[quote name='Mr Morse' date='Apr 17 2005, 06:53 PM']Errr.....sounds very good
But how to plan on generating revenue to pay for all of this?

[right][snapback]232407[/snapback][/right][/quote]
Flat tax is revenu neutral , so it is tweaked to bring in the same amount of tax. The gershwin report commissioned by Labour says that £20 Billion can be saved, the report commisioned by the Conservatives says £35 billion can be saved,
Taking the lower figure as my base. We have up to £20 billion to re-invest. Also I would chanel the overseas aid budget. Which according to the gov will rise to £5.3 bilion by 2008.
I would invest £1 billion of this in R&D in this country to pay for development and free deployment of TB/malaria and Aids retrovirals. This has two advantages, it saves millions and millions of lives. And it keeps research and development in this country, and gives the drug companies an incentive do develop these costly drugs , which have little commercial value in them in a classical market.
I would use another 2 billion for 2 very specific overseas projects.
The rest of the money would be put back into the general pot.
I would save loads of money by not having a costly to administer revenue system , thus be able to reduce thousands of pen pushers in the inland revenu.
Already that is £22 Billion in the pool.
Remove 70% of the beaurocrats from Defra etc. Theres 700 Million in the Big Opportunitys fund (formerley the Orwellian sounding new opportunitys fund) this is currently going into schools and hospitals and has become part of the same general tax fund, not going to charitys , sport and arts etc.
Sell/give the train tracks to the train companys in retrurn for much less subsidy. See the excerpt below for interesting reading. The railways currntly recieve almost £4 Billion in rail subsidys.
I would use 2 Billion of that a year that to build brand new high speed links (400 mph+) between the major cities. Great boost for british manufcacturing as well! The train companys can ulise the network in an efficient way. Give any small line that loses it's rail fast and subsidised coach access. Cheaper , more regular and probably quicker.
Use the rest to invest in Personal Rapid Transport for London and rolled out to other major cities . We can use this as the cars eventual replacement , for the majority of inter urban transportation. Lower pollution, cheaper than building more tube, faster than bus and as personal as a car. Also build and manufactuer in Britain and gain a nice export line for the GDP boost. Can replace our car industry.
[url="http://www.cprt.org/"]http://www.cprt.org/[/url]
[url="http://www.skywebexpress.com/"]http://www.skywebexpress.com/[/url]
There's billions if you look. We can spend the money more inteligently and reduce the size of govermnet whilst creating a real value add, scientific-industrial base from which to tackle the future .
---------------------------------------------------------------------
RAIL SUBSIDIES
Rail news & views | November 2003
05 November 2003
TEN years after the 1993 Railways Act received Royal Assent and began the process of privatisation, taxpayers’ support for Britain’s railways is now said to have risen three-fold.
Research carried out by rail journalist Roger Ford, and published in The Rising Cost of Britain's Railways by pressure group Transport 2000, shows support for the railways in 2003/04 is expected to total £3.84 billion.
By comparison, in British Rail's last year as operator of an integrated railway (1993-94) the total subsidy was £1.325 billion (at 2003/04 prices).
Revenue, which the proponents of privatisation expected to rise dramatically, has hardly increased at all. It was £4.94 billion in 1989/90 and is expected to be £5bn this year.
But the costs of many areas of work are now well in excess of twice those at privatisation, and in 1992/93 BR achieved nearly 90% of arrivals on time, while in 2002-03 the figure was just 80%.
Remember that the tax intake has rise massivley since 1997.