Look! JK Rowling is giving Gordon Brown loadsa money! She says:
David Cameron’s promise of tax perks for the married, on the other hand, is reminiscent of the Conservative government I experienced as a lone parent.
It sends the message that the Conservatives still believe a childless, dual-income, but married couple is more deserving of a financial pat on the head than those struggling, as I once was, to keep their families afloat in difficult times.
We’ll first off have to ignore the ridiculous mis-characterisaton of Conservative policy regarding married couples1. We’ll also have to quietly pretend that we actually have a reason to care what Rowling says – she’s a talented author, but it’s a bit like saying ‘Liam Gallagher’s a good singer, so I agree with everything he says about renaissance art’.
So, let me get this straight – Labour have traded for a century (however inaccurately) on the idea that they look out for the interests of everybody, that the State should look after those in most need and that we should put the needs of the wider population ahead of our own personal desires, yes?
And now Rowling is saying that she supports them because they’ll look after her but not others. “I’ll support you if you’re looking out for my interests. Help out somebody else and you’ll get no support from me”. I’m sorry, but it’s sheer hypocrisy. You can’t see the Labour party as the party who cares about the disadvantaged, and then support them because they’re singling out your minority group for help.
Anyway, the money quote was right at the bottom of the BBC article.
A source indicated that JK Rowling’s money would not simply be swallowed up in debt repayments, but would allow the party to continue with its work.
Yeah. Right.
Incidentally, I hope you’re impressed that I wrote an entire post about JK Rowling without making a single cheesy Hogwarts joke.
Wizard.
- Cameron has said it should be tax neutral to be married, not that married couples should pay less tax nor get ‘perks’. The idea is that a two-adult family (like my own) shouldn’t be able to earn a significant amount of money by splitting up and becoming single parents. What’s more, as far as I’m aware the Conmservatives haven’t said a damn thing about giving significant tax breaks to childless couples. [↩]
I’m a tad fed up of awarding Medals for Motherhood and I’m certainly not impressed with those who feel it’s OK to attempt to politically sway the minds of their customers, especially when her main readers are under 18yo’s.
Personally, I believe DC’s touted £20 tax allowance for married couples is not about neutralising the disincentive of couples living apart. It bothers me that ‘marriage’ is wedded to the proposal.
The reasons I married the current Mr Tizzy are more due to the various laws on pensions and inheritance tax, but mainly the rights on his body and body parts at the point of death.
If this disgusts your readers, I suggest they read up on the benefits of common law partnerships – there aren’t any worth mentioning, but definitley some against.
Tizzy
September 21, 2008 at 9:38 pm