I AM sorry that Mr Hunter felt patronised by my letter published on September 18. He clearly recognises that as ''taxes pay for our society'', the formula ''taxes are bad and should be reduced'' is naive, simplistic, and unworthy of a civilised society. Sadly, too many of the remarks I have heard and read over the last days - including those made by Messrs Hague and Portillo today - have not risen to this level of sophistication and have adopted exactly that tone. It was to these that my comments were addressed.
Mr Hunter goes on to make some very valid points. I was particularly interested in his suggestion of taxing fuel by the measure rather than the cost. This may have much to recommend it in terms of predictability of revenue and I hope that the Chancellor considers it.
Mr Hunter's comments on arbitrary taxation are also well made; though it is difficult to see what could be more arbitrary than levying taxation on the basis of whether or not a sector in society can bring the country to a standstill. All indirect taxation is arbitrary to one degree or another. I argued that tax levelled at an item only purchased by people sufficiently able and sufficiently well-off to drive was less arbitrary than more generalised forms of indirect taxation such as VAT; it is clearly arbitrary to a significant extent.
The problem, which Mr Hunter identifies, is that it has become politically unfeasible to propose raising direct taxation of wealth through income tax. It will take courage on the part of politicians and maturity on the part of the electorate if that is to be changed. In the meantime the kind of posturing we've seen from the Conservative Party does little to help.
I take issue with Mr Hunter's closing remarks. My original letter was prompted by an apparent lack of proportion; where desperate levels of poverty went relatively unremarked, but expensive petrol was viewed as privation and injustice worth taking to the streets for. Mr Hunter's closing remarks show a similar tendency.
The Ceausescu regime closed down opposition newspapers, tortured and executed dissidents, and committed dreadful atrocities. During the time of Mao Tzedung and later the Chinese Government systematically slaughtered forces of opposition and perpetrated the bloodbath of Tiananmen Square. In contrast the British Government in ''targeting future protests'' is not considering anything remotely like the levels of oppression applied against trade unions in this country during the 80s.
To equate these things - and I'm not sure I support them - to the works of Ceausescu and Mao is to further muddy waters stirred up by anger and, worse, to belittle and demean the suffering and despair experienced by the victims of those authoritarian regimes.
Andrew A Morton,
19 Sherwood Park, Lockerbie.
September 20.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article