Guest 684- Registered: 26 Feb 2009
- Posts: 635
#1
Thoroughly depressing article on page 5 of today's Dover Express, regarding the owner of Via Romana restaurant.
The poor chap's just trying to get on with making an honest living and then some thuggish numpties go and stick their oar in and try to ruin things.
How dare the authorities go and raise the business rates at a time like this!
Oh, and that mooning yob should be ashamed of himself too.
Unregistered User
#2
Andy, totally agree if that is what business investors see of Dover and listen to some of the stupid comments , heaven help Dover's future. Makes the job of selling Dover even more difficult.
Watty
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#3
True, very true - most depressing.
The national business rate must be reformed. There were good intentions when it was set up that way but times have moved on and it has just become another weapon in the hands of Government to shift resources to where they see fit, the inner cities and up north from 'priviledged' places like Dover!!! Only a very small proportion of what Dover businesses pay is sent back to be spent in Dover.
We must get local control back over business rates so they can be set in response to local conditions, meet the needs of local businesses and be spent locally.
Guest 684- Registered: 26 Feb 2009
- Posts: 635
#4
Totally agree, Paul and Barry.
It's numb-headed, greedy, intransigent, short-sighted, blinkered, damaging and outrageous.
Sums up this sick joke of a government really.
Cheers all,
Andy
Sid Pollitt
#5
I think that the issue of business rate reform would get a lot of support. Wasnt it though the government of the numb-headed, greedy, intransigent, short-sighted, blinkered Margaret Thatcher that foisted the change in the first place?
Guest 684- Registered: 26 Feb 2009
- Posts: 635
#6
Yes, probably her as well. Most things were. I am neither blue nor red...no hard and fast political alignment. I just know what I like and don't like!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#7
Nick Ridley brought in the changes in Mrs T's time along with the Community Charge and he fouled up, tried too many changes at once and totally lost track of what he needed to achieve. The Business rate was a response to the way businesses were being driven out of parts of the inner cities by extreme left wing councils who punished businesses with huge rate rises. The change was well intentioned to deal with the problems of then but it has now created worse problems with the shambolic Labour Government's attempts to punish the so called 'wealthy' south east.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#8
i have read the story,didnt see anything about buissnes tax in the story.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#9
history shows us that one party brings in a tax, the party not in power criticises, then when they gain power they do nothing to change it.
barry, you know this, there will still be student fees, pension funds being raided, as you have put it.
the excuse will be that the new goverment has to reduce public spending.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#10
We need cuts to spending most importantly of all Howard, not tax rises. I have said all along 20% cuts in public spending are needed over 3 years, minimum. Not tax increases as we are already over taxed. You seem a bit mixed up in what you say as you suggest tax rises might be used as an excuse to cut public spending, dont you mean cut debt? Debt is the big problem and its spending that must be dramatically chopped to get it under control.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#11
barry
the point i was making was that the opposition have opposed public spending cuts as detailed in my post, yet will just carry on with the same when elected.
tax rises will come in whatever colour of government is in power next may.
then, the wonder of it, cuts in taxation will start to appear 3 years on.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#12
The Opposition has said it will make spending cuts, so come off it Howard. It is Labour who despite their budget saying there will be cuts are denying their own figures. They do seem to realise they are rumbled now though!
You may be right about tax rises but they should be temporary as they are already too high, it must be spending cuts that take the burden though not tax rises. It will take several years to bring in big enough cuts to public spending.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#13
Actually, it's not a case of some rent is better than no rent, because if Landlords reduce their rent, it also reduces the value of their property portfolio and that is one thing they want to keep high.
Many Dover properties are subject to almost London-rated rents and are far too high for the level of trading they are doing. Business-rates - or NNDR, are another big bane of a small business owner. If anyone could wave a magic wand and get either, or both of these reduced, they'd be voted in as PM, let alone Dover Business Support Manager.
I do think there needs to be an agreement to lower rents and rates and give small independant traders help, but I do believe all traders (large or small) need a level playing field and they're not getting one.
I don't know if it's possible or even legal, but to get new businesses opening up here, there should be a relief period of say 5 years, where the rent and rates are 50% of normal, then increase by 10 % each year; this would give the businesses time to grow and become better businesses and gradually as they make more money, they could afford to pay a little more too.
At the very least, they'd be given a fighting chance.
The Town itself needs sprucing up - from run-down buildings, to closed down buildings; from weeds and dead flowers to bright colourful flowers and plants; from banners across the road telling us what's coming up next, to restoring pride in the Town.
Reading the Express yesterday about La Via Romana and the aggravation he's experienced, it's no wonder businesses aren't doing well. On this very point, the DPAC phone would have worked very well and what about the "manned" CCTV ? that's supposed to be operated during daylight hours and this offence was during day-light hours, so why wasn't it picked up ?
Roger
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#14
roger you must be making a p;oint twice!!
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#15
That's because it's worth making twice, Keith.
The Government set the poundage on the business rates, currently I believe 48.5 pence in the pound.
They also decide how much each local authority will receive back.
This then means that there are two things they could do - reduce the poundage, to lessen the cost to the businesses and give a greater proportion back to the local authorities, or treat them more equally, which they are not doing at the moment.
This in turn would mean the local authorities receive more money from the Government so it could go to reducing the Council tax for instance, or allow them ti increase (or improve) services.
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#16
does anyone see any change in the way business rates are set, or money distributed, come a change of government.
of course not, so few voters pay it.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#17
Actually howard, yes.
The big move, as I have said, is towards localism. Part of that would be greater autonomy for Councils but they can only have that if they were responsible for raising all their revenue themselves locally.
There is a suggestion in Conservative circles that local authorites be funded by a mix of local sales tax (replacing VAT), local business rates (replacing NNDR), and a reformed Council Tax. There would be no grant then from Government except as a transitional arrangement for some particularly deprived areas.
We will have to see whether the economic situation delays these kind of reforms but I do believe they will come eventually.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#18
Barryw
you realy are take in by it all.
a true tory supporter I love it.
The worst party to starve local councils of there freedom by cutting there finance when the tories had the opportunity to FREE local councils as you suggest.
So its hard to believe, cos them same tories still lurk in the background of the party waiting to pounce to stop DC when they are ready
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#19
Times change Keith. I have already referred to the problems encountered by Mrs T with extreme left wing councils at the time and she responded in a particular way. We now have different challenges to deal with and policies evolve accordingly. The Conservatives are returning to their small Government roots and as far as Councils are concerned now recognise that the only way they can have more independence from central government is by them raising more finance for themselves. A great deal of policy thought and discussion has gone into this starting back in the time of my Chairmanship.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#20
Barryw
I realy want to believe you, but the times evemn in your times a chairperson didn't realy change owyt for local govt, in fact they tried to starve councils completely.
Yes there probably were some left wing councils(wonder what that term means these days ;lol)
aND SOME lefty councils as you call them, didn't help the council cause
wonder if things will realy change?