In getting back to the subject of this Second Reading debate, I should begin by pointing out that, as a member of the Institute of Revenues Rating and Valuation, and of the Society of Clerks of Valuation Tribunals, I have some professional involvement in this area. I have certain predetermined views on local government finance.
I should also make it clear that I see some merit in the Government’s argument for ensuring that revaluation is tied to a review of, and re-jigging of, local government finance; my real concern is the length of that delay. The history of any property tax shows that the longer revaluation is delayed, the more that tax is fundamentally undermined. There was a revaluation in the years immediately after the war, when the Inland Revenue was responsible for valuing the rates. There was another revaluation in 1956, and further revaluations in 1963 and 1973. By the end of the 1980s, after various Ministers delayed a further revaluation and following the experience in Scotland, it was impossible for the then Tory Government to have another one. We ended up with the poll tax.
Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
David S Borrow
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 7 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Council Tax (New Valuation Lists for England) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c58 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:53:50 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_271357
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_271357
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_271357