to 18 no more. Pay them a better wage and lets get a proper job done.

I think they do an OK job nothing brilliant, and they make some terrible decisions, absolutely terrible. But I do think the system that we are using is part of the problem.

We need qualified men and women who are able to give this job the time and diligence that WE deserve, we pay for it! Well I propose we pay
double the fee to half of them. That's all, I don't want to take charge, I just think that would be better for our community.

I thank you for listening, reading, and good niight and god bless
[quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MrTomSmith[/bold] wrote: I keep saying we have the worst council in England and I stand by that, this is just more proof, how much income do they need? Sack these part timers on 10k to 15k for these councillor jobs of which we have far too much, half them, and pay them 20k to 30k and a get a decent job done. Decision after decision is wrong, they have endless meetings about changing the roads, and they finally decide to put a "painted hatched area" and put up more signs it's terrible. Shocking they are, and as they read this, yes you can ALL glow with embarrassment, as being the worst council in England.....well done.[/p][/quote]Well Tom who did you vote for. If you really think they are so bad stand yourself. I agree that some of them are poor at the job just like sheep, they follow the leader.[/p][/quote]Cosmick, I normally like your posts, but come on, you dont't surely think that because you disagree with something you need to stand or be in charge of it do you? Thats not right. I dont agree with Putin or Roy Hodgson but I can have opinion without having to take over their jobs............ mind you :-) I am not going to say who I voted for, because I don't think that will help, I have been damming on the council and that goes for them all, not for just the one person. Getting back to the subject while I am here, and I think my point was that the system as it stands means we get IMPORTANT positions being paid peanuts 10k to 15k is not enough. But we have far too many councillors , 38 I think it is. We only need about 15 to 18 no more. Pay them a better wage and lets get a proper job done. I think they do an OK job nothing brilliant, and they make some terrible decisions, absolutely terrible. But I do think the system that we are using is part of the problem. We need qualified men and women who are able to give this job the time and diligence that WE deserve, we pay for it! Well I propose we pay double the fee to half of them. That's all, I don't want to take charge, I just think that would be better for our community. I thank you for listening, reading, and good niight and god bless MrTomSmith
  • Score: 9

1:10am Sun 3 Aug 14

portland.bill says...

islandman wrote:
Portland Bill, please don't mince your words.
Sorry i cannot help it ,
[quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: Portland Bill, please don't mince your words.[/p][/quote]Sorry i cannot help it , portland.bill
  • Score: 4

7:59am Sun 3 Aug 14

Caption Sensible says...

It does not help either that over 7,000 people have gone missing (hence council tax payments) from the 'official' population figure (72,000 and not 65,000).
It does not help either that over 7,000 people have gone missing (hence council tax payments) from the 'official' population figure (72,000 and not 65,000). Caption Sensible
  • Score: 5

8:01am Sun 3 Aug 14

PHonnor says...

Recently there was a Labour proposal to increase council tax on 2nd home owners in the borough, this was voted out by the conservative group. This proposal could of brought extra revenue into the coffers so why did they vote no?
Recently there was a Labour proposal to increase council tax on 2nd home owners in the borough, this was voted out by the conservative group. This proposal could of brought extra revenue into the coffers so why did they vote no? PHonnor
  • Score: 26

8:12am Sun 3 Aug 14

Rocksalt says...

iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho

.co.uk/news/11116015

.Dorset_workers_stru

ggle_to_make_living_

wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
[quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors. Rocksalt
  • Score: 15

9:57am Sun 3 Aug 14

burgerboy says...

You have got to pay for the Olympic legacy somehow.........
You didn't think that came for free did you.
You have got to pay for the Olympic legacy somehow......... You didn't think that came for free did you. burgerboy
  • Score: 5

9:57am Sun 3 Aug 14

Caption Sensible says...

Rocksalt wrote:
iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho


.co.uk/news/11116015


.Dorset_workers_stru


ggle_to_make_living_


wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.
[quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.[/p][/quote]Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service. Caption Sensible
  • Score: 0

10:04am Sun 3 Aug 14

voiceof says...

Interesting to see that the opinion of random residents is included in the article... No wait a minute I've seen that name before...
Interesting to see that the opinion of random residents is included in the article... No wait a minute I've seen that name before... voiceof
  • Score: 4

10:15am Sun 3 Aug 14

K9 says...

The political composition of the Weymouth and Portland Borough Council is: 15 Labour, 11 Conservative, 7 Liberal Democrat, 3 Independent.
The political composition of the Weymouth and Portland Borough Council is: 15 Labour, 11 Conservative, 7 Liberal Democrat, 3 Independent. K9
  • Score: 6

10:25am Sun 3 Aug 14

MoralMinority says...

PHonnor wrote:
Recently there was a Labour proposal to increase council tax on 2nd home owners in the borough, this was voted out by the conservative group. This proposal could of brought extra revenue into the coffers so why did they vote no?
I'm not surprised the conservatives voted out the increase on 2nd homes - Ian Bruce (Elected Conservative for Preston) owns 8 homes in Weymouth and Portland for example.
[quote][p][bold]PHonnor[/bold] wrote: Recently there was a Labour proposal to increase council tax on 2nd home owners in the borough, this was voted out by the conservative group. This proposal could of brought extra revenue into the coffers so why did they vote no?[/p][/quote]I'm not surprised the conservatives voted out the increase on 2nd homes - Ian Bruce (Elected Conservative for Preston) owns 8 homes in Weymouth and Portland for example. MoralMinority
  • Score: 23

10:29am Sun 3 Aug 14

Schrodinger's Cat says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
Rocksalt wrote:
iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho



.co.uk/news/11116015



.Dorset_workers_stru



ggle_to_make_living_



wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.
If council services were privatised, how much would you be prepared to pay a company for your bin and recycling to be collected? How much would you be prepared to pay each time you used the beach and make sure it was cleaned every day? How much would you be prepared to pay for car parking (have you ever been to a NCP car park?!!!)
The average Weymouth + Portland property is in Band B. The household (not each individual) pays £4 a week in council tax to WPBC. Socialist principles keep costs down because we all contribute.
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.[/p][/quote]Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.[/p][/quote]If council services were privatised, how much would you be prepared to pay a company for your bin and recycling to be collected? How much would you be prepared to pay each time you used the beach and make sure it was cleaned every day? How much would you be prepared to pay for car parking (have you ever been to a NCP car park?!!!) The average Weymouth + Portland property is in Band B. The household (not each individual) pays £4 a week in council tax to WPBC. Socialist principles keep costs down because we all contribute. Schrodinger's Cat
  • Score: 5

11:11am Sun 3 Aug 14

WykeReg says...

The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry).

Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges.

That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).
The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure). WykeReg
  • Score: 5

11:19am Sun 3 Aug 14

iansedwell says...

Rocksalt wrote:
iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho


.co.uk/news/11116015


.Dorset_workers_stru


ggle_to_make_living_


wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
Six of the wards in Weymouth & Portland are in the 20% most deprived in the uK according to the 2010 data. When the new data becomes available we are unlikely to see an improvement given the continued economic downturn in the borough.

https://www.dorsetfo
ryou.com/401843
[quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.[/p][/quote]Six of the wards in Weymouth & Portland are in the 20% most deprived in the uK according to the 2010 data. When the new data becomes available we are unlikely to see an improvement given the continued economic downturn in the borough. https://www.dorsetfo ryou.com/401843 iansedwell
  • Score: 6

11:45am Sun 3 Aug 14

Schrodinger's Cat says...

WykeReg wrote:
The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry).

Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges.

That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).
I don't think you really understand the principles of socialism. A socialist understands that everyone needs to contribute according to their ability in order to ensure that everyone receives what they need. Socialists have no objection to paying for things but would prefer that their money is then used to provide services for everyone rather than some of their money being creamed off as profit by a few already wealthy people.
[quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).[/p][/quote]I don't think you really understand the principles of socialism. A socialist understands that everyone needs to contribute according to their ability in order to ensure that everyone receives what they need. Socialists have no objection to paying for things but would prefer that their money is then used to provide services for everyone rather than some of their money being creamed off as profit by a few already wealthy people. Schrodinger's Cat
  • Score: 15

12:15pm Sun 3 Aug 14

monkeydog says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
Rocksalt wrote:
iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho



.co.uk/news/11116015



.Dorset_workers_stru



ggle_to_make_living_



wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.
You might remove your blinkers and take an interest in socialism and it's advantages for working people if you understood the real effects of the neo-liberal policies of our present leaders who, based on your observation, you prefer. But then, there are always people who take comfort in knowing their place.
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.[/p][/quote]Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.[/p][/quote]You might remove your blinkers and take an interest in socialism and it's advantages for working people if you understood the real effects of the neo-liberal policies of our present leaders who, based on your observation, you prefer. But then, there are always people who take comfort in knowing their place. monkeydog
  • Score: 4

1:33pm Sun 3 Aug 14

Newground says...

monkeydog wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Rocksalt wrote:
iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho




.co.uk/news/11116015




.Dorset_workers_stru




ggle_to_make_living_




wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.
You might remove your blinkers and take an interest in socialism and it's advantages for working people if you understood the real effects of the neo-liberal policies of our present leaders who, based on your observation, you prefer. But then, there are always people who take comfort in knowing their place.
Right on, comrade.

Socialists have nothing... and they want to share it with you!
[quote][p][bold]monkeydog[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.[/p][/quote]Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.[/p][/quote]You might remove your blinkers and take an interest in socialism and it's advantages for working people if you understood the real effects of the neo-liberal policies of our present leaders who, based on your observation, you prefer. But then, there are always people who take comfort in knowing their place.[/p][/quote]Right on, comrade. Socialists have nothing... and they want to share it with you! Newground
  • Score: -3

3:11pm Sun 3 Aug 14

WykeReg says...

Schrodinger's Cat wrote:
WykeReg wrote:
The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry).

Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges.

That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).
I don't think you really understand the principles of socialism. A socialist understands that everyone needs to contribute according to their ability in order to ensure that everyone receives what they need. Socialists have no objection to paying for things but would prefer that their money is then used to provide services for everyone rather than some of their money being creamed off as profit by a few already wealthy people.
Sorry, my friend, that is the socialist PR version of their immensely damaging formula for wealth destruction. The reality is that there is no limit in that thinking as to how much wealth can be sucked out of the economy. The money trees just keep on producing a new crop every day.

This is the concept of the free lunch. Everybody can live at everyone else's expense. It works fine until you run out of other people's money.

You must also get over this bizarre notion of the 'wealthy few.' These are generally the people who paid attention in school, got a reasonable entry-level job and worked their way up, or maybe started their own business and worked day and night to make a success of it. Why we should penalize them and remove the incentive for anyone else to strive to achieve is beyond comprehension.

Taxation, as it is currently practiced, is theft. We have no more control over how the funds are wasted than we have control over how a mugger spends what he steals from us.
[quote][p][bold]Schrodinger's Cat[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).[/p][/quote]I don't think you really understand the principles of socialism. A socialist understands that everyone needs to contribute according to their ability in order to ensure that everyone receives what they need. Socialists have no objection to paying for things but would prefer that their money is then used to provide services for everyone rather than some of their money being creamed off as profit by a few already wealthy people.[/p][/quote]Sorry, my friend, that is the socialist PR version of their immensely damaging formula for wealth destruction. The reality is that there is no limit in that thinking as to how much wealth can be sucked out of the economy. The money trees just keep on producing a new crop every day. This is the concept of the free lunch. Everybody can live at everyone else's expense. It works fine until you run out of other people's money. You must also get over this bizarre notion of the 'wealthy few.' These are generally the people who paid attention in school, got a reasonable entry-level job and worked their way up, or maybe started their own business and worked day and night to make a success of it. Why we should penalize them and remove the incentive for anyone else to strive to achieve is beyond comprehension. Taxation, as it is currently practiced, is theft. We have no more control over how the funds are wasted than we have control over how a mugger spends what he steals from us. WykeReg
  • Score: 9

3:40pm Sun 3 Aug 14

oldbrock says...

islandman wrote:
Portland Bill, please don't mince your words.
good on him! trouble is , you speak your mind and people don't like it1 tough! all politicians are lying, self seeking, expenses grabbing spinners who can't lie straight in bed! and the people suffer!
[quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: Portland Bill, please don't mince your words.[/p][/quote]good on him! trouble is , you speak your mind and people don't like it1 tough! all politicians are lying, self seeking, expenses grabbing spinners who can't lie straight in bed! and the people suffer! oldbrock
  • Score: -1

3:56pm Sun 3 Aug 14

siratb says...

My view is that the money has to come from somewhere, and if W&PBC only receive 15% of it, then you can hardly blame them.

Westminster is a different kettle of fish. High population density, low costs (bin lorries don't have to drive as far, for example), so it is like comparing chalk and cheese. Maybe a comparison between similar towns would be more useful.

I agree with the Poll Tax post above - Poll tax is far fairer as then EVERYBODY pays, not just the home owner. You may have one old lady living in a million pound house that cost her 10,000 back in 1940. Why should she pay more because her property is "worth" more? It is only worth more if it is sold.

Actually even fairer would be a local income tax as per the US State Tax but better not go down that road of the socialists will grasp it with both hands, tax the hell out of those "wealthy" people - you know, the ones that drive the economy, can afford to spend 200 quid on a nice meal in a Weymouth restaurant, and can afford to take their BMW to a local dealer for servicing. What happens then is that they bugger off somewhere cheaper to live.

There is a proven thing regarding taxes that the socialists really need to understand. If you raise tax rates beyond a certain threshold, tax revenues fall. This is because those with wealth can avoid paying these taxes, either through schemes deliberately set up, or by moving. Isn't London half French and half Russian these days?
My view is that the money has to come from somewhere, and if W&PBC only receive 15% of it, then you can hardly blame them. Westminster is a different kettle of fish. High population density, low costs (bin lorries don't have to drive as far, for example), so it is like comparing chalk and cheese. Maybe a comparison between similar towns would be more useful. I agree with the Poll Tax post above - Poll tax is far fairer as then EVERYBODY pays, not just the home owner. You may have one old lady living in a million pound house that cost her 10,000 back in 1940. Why should she pay more because her property is "worth" more? It is only worth more if it is sold. Actually even fairer would be a local income tax as per the US State Tax but better not go down that road of the socialists will grasp it with both hands, tax the hell out of those "wealthy" people - you know, the ones that drive the economy, can afford to spend 200 quid on a nice meal in a Weymouth restaurant, and can afford to take their BMW to a local dealer for servicing. What happens then is that they bugger off somewhere cheaper to live. There is a proven thing regarding taxes that the socialists really need to understand. If you raise tax rates beyond a certain threshold, tax revenues fall. This is because those with wealth can avoid paying these taxes, either through schemes deliberately set up, or by moving. Isn't London half French and half Russian these days? siratb
  • Score: 5

4:01pm Sun 3 Aug 14

Caption Sensible says...

WykeReg wrote:
Schrodinger's Cat wrote:
WykeReg wrote:
The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry).

Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges.

That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).
I don't think you really understand the principles of socialism. A socialist understands that everyone needs to contribute according to their ability in order to ensure that everyone receives what they need. Socialists have no objection to paying for things but would prefer that their money is then used to provide services for everyone rather than some of their money being creamed off as profit by a few already wealthy people.
Sorry, my friend, that is the socialist PR version of their immensely damaging formula for wealth destruction. The reality is that there is no limit in that thinking as to how much wealth can be sucked out of the economy. The money trees just keep on producing a new crop every day.

This is the concept of the free lunch. Everybody can live at everyone else's expense. It works fine until you run out of other people's money.

You must also get over this bizarre notion of the 'wealthy few.' These are generally the people who paid attention in school, got a reasonable entry-level job and worked their way up, or maybe started their own business and worked day and night to make a success of it. Why we should penalize them and remove the incentive for anyone else to strive to achieve is beyond comprehension.

Taxation, as it is currently practiced, is theft. We have no more control over how the funds are wasted than we have control over how a mugger spends what he steals from us.
Could not have expressed it any better.

Socialism destroys people, economies and wealth creators. Look to France for the latest example of the brilliance of socialism. Socialists also lie... A lot! Especially to themselves...

And socialism is designed by the 'elites' to keep the people in check (and slavery). The 'elites' never practice the philosophy themselves e.g. Soviet Russia, China, East Germany...

Orwell knew what was going on...
[quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Schrodinger's Cat[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).[/p][/quote]I don't think you really understand the principles of socialism. A socialist understands that everyone needs to contribute according to their ability in order to ensure that everyone receives what they need. Socialists have no objection to paying for things but would prefer that their money is then used to provide services for everyone rather than some of their money being creamed off as profit by a few already wealthy people.[/p][/quote]Sorry, my friend, that is the socialist PR version of their immensely damaging formula for wealth destruction. The reality is that there is no limit in that thinking as to how much wealth can be sucked out of the economy. The money trees just keep on producing a new crop every day. This is the concept of the free lunch. Everybody can live at everyone else's expense. It works fine until you run out of other people's money. You must also get over this bizarre notion of the 'wealthy few.' These are generally the people who paid attention in school, got a reasonable entry-level job and worked their way up, or maybe started their own business and worked day and night to make a success of it. Why we should penalize them and remove the incentive for anyone else to strive to achieve is beyond comprehension. Taxation, as it is currently practiced, is theft. We have no more control over how the funds are wasted than we have control over how a mugger spends what he steals from us.[/p][/quote]Could not have expressed it any better. Socialism destroys people, economies and wealth creators. Look to France for the latest example of the brilliance of socialism. Socialists also lie... A lot! Especially to themselves... And socialism is designed by the 'elites' to keep the people in check (and slavery). The 'elites' never practice the philosophy themselves e.g. Soviet Russia, China, East Germany... Orwell knew what was going on... Caption Sensible
  • Score: 2

5:38pm Sun 3 Aug 14

monkeydog says...

Newground wrote:
monkeydog wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Rocksalt wrote:
iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho





.co.uk/news/11116015





.Dorset_workers_stru





ggle_to_make_living_





wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.
You might remove your blinkers and take an interest in socialism and it's advantages for working people if you understood the real effects of the neo-liberal policies of our present leaders who, based on your observation, you prefer. But then, there are always people who take comfort in knowing their place.
Right on, comrade.

Socialists have nothing... and they want to share it with you!
Do you think those who have everything want to share it with you? They would prefer to have whatever little you have and leave you with nothing, which is what is happening to thousands of people in this country right now. The five percent who control ninety-five percent of the nation's wealth care nothing for you or your family and would have you in bondage at the drop of a hat.
[quote][p][bold]Newground[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]monkeydog[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.[/p][/quote]Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.[/p][/quote]You might remove your blinkers and take an interest in socialism and it's advantages for working people if you understood the real effects of the neo-liberal policies of our present leaders who, based on your observation, you prefer. But then, there are always people who take comfort in knowing their place.[/p][/quote]Right on, comrade. Socialists have nothing... and they want to share it with you![/p][/quote]Do you think those who have everything want to share it with you? They would prefer to have whatever little you have and leave you with nothing, which is what is happening to thousands of people in this country right now. The five percent who control ninety-five percent of the nation's wealth care nothing for you or your family and would have you in bondage at the drop of a hat. monkeydog
  • Score: 2

6:54pm Sun 3 Aug 14

Dkny1982 says...

This is a disgrace we pay through the nose to live in a town that OUR council is running in to the ground.
We can't even go shopping in this town anymore instead we have to get on a bus or a train to a destination that has a council that take a bit of pride in there area
This is a disgrace we pay through the nose to live in a town that OUR council is running in to the ground. We can't even go shopping in this town anymore instead we have to get on a bus or a train to a destination that has a council that take a bit of pride in there area Dkny1982
  • Score: 2

7:00pm Sun 3 Aug 14

Schrodinger's Cat says...

£2 a week each for two people living in an average Weymouth + Portland property doesn't seem like paying through the nose to me. Of course I'm assuming you mean WPBC when you talk about OUR council and not Dorset County Council who take about 3/4 of your council tax.
£2 a week each for two people living in an average Weymouth + Portland property doesn't seem like paying through the nose to me. Of course I'm assuming you mean WPBC when you talk about OUR council and not Dorset County Council who take about 3/4 of your council tax. Schrodinger's Cat
  • Score: 3

7:01pm Sun 3 Aug 14

Rocksalt says...

siratb wrote:
My view is that the money has to come from somewhere, and if W&PBC only receive 15% of it, then you can hardly blame them.

Westminster is a different kettle of fish. High population density, low costs (bin lorries don't have to drive as far, for example), so it is like comparing chalk and cheese. Maybe a comparison between similar towns would be more useful.

I agree with the Poll Tax post above - Poll tax is far fairer as then EVERYBODY pays, not just the home owner. You may have one old lady living in a million pound house that cost her 10,000 back in 1940. Why should she pay more because her property is "worth" more? It is only worth more if it is sold.

Actually even fairer would be a local income tax as per the US State Tax but better not go down that road of the socialists will grasp it with both hands, tax the hell out of those "wealthy" people - you know, the ones that drive the economy, can afford to spend 200 quid on a nice meal in a Weymouth restaurant, and can afford to take their BMW to a local dealer for servicing. What happens then is that they bugger off somewhere cheaper to live.

There is a proven thing regarding taxes that the socialists really need to understand. If you raise tax rates beyond a certain threshold, tax revenues fall. This is because those with wealth can avoid paying these taxes, either through schemes deliberately set up, or by moving. Isn't London half French and half Russian these days?
Actually, some people say that land / property taxes are far more effective than poll taxes, income taxes or even purchase taxes as the rich find them more difficult to dodge. Presumably why so many countries have them.
[quote][p][bold]siratb[/bold] wrote: My view is that the money has to come from somewhere, and if W&PBC only receive 15% of it, then you can hardly blame them. Westminster is a different kettle of fish. High population density, low costs (bin lorries don't have to drive as far, for example), so it is like comparing chalk and cheese. Maybe a comparison between similar towns would be more useful. I agree with the Poll Tax post above - Poll tax is far fairer as then EVERYBODY pays, not just the home owner. You may have one old lady living in a million pound house that cost her 10,000 back in 1940. Why should she pay more because her property is "worth" more? It is only worth more if it is sold. Actually even fairer would be a local income tax as per the US State Tax but better not go down that road of the socialists will grasp it with both hands, tax the hell out of those "wealthy" people - you know, the ones that drive the economy, can afford to spend 200 quid on a nice meal in a Weymouth restaurant, and can afford to take their BMW to a local dealer for servicing. What happens then is that they bugger off somewhere cheaper to live. There is a proven thing regarding taxes that the socialists really need to understand. If you raise tax rates beyond a certain threshold, tax revenues fall. This is because those with wealth can avoid paying these taxes, either through schemes deliberately set up, or by moving. Isn't London half French and half Russian these days?[/p][/quote]Actually, some people say that land / property taxes are far more effective than poll taxes, income taxes or even purchase taxes as the rich find them more difficult to dodge. Presumably why so many countries have them. Rocksalt
  • Score: 5

7:07pm Sun 3 Aug 14

Rocksalt says...

iansedwell wrote:
Rocksalt wrote:
iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho



.co.uk/news/11116015



.Dorset_workers_stru



ggle_to_make_living_



wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
Six of the wards in Weymouth & Portland are in the 20% most deprived in the uK according to the 2010 data. When the new data becomes available we are unlikely to see an improvement given the continued economic downturn in the borough.

https://www.dorsetfo

ryou.com/401843
I wasn't contesting that there are poor wards in Weymouth and Portland. (Although I would argue that there is a big difference between the top 10% poorest and the next 10%). I was making the point that there are deprived boroughs that as deprived, if not more so, where the council tax is lowers, notwithstanding they will have the same revenue collecting problems.
[quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.[/p][/quote]Six of the wards in Weymouth & Portland are in the 20% most deprived in the uK according to the 2010 data. When the new data becomes available we are unlikely to see an improvement given the continued economic downturn in the borough. https://www.dorsetfo ryou.com/401843[/p][/quote]I wasn't contesting that there are poor wards in Weymouth and Portland. (Although I would argue that there is a big difference between the top 10% poorest and the next 10%). I was making the point that there are deprived boroughs that as deprived, if not more so, where the council tax is lowers, notwithstanding they will have the same revenue collecting problems. Rocksalt
  • Score: 2

11:39am Mon 4 Aug 14

portlandboy says...

If we had lights on all night, ALL bins eptied every week and more public facilities opening rather than closing, most people would accept that we pay such a high CT rate. But we get all the cuts in services and an annual increase in charges which is very efficiently calculated to be as close to the maximum as is allowed by central government. That's what P's people off about our council.
If we had lights on all night, ALL bins eptied every week and more public facilities opening rather than closing, most people would accept that we pay such a high CT rate. But we get all the cuts in services and an annual increase in charges which is very efficiently calculated to be as close to the maximum as is allowed by central government. That's what P's people off about our council. portlandboy
  • Score: 2

12:04pm Mon 4 Aug 14

February1948 says...

WykeReg wrote:
The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).
Well said, WykeReg! A poll tax is the fairest way of ensuring everyone pays their way, but it was screamed down by the can't-pay-won't-pay rentamob.
Why on earth should an elderly widow or widower existing on a pension and living on their own have to pay the same extortionate amount of council tax as the people next door with perhaps four people earning a good salary?
But, we've been through this before to no avail.
And at least the highwaymen wore masks.
[quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).[/p][/quote]Well said, WykeReg! A poll tax is the fairest way of ensuring everyone pays their way, but it was screamed down by the can't-pay-won't-pay rentamob. Why on earth should an elderly widow or widower existing on a pension and living on their own have to pay the same extortionate amount of council tax as the people next door with perhaps four people earning a good salary? But, we've been through this before to no avail. And at least the highwaymen wore masks. February1948
  • Score: 2

2:11pm Mon 4 Aug 14

Jim4512 says...

February1948 wrote:
WykeReg wrote:
The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).
Well said, WykeReg! A poll tax is the fairest way of ensuring everyone pays their way, but it was screamed down by the can't-pay-won't-pay rentamob.
Why on earth should an elderly widow or widower existing on a pension and living on their own have to pay the same extortionate amount of council tax as the people next door with perhaps four people earning a good salary?
But, we've been through this before to no avail.
And at least the highwaymen wore masks.
Someone living on their own only getting a pension would pay less council tax as they live on their own and the would also get social benefits which would also help towards council tax. Council tax is to high in this town too many people doing one persons job at the council costs us plus high management salarys and too many managers.
[quote][p][bold]February1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).[/p][/quote]Well said, WykeReg! A poll tax is the fairest way of ensuring everyone pays their way, but it was screamed down by the can't-pay-won't-pay rentamob. Why on earth should an elderly widow or widower existing on a pension and living on their own have to pay the same extortionate amount of council tax as the people next door with perhaps four people earning a good salary? But, we've been through this before to no avail. And at least the highwaymen wore masks.[/p][/quote]Someone living on their own only getting a pension would pay less council tax as they live on their own and the would also get social benefits which would also help towards council tax. Council tax is to high in this town too many people doing one persons job at the council costs us plus high management salarys and too many managers. Jim4512
  • Score: 0

3:21pm Mon 4 Aug 14

February1948 says...

Jim4512 wrote:
February1948 wrote:
WykeReg wrote: The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).
Well said, WykeReg! A poll tax is the fairest way of ensuring everyone pays their way, but it was screamed down by the can't-pay-won't-pay rentamob. Why on earth should an elderly widow or widower existing on a pension and living on their own have to pay the same extortionate amount of council tax as the people next door with perhaps four people earning a good salary? But, we've been through this before to no avail. And at least the highwaymen wore masks.
Someone living on their own only getting a pension would pay less council tax as they live on their own and the would also get social benefits which would also help towards council tax. Council tax is to high in this town too many people doing one persons job at the council costs us plus high management salarys and too many managers.
I believe they get a 25% reduction but the point I was making was that the poll tax would have distributed the amount between the actual users of council services, whether good or bad, and was not based on the value of the house with the responsibility for the tax falling on the property owner. Each working person living in the property would, I believe, have been billed individually and would pay their share which to me seems a lot more fair. I could be wrong and no doubt someone will correct me!
[quote][p][bold]Jim4512[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]February1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: The problem with government, both central and local, is that the demand for tax revenues is insatiable. The great post-war socialist dream has turned into a nightmare of epic proportions. The welfare state is unaffordable as it is currently organized and massively wasteful due the appallingly low level of management skill (which is also a major problem for British industry). Once upon a time the hard-working highwayman would have the good grace to rob you just once on your journey. Now the government robs you every mile on the way. And if you stop, you get stiffed for parking charges. That said, I am all for a fairer Britain. The way to achieve that is to introduce a Poll Tax so that everyone contributes. (Now open your window - the noise you hear are the socialists screaming at the thought of actually paying for something. Go figure).[/p][/quote]Well said, WykeReg! A poll tax is the fairest way of ensuring everyone pays their way, but it was screamed down by the can't-pay-won't-pay rentamob. Why on earth should an elderly widow or widower existing on a pension and living on their own have to pay the same extortionate amount of council tax as the people next door with perhaps four people earning a good salary? But, we've been through this before to no avail. And at least the highwaymen wore masks.[/p][/quote]Someone living on their own only getting a pension would pay less council tax as they live on their own and the would also get social benefits which would also help towards council tax. Council tax is to high in this town too many people doing one persons job at the council costs us plus high management salarys and too many managers.[/p][/quote]I believe they get a 25% reduction but the point I was making was that the poll tax would have distributed the amount between the actual users of council services, whether good or bad, and was not based on the value of the house with the responsibility for the tax falling on the property owner. Each working person living in the property would, I believe, have been billed individually and would pay their share which to me seems a lot more fair. I could be wrong and no doubt someone will correct me! February1948
  • Score: 1

5:01pm Mon 4 Aug 14

Preston North End says...

As reported here, the councillors are doing a great job of pointing the finger at anyone else they can think of other than themselves.

I wish the parties used primaries before each main election so their prospective candidate's specific qualities could be judged by the electorate before they were allowed to run.

That might focus their minds a little (no job for life).
As reported here, the councillors are doing a great job of pointing the finger at anyone else they can think of other than themselves. I wish the parties used primaries before each main election so their prospective candidate's specific qualities could be judged by the electorate before they were allowed to run. That might focus their minds a little (no job for life). Preston North End
  • Score: 0

12:59am Wed 6 Aug 14

breamoreboy says...

MoralMinority wrote:
PHonnor wrote:
Recently there was a Labour proposal to increase council tax on 2nd home owners in the borough, this was voted out by the conservative group. This proposal could of brought extra revenue into the coffers so why did they vote no?
I'm not surprised the conservatives voted out the increase on 2nd homes - Ian Bruce (Elected Conservative for Preston) owns 8 homes in Weymouth and Portland for example.
So he actually couldn't care less as he'd just up the rent.
[quote][p][bold]MoralMinority[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PHonnor[/bold] wrote: Recently there was a Labour proposal to increase council tax on 2nd home owners in the borough, this was voted out by the conservative group. This proposal could of brought extra revenue into the coffers so why did they vote no?[/p][/quote]I'm not surprised the conservatives voted out the increase on 2nd homes - Ian Bruce (Elected Conservative for Preston) owns 8 homes in Weymouth and Portland for example.[/p][/quote]So he actually couldn't care less as he'd just up the rent. breamoreboy
  • Score: 0

1:08am Wed 6 Aug 14

breamoreboy says...

oldbrock wrote:
islandman wrote:
Portland Bill, please don't mince your words.
good on him! trouble is , you speak your mind and people don't like it1 tough! all politicians are lying, self seeking, expenses grabbing spinners who can't lie straight in bed! and the people suffer!
What nonsense, they've all got the interests of the electorate right at the heart of their thinking. After they've paid for the duck house, moat cleaner and heating the stables at the second home. That final one the claim was for over £6,000, that's more than I'm expected to live for a year. Benefits scroungers, don't make me laugh, it's the politicians who are the scroungers.
[quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: Portland Bill, please don't mince your words.[/p][/quote]good on him! trouble is , you speak your mind and people don't like it1 tough! all politicians are lying, self seeking, expenses grabbing spinners who can't lie straight in bed! and the people suffer![/p][/quote]What nonsense, they've all got the interests of the electorate right at the heart of their thinking. After they've paid for the duck house, moat cleaner and heating the stables at the second home. That final one the claim was for over £6,000, that's more than I'm expected to live for a year. Benefits scroungers, don't make me laugh, it's the politicians who are the scroungers. breamoreboy
  • Score: 1

8:43pm Thu 7 Aug 14

Hippyhooker says...

burgerboy wrote:
You have got to pay for the Olympic legacy somehow.........
You didn't think that came for free did you.
Are those the same Olympics that were not paid for by our Council or are you talking about some secret Olympic event?
[quote][p][bold]burgerboy[/bold] wrote: You have got to pay for the Olympic legacy somehow......... You didn't think that came for free did you.[/p][/quote]Are those the same Olympics that were not paid for by our Council or are you talking about some secret Olympic event? Hippyhooker
  • Score: 2

8:49pm Thu 7 Aug 14

Hippyhooker says...

Does local resident Michael McManus stand outside the Echo offices 24/7 just in case they want a local residents point of view !
Does local resident Michael McManus stand outside the Echo offices 24/7 just in case they want a local residents point of view ! Hippyhooker
  • Score: 3

9:06am Sat 9 Aug 14

La Vigneron says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
Rocksalt wrote:
iansedwell wrote:
And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho



.co.uk/news/11116015



.Dorset_workers_stru



ggle_to_make_living_



wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour

It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.
It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing.

All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.
Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.
February 1948 wrote:
"Well said, WykeReg! A poll tax is the fairest way of ensuring everyone pays their way, but it was screamed down by the can't-pay-won't-pay rentamob. Why on earth should an elderly widow or widower existing on a pension and living on their own have to pay the same extortionate amount of council tax as the people next door with perhaps four people earning a good salary? But, we've been through this before to no avail. And at least the highwaymen wore masks."

There are other well thought out comments, principally that there are too many counsellors. Many years ago a friend, a counsellor now dead, during a convivial evening over a few drinks confided about the unseemly stampede to get onto as many committees as possible; not through interest or even knowledge of the committee's aims, just in order to claim attendance allowance and the routine fraud of four counsellors arriving in one car and claiming separate traveling allowance. Small beer perhaps but, it all increases the tax levied on residents.
Regrettably they are greedy and in many cases unprincipled. Slimming down the council is badly required but, how to go about it, they certainly would not go quietly!
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]iansedwell[/bold] wrote: And yet, as reported in the Dorset Echo (http://m.dorsetecho .co.uk/news/11116015 .Dorset_workers_stru ggle_to_make_living_ wage/) 29% of workers in Weymouth and Portland earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 per hour It is an absolute scandal that one of the poorest areas in the country should be burdened with the highest Council Tax.[/p][/quote]It's not unusual for relatively poor area to have high council tax. Less people actually pay the tax and those that do are more likely to live in Band A and B houses. These houses don't generate as much as money as higher band housing. All of this may be unfair, bit it's not unique to Weymouth and Portland. W&P will have more costs than affluent areas, but oesn't have the same levels of deprivation as many urban areas, so I am not sure why the Council Tax should be amongst the highest in the country. I think the inefficiency of the current system ( WPBC / DCC ) plays a big part, not least the coat of supporting a vast army of councillors.[/p][/quote]Any governmental system based upon socialist principles invariably means disproportionate taxation levels and very poor and inefficient levels of service.[/p][/quote]February 1948 wrote: "Well said, WykeReg! A poll tax is the fairest way of ensuring everyone pays their way, but it was screamed down by the can't-pay-won't-pay rentamob. Why on earth should an elderly widow or widower existing on a pension and living on their own have to pay the same extortionate amount of council tax as the people next door with perhaps four people earning a good salary? But, we've been through this before to no avail. And at least the highwaymen wore masks." There are other well thought out comments, principally that there are too many counsellors. Many years ago a friend, a counsellor now dead, during a convivial evening over a few drinks confided about the unseemly stampede to get onto as many committees as possible; not through interest or even knowledge of the committee's aims, just in order to claim attendance allowance and the routine fraud of four counsellors arriving in one car and claiming separate traveling allowance. Small beer perhaps but, it all increases the tax levied on residents. Regrettably they are greedy and in many cases unprincipled. Slimming down the council is badly required but, how to go about it, they certainly would not go quietly! La Vigneron
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree