Taxpayers are fed up with rewarding failure, while in return they suffer a reduction in the quality of services and higher council tax bills. 

View this email in your browser ([link removed])
Croydon residents send a clear message to council
Following on from last week’s campaigning in Northumberland ([link removed]) , we turned our attention to the opposite end of the country as we paid a visit to Purley in Croydon.

As you may recall from this year’s Town Hall Rich List ([link removed]) , Jo Negrini - the former chief executive of Croydon Council - topped the remuneration charts with a package of £613,895!
Setting out our stall in the high street, we asked local residents whether this bumper payout was deserved - especially when you consider that under Ms Negrini’s watch the council went bankrupt with debts now estimated in excess of £1 billion!
Throughout the day our stall was inundated with visitors eager to have their say. Many stuck around to voice their anger and concerns at the financial mismanagement of the council. By the end of the day a clear result was recorded!
Just one member of the public said the golden goodbye was deserved. With the vast majority (too many to count - the ballot box overflowed!) saying the opposite.

So the message to Croydon Council is overwhelming. Taxpayers are fed up with rewarding failure, while in return they suffer a reduction in the quality of frontline services and higher council tax bills. The TaxPayers’ Alliance will continue to hold councils all across the nation accountable.
Let me know where we should visit next. (mailto:[email protected])
TaxPayers' Alliance in the news
Liz’s war on waste and Rishi’s tax cut

It’s been another rollercoaster week in the race to become the next prime minister. Following the release of our research into regional pay bargaining last Sunday, an altered version of the policy was adopted (albeit briefly) by Liz Truss. In the midst of a media storm and baffling row about what the policy actually said ([link removed]) , it was dropped after pressure from those seeking to maintain the unsustainable status quo in the public sector.
[link removed]
It’s a real shame to see a genuine debate over the facts of this policy drowned out by a political row!

And that wasn’t all. Early in the week, Rishi Sunak pledged that if he becomes PM the basic rate of income tax would be cut to 16 pence in the pound by 2029. A 4p cut to income tax would be very welcome and we used our dynamic tax model to assess the impacts on the economy.

Results show that in the event of a 4p cut to income tax, GDP would be £11 billion higher over ten years, also increasing investment by £2 billion. However, if the cut to income tax were accompanied by the scrapping of the national insurance rise, GDP would be £38 billion higher over 10 years, with average earnings up by £468 a year (£9 a week).

There’s no hiding from the fact that the national insurance rise is severely denting people’s pay packets and stifling investment in jobs, so cutting both taxes together would be a silver bullet for boosting growth.
Whitehall’s wasteful woke projects

The Telegraph reports ([link removed]) that “Six of Whitehall’s most senior officials have been accused of wasting time on ‘woke projects’ after their roles as Civil Service diversity and inclusion champions were exposed.”

The mandarins in question (paid between £170,000 to £200,000) have been promoting causes such as “race, gender, age and LGBT rights” in addition to their core duties.
In his comments to The Telegraph our political director James Roberts lambasted the spending, "Taxpayers are fed up with funding woke Whitehall. Politicians decide policy, so there is little need for top mandarins to be sermonising on social justice. Well-paid officials should focus on their day jobs and improving services for struggling taxpayers."

At the same time, attorney general Suella Braverman called for an end to “woke witch trials” in government departments, revealing that officials in her department alone took part in almost 2,000 hours of diversity training.
[link removed]
Speaking to TalkTV’s Richard Tice, I was keen to urge civil servants to get their priorities in order, saying “when you consider taxpayers are suffering under a 70-year high tax burden [and] we have a cost of living crisis, this is not the sort of thing we expect civil servants to be focusing their time on!”
TPA slams council hypocrisy

An investigation by the TaxPayers’ Alliance in The i newspaper ([link removed]) has revealed that more than £5 million has been spent by local authorities converting grass verges into parking spaces in the past two years, despite 23 of the 39 councils in question declaring a “climate emergency”. Some of the biggest spenders were Southampton, Rochdale and Stoke-on-Trent at £682,885, £674,000 and £660,481 respectively.
Commenting on the findings, our investigations campaign manager Elliot Keck didn’t mince his words, stating “Councils face difficult decisions when balancing car infrastructure with other priorities. Yet far too many sermonise about a climate emergency, while acting contrary to their own rhetoric. Hypocritical councils shouldn’t be lecturing residents on climate change while using their cash to pave paradise and put up a parking lot.”
Blog of the week
UKHSA: Triumph or failure?

This week our researcher Tom Ryan reviews the performance of the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), which was one of the bodies set up to replace the failed Public Health England.
[link removed]
Tom rightly points out that it looks like the UKHSA might have improved things. When it comes to the matter of monkeypox, public health institutions have been notably more effective. As he explains, “While politicians continue to posture and preen about their nanny state obsessions, like obesity, UKHSA has shifted focus to monitoring and preventing future pandemics.”

About time! But Tom did warn about the ongoing obsession with nanny state policies. He writes, “The UKHSA’s sister agency, the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, continues to pump out the kind of nanny state activism that we saw with the old PHE. Whether that’s promoting the bonkers Khan Review or pursuing policies that have little to do with public health, like language services for temporary migrants.”

Click here to read Tom’s review. ([link removed])
War on Waste
UKHSA: Triumph or failure?

Stoke-on-Trent council’s city director has seen his remuneration rise above £200,000 ([link removed]) for the financial year 2021-22 - an increase of around £3,000 on the previous year. The local paper also reports that five other senior bosses received remuneration in excess of £100,000.

Once again it raises questions about how taxpayers’ cash is spent, as our chief executive John O’Connell made clear in his comments, saying “Sky-high council exec pay packets will be hard to justify to taxpayers struggling to make ends meet. During a cost of living crisis, residents are right to expect local authorities to tighten their belts and prioritise funds on frontline services. Stoke-on-Trent council must get to grips with senior staff remuneration to keep costs down for local households."

Please send me your examples of public sector waste. (mailto:[email protected]?subject=War%20on%20Waste)

Harry Fone
Grassroots Campaign Manager

[link removed]

============================================================
** Twitter ([link removed])
** [link removed] ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
** Website ([link removed])
Copyright © 2022 The TaxPayers' Alliance, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in to receiving our updates, or we have a legitimate interest to contact you about our work.



TaxPayers' Alliance is a trading name of The TaxPayers' Alliance Limited, a company incorporated in England & Wales under company registration no. 04873888 and whose registered office is at 55 Tufton Street, London SW1P 3QL.



You can read our privacy notice here: [link removed]
Our mailing address is:
The TaxPayers' Alliance
55 Tufton Street
London, London SW1P 3QL
United Kingdom
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.