I'm not sure there is much evidence to support that - although high taxes dissuading people from starting may have more effect.
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/11/suppl_1/i62.full
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-03-27-tobacco-tax_N.htm
Interesting stuff there Tony, thanks for the links
That was pretty much how I saw it at the time. Alas the LibDems have received no credit for doing the best thing for the Country at the time. The tuition fees farce robbed them of their core support too, but looking at things pragmatically, would the NHS bill not have been worse without Lib Dem involvement, and would the income tax threshold have been raised towards £10k with a majority Tory government? Probably not.
The one issue I have with the Lib Dems is their refusal to talk sensibly about Europe despite a large swathe of public opinion wanting changes. While I'd not be at all happy (for that read furious!) if the extreme right-wing had their way and pulled us out, our Parliament should have far more control over our affairs. I honestly think that Europe could be a deciding factor at the next election...
The timing of the Tuition Fees and the AV Referendum will cost the LibDems badly.
Neither had to happen when it did, but the fact that they were seen to be selling out on what people thought was their biggest "pledge" so early into a coalition meant that a lot of people have given up listening to the LibDems when they do make a positive change (like the increase in personal allowances on Income Tax - a genuine benefit, but we have a "once bitten, twice shy" attitude to politicians and it'll be very hard for the LibDems to get back the goodwill they lost over tuition fees.
Similarly, having played the Proportional Referendum card very early into the coalition (rather than waiting until they were confident of winning a referendum before holding it - look at how Alex Salmond has carefully waited and waited to ensure that he has a better chance of Independance). If Clegg had waited until the third or fourth year of the five year coalition before having his referendum then (as well as having a better chance of winning it) he'd have been able to keep the party onside with the "jam tomorrow" incentive of PR to keep them "loyal".
Grabbing the first chance of a referendum meant that there's no real incentive for party members to "keep the faith", again making things hard for him.
I really cant see why the media keep banging on about a granny tax. They have not taxed grannies, just not raised the their tax free allowance which is almost double the amount of the state pension anyway, so it is not affecting a majority of pensioners.
Why should old folk have a higher tax threshold than working people?
They already get free prescriptions, free eye tests, free off peak bus travel in most areas, cheap train travel if the buy a railcard, reduced entry fees to most events or historic properties and extra money to pay for winter fuel bills.
:roll:
I agree with you there Madge.
The tax changes for pensioners are very sensible, the kind of tough decision that needs taking but no politician has the guts to tackle (like merging Income Tax and National Insurance, or the IDS plan for a "single" welfare benefit).
There are poor pensioners who need help, of course, in the way that there are poor people of all generations. But the blanket treatment of them means we are spending a lot of money on tax relief/ free television licences etc regardless of need.
I'm no Tory, but I'm impressed that young Gideon has taken this decision (at a time when the Government are having to make cuts in many directions there's no reason for one section of society to be "sacred cows")