Nick Clegg calls for emergency taxes on wealthy

Nick Clegg has told the Guardian that he wants to see a time limited extra tax for the wealthiest so that it can be seen that they are shouldering their share of the burden of the country's economic challenges. He warned that, with the "economic war" we're facing likely to be longer term than we thought, it wouldn't be either "socially or politically sustainable  or acceptable" if the richest weren't asked to pay more.

He said:

If we are going to ask people for more sacrifices over a longer period of time, a longer period of belt tightening as a country, then we just have to make sure that people see it is being done as fairly and as progressively as possible.

We already know that the Liberal Democrats have already made sure that the rich pay more tax on their Capital Gains while the lowest paid pay less tax. Nick Clegg also insisted that benefits should be uprated in line with inflation last year, against the wishes of the Conservatives and of course we have seen the biggest cash rise in the State Pension ever. None of these things would have happened without us being in Government.

Nick didn't give any specific details of how the "time limited contribution" would work. Our conference in three weeks' time will provide the prime opportunity to unveil the proposal.

Liberal Democrat Voice c0-editor Mark Pack, while welcoming the policy, expressed concerns at the clumsiness of the language Nick  used to describe it. Certainly

we need to really hard-wire fairness into what we do in the next phases of fiscal restraint

is not a phrase we want to see on too many leaflets.

While many Liberal Democrats will welcome such a bold statement from the leader, and will strongly support his proposals, they will also want to see more measures to actively relieve the pressure on the poorest, particularly those whose sickness benefits have been time limited and who are struggling as a consequence. The Conference will also be debating a wide-ranging motion on inequality which will tackle some of those issues.

Labour were typically quick to criticise Nick's proposal - but it's significantly more radical than anything they managed to do. A modest rise in income tax for the wealthiest a month before leaving office didn't really cut it, especially when it's wealth and unearned income which require greater attention from HMRC.

And, finally, it's good to see the Guardian publish a nice picture of Nick smiling for a change. They do exist and should be used more often.

Clegg: "We must be bolder on fairer taxes but we're winning the argument"

Nick Clegg was interviewed by Andrew Marr this morning and, as has become my tradition, I've tweeted my way through it and preserved my commentary for you all to read.

He came across very well in the interview. You see, I first knew him a long time ago, and he talks to Marr in the same genuine and open way as he did with all of us way back then. He's being himself, which is something you don't often see with politicians at his level.

In my view, Marr didn't quiz him hard enough on welfare reform and particularly the cuts in benefits for the sick and disabled. It's not difficult to find evidence that these measures are a bad idea so a bit of laziness on Marr's part there. I'd have been interested to hear how Nick would have answered them.

The only criticism I'd really make about what he said was his use of that awful phrase "hard working families". It's quite a narrow phrase and doesn't take account of those people, who need looking after, who can't work for reasons of illness, caring responsibilities or there being no jobs.

However, Nick was pressed on taxes, fairness, the benefit cap, NHS reforms, bankers' bonuses and passed all those tests with flying colours. The thing about Nick is that he generally has a go at actually answering the question put to him. Often politicians use phrases like "let me be clear" as a deflection technique, but Nick actually means it.

There were three things that I felt were really important in what he said.

First was his clear passion to see greater fairness in the tax system. You can tell he's as fed up as we all are with the fact that bankers are still getting massive bonuses while the rest of us suffer, but he highlighted that this was a result of Labour's "irresponsible capitalism" giving them contractual entitlement to them.He talked about how the Coalition had done what it could to curb them. Asked by Marr on the Mansion Tax, he said that it was in our manifesto and if implemented would generate revenue to take taxes away from the poorest. He said that the Liberal Democrats were winning the argument on these issues.

Secondly, he said that the issue of how to deliver fairness in a time of austerity was a crucial issue for progressive parties everywhere. He pointed out Labour's failures in that regard - they, he said, had completely ducked the issue.

Finally, he was passionate about the Youth Contract, saying how he had pushed through government a far more ambitious plan to tackle youth unemployment than that offered by Labour. He clearly understood the effect of not getting a job, talking about the long term scarring of sitting at home filling in application after application and getting rejected.

The most amazing thing about the whole interview was that Spidey, who has not always been, shall we say, effusive in her praise for Nick, was talking about loving him forever.

Anyway, here are the tweets from the show.

A Future Fair for All: Take 2

Just in case you missed take 1, telling you how slightly tipsy I was, here it is.

When we heard the slogan, Stephen's mind went to free fall.

Mine, well, I thought fair couldn't possibly mean what we Lib Dems mean by fair.

If it was, well, then people undergoing Cancer treatment wouldn't be told they were fit for work.

People wouldn't be placed under virtual house arrest without being told what they were being accused of.

Children wouldn't be locked up in immigration detention centres.

Struggling families wouldn't be forced to pay back huge amounts of tax credits overpaid by official error.

The poor wouldn't have got poorer and the rich richer and the gap between the two stretched.

I mean, this lot have had 13 years to sort that out.

No, it has to be a fun fair they are talking about. One with stalls, and waltzers, and a helter skelter and a bouncy castle and candy floss and goldfish - and stocks where we can throw custard pies at Gordon Brown or guacamole at Peter Mandelson - and a coconut shy.



The idea is from my head and beautifully brought to life by Stephen.

Thanks also to Labour for choosing a slogan that is just so mickeytakeable - it almost makes "Have you got the guts to vote SDP?" which many of us in SDP Students had to endure in 1986 seem vaguely adequate by comparison.