If you could change one thing

[peterl]

Just for a bit of fun. If you could change one thing about the law surrounding elections, Parliament, local government or other constitutional issues what would it be. Let's leave the question of Europe to one side to allow for some variety. Feel free to mention a few things if you really want.

[carlton43]

I would make all wards small single member elected by thirds on FPTP.

All other elections in single member units elected by FPTP

No Fixed Term for Westminster Parliaments.

750-Seats for Westminster.

No Devolved or Regional Assemblies/Parliaments/etc.

All Mayors/Leaders of all authorities by direct election.

All Candidates for parties selected by direct vote of registered party electors (need not be party members).

[carlton43]

Feb 1, 2017 15:16:48 GMT ArmchairCritic said:

Feb 1, 2017 15:05:24 GMT carlton43 said:

I would make all wards small single member elected by thirds on FPTP.

All other elections in single member units elected by FPTP

No Fixed Term for Westminster Parliaments.

750-Seats for Westminster.

No Devolved or Regional Assemblies/Parliaments/etc.

All Mayors/Leaders of all authorities by direct election.

All Candidates for parties selected by direct vote of registered party electors (need not be party members).

I hate to appear pedantic, but that isn't 'one thing'.

No you don't!   You really don't!!

Read what he posted.   Last sentence.

[Deleted]

Compulsory reporting of polling district results for all elections and referendums.

[greenchristian]

I'll be boring and suggest elections by proportional representation. Preferably by AMS.

[Deleted]

Would have STV for English local elections.

[Jack]

Feb 1, 2017 16:47:53 GMT greenchristian said:

I'll be boring and suggest elections by proportional representation. Preferably by AMS.

I'll be boring too and agree with you.

PR is overdue in English local elections.

[Richard Allen]

Local authorities to raise the vast majority of the money that they spend with a locally set sales tax replacing VAT.

[No Offence Alan]

Feb 1, 2017 18:09:00 GMT Richard Allen said:

Local authorities to raise the vast majority of the money that they spend with a locally set sales tax replacing VAT.

Local authorities to raise the vast majority of the money that they spend with a locally set land valuation tax replacing council tax and business rates.
"Sales" are too mobile (land is not) to be an effective tax base.

[Richard Allen]

Feb 1, 2017 18:49:18 GMT No Offence Alan said:

Feb 1, 2017 18:09:00 GMT Richard Allen said:

Local authorities to raise the vast majority of the money that they spend with a locally set sales tax replacing VAT.

Local authorities to raise the vast majority of the money that they spend with a locally set land valuation tax replacing council tax and business rates.
"Sales" are too mobile (land is not) to be an effective tax base.

Well council tax is already on property but yes I have no problem with multiple sources of revenue for local authorities. Getting rid of VAT is however very high on my agenda.

[peterl]

Not too hard to work out from my numerous posts on the subject, but mine would be the end of creeping regionalism - that is to say the repeal of the Cities and Devolution Act, an end to combined authorities and an end to geographically large unitary councils. If I had a second thing, it would be the end of the Cabinet system in local government.

[J.G.Harston]

Feb 1, 2017 19:06:36 GMT peterl said:

Not too hard to work out from my numerous posts on the subject, but mine would be the end of creeping regionalism - that is to say the repeal of the Cities and Devolution Act, an end to combined authorities and an end to geographically large unitary councils. If I had a second thing, it would be the end of the Cabinet system in local government.

I'd modify that to ending forced regionalisation, but fully agree with council cabinets. (edit: ie, getting rid of them)

Any subnational govermental reorganisation should be at the instigation of the subnational govermental units themselves to build a system that they themselves have worked out to the best of their abilities would best fit their local area needs and problems, not to comply with top-down pressures.

[carlton43]

Feb 1, 2017 18:09:00 GMT Richard Allen said:

Local authorities to raise the vast majority of the money that they spend with a locally set sales tax replacing VAT.

Don't do it Richard.

It will result in sensible authorities having carefully crafted low rates leading to a garnering of trade and increase of prosperity in such authorities. So far so good one might expect? But, those areas will act as a magnet for new shops/trades/businesses, greater prosperity and huge volumes and plentiful taxes! That is turn will permit more local expenditure making the area even more attractive, and then possibly, even probably a reduction of taxes because of the sheer volumes of trade engendered. A veritable virtuous cycle!

What could possibly go wrong? Well other poorer and/or less well run authorities may be tempted to set higher taxes to glean enough cashflow to cover their spending plans and to balance their budget. That will be the start of a cycle of decline as comparison sites show where it is best to shop for prices, low taxes, pleasant services and say free parking. That will exacerbate the situation and in this second authority they will be forever chasing their tail in an ever-diminishing chase to the bottom, characterized by higher and higher charges/prices/taxes until in desperation they slash prices and taxes to the detriment of their income, failure to balance budget and eventual wholesale cancellation of services coupled with possible virtual bankruptcy!

What differentiates the successful authorities from the abject failures? One factor will be size and scope. The already fairly to very large centres will have a big advantage. The next will be pleasantness of natural aspect and the well favoured will have a big advantage. The third is overall wealth set against welfare demand. Here many old industrial areas with little to attract but a large welfare spend will be doubly disadvantaged.

Added into this mix will be the naked politics where the lefter-leaning authorities will be inclined to ramp taxes and cause even greater consequent problems. Why am I concerned? Merely that the failing authorities will need bailing out and targeted support from government and will fall as a charge on general taxation. It is a form of idea that may well spell ruin for a St. Helens but be a bounty for a Guildford.

[Richard Allen]

Feb 1, 2017 19:23:00 GMT carlton43 said:

Feb 1, 2017 18:09:00 GMT Richard Allen said:

Local authorities to raise the vast majority of the money that they spend with a locally set sales tax replacing VAT.

Don't do it Richard.

It will result in sensible authorities having carefully crafted low rates leading to a garnering of trade and increase of prosperity in such authorities. So far so good one might expect? But, those areas will act as a magnet for new shops/trades/businesses, greater prosperity and huge volumes and plentiful taxes! That is turn will permit more local expenditure making the area even more attractive, and then possibly, even probably a reduction of taxes because of the sheer volumes of trade engendered. A veritable virtuous cycle!

What could possibly go wrong? Well other poorer and/or less well run authorities may be tempted to set higher taxes to glean enough cashflow to cover their spending plans and to balance their budget. That will be the start of a cycle of decline as comparison sites show where it is best to shop for prices, low taxes, pleasant services and say free parking. That will exacerbate the situation and in this second authority they will be forever chasing their tail in an ever-diminishing chase to the bottom, characterized by higher and higher charges/prices/taxes until in desperation they slash prices and taxes to the detriment of their income, failure to balance budget and eventual wholesale cancellation of services coupled with possible virtual bankruptcy!

What differentiates the successful authorities from the abject failures? One factor will be size and scope. The already fairly to very large centres will have a big advantage. The next will be pleasantness of natural aspect and the well favoured will have a big advantage. The third is overall wealth set against welfare demand. Here many old industrial areas with little to attract but a large welfare spend will be doubly disadvantaged.

Added into this mix will be the naked politics where the lefter-leaning authorities will be inclined to ramp taxes and cause even greater consequent problems. Why am I concerned? Merely that the failing authorities will need bailing out and targeted support from government and will fall as a charge on general taxation. It is a form of idea that may well spell ruin for a St. Helens but be a bounty for a Guildford.

I find you arguments a persuasive case in favour of my plan. I want voters to get what they vote for and to suffer the consequences when they continue to elect bad councillors because of the colour of the rosette, or to punish the government, or for other silly reasons like "sending a message" about something or other. I want to want powerful local authorities that are not beholden to central government and that means they need to raise their own revenue.

[Richard Allen]

Feb 1, 2017 19:06:36 GMT peterl said:

Not too hard to work out from my numerous posts on the subject, but mine would be the end of creeping regionalism - that is to say the repeal of the Cities and Devolution Act, an end to combined authorities and an end to geographically large unitary councils. If I had a second thing, it would be the end of the Cabinet system in local government.

Not that I completely disagree with you on regionalism but what kind of structure would you advocate for co-operation between local authorities on matters such as transport and strategic planning. I appreciate that in parts of the country this isn't of huge importance but in large conurbations there are some things that simply can't be handled at the level of the local authority.

[J.G.Harston]

Feb 1, 2017 19:23:00 GMT carlton43 said:

Feb 1, 2017 18:09:00 GMT Richard Allen said:

Local authorities to raise the vast majority of the money that they spend with a locally set sales tax replacing VAT.

Don't do it Richard.
...
Added into this mix will be the naked politics where the lefter-leaning authorities will be inclined to ramp taxes and cause even greater consequent problems. Why am I concerned? Merely that the failing authorities will need bailing out and targeted support from government and will fall as a charge on general taxation. It is a form of idea that may well spell ruin for a St. Helens but be a bounty for a Guildford.

How was local government funded in the past before we got to tay's council tax being a pathetic 15% of council income? Eg, 50+ or more years ago? Did Chamberlain's Birmingham raise all its money locally, or did it get some from central government, and in what proportion?

[Richard Allen]

Feb 1, 2017 19:51:54 GMT J.G.Harston said:

Feb 1, 2017 19:23:00 GMT carlton43 said:

Don't do it Richard.
...
Added into this mix will be the naked politics where the lefter-leaning authorities will be inclined to ramp taxes and cause even greater consequent problems. Why am I concerned? Merely that the failing authorities will need bailing out and targeted support from government and will fall as a charge on general taxation. It is a form of idea that may well spell ruin for a St. Helens but be a bounty for a Guildford.

How was local government funded in the past before we got to tay's council tax being a pathetic 15% of council income? Eg, 50+ or more years ago? Did Chamberlain's Birmingham raise all its money locally, or did it get some from central government, and in what proportion?

From memory I think that local government was funded entirely from local revenue until around 1850 and was probably still at about 80% during Chamberlain's time leading Birmingham Council.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

Feb 1, 2017 19:51:54 GMT J.G.Harston said:

How was local government funded in the past before we got to tay's council tax being a pathetic 15% of council income? Eg, 50+ or more years ago? Did Chamberlain's Birmingham raise all its money locally, or did it get some from central government, and in what proportion?

There have been government grants to local government institutions since forever, but locally raised taxation used to be a much higher proportion. Of course that wasn't Council Tax, but Rates. Which of course covered both domestic and business premises.

[mondialito]

If I can change just one thing, it would be to introduce STV for councils in England and Wales.

[Lord Twaddleford]

If it's only one thing that could be changed, I'd move switch the UK over to using the federal system, be it de jure* or de facto**.

I would also envisage the new English parliament that will inevitably emerge from this to utilise a Mixed-Member electoral system, as is currently used in Scotland and Wales.


_{*i.e. by means of a major sweeping constitutional overhaul, with changes that affect the current devolved parliaments (if need be), in addition to the creating a seperate English parliament
**i.e. by simply just establishing a seperate English parliament, without necessarily touching anything else}