The Press THURSDAY, JUNE 19, 1969. The Unequal Burden Of Rates

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32018, 19 June 1969, Page 16

The Press THURSDAY, JUNE 19, 1969. The Unequal Burden Of Rates

On May 31 in a leading article which discussed the acknowledged difficulties of pensioners and other ratepayers of limited means in times of steeplyrising costs, we drew attention to the conflict of interest between the younger and progressive city-dwellers on the one hand and the elderly and less well-to-do on the other. It was suggested that the conflict could be reduced and the dilemma resolved if pensioners had ready access to long-term loans—ideally, loans which need not be repaid in their lifetime. This suggestion was not supported in any of the 16 letters on the subject we have printed in the last three weeks. The number and tenor of the letters received, however, bear out our argument that there is a conflict of interest between the two classes of ratepayer we described. One of the more positive suggestions received from correspondents came from a writer who suggested that the City Council might introduce for home owners a “rate endowment policy, e.g., “ by paying at 60 years $BOO, or at 65 years $7OO, or “at 70 years $5OO, and living rate-free in a house “or ownership flat for life ”. The restrictions on the powers of local bodies probably prevent the City Council from entering into such a contract; but the suggestion deserves consideration by insurance companies and other financial institutions. The City Council is not unsympathetic to pensioners. The chairman of the council’s finance committee (Cr H. P. Smith) said this week that salaries and wages had risen much more than the rating cost, but this was no help to those on fixed incomes or elderly persons dependent or almost entirely dependent on Social Security benefits. These persons could apply to the Social Security Department for assistance with rates, he said. A second course was to ask the council to postpone rates during a ratepayer’s lifetime. This was not a mortgage, he said.

“ Elderly Widow ” complained that her rates have “ more than doubled ” in the last 15 years. She did not mention that universal superannuation is now 3.8 times the 1954 benefit Several correspondents are under the misapprehension that non-ratepayers get

off scot-free. “ Let us assume that the user should pay “ and that the average household occupancy is four ”, said one correspondent; “ ‘ Elderly Widow ’ should “ then be rated one-fourth of her counterpart ”. The principle so enunciated flouts every canon of town-planning and economics, which is concerned with making the best use of limited space and expensive services in growing cities. The citizens’ poll-tax, suggested from time to time, may have merit, but its aim is not to encourage further urban sprawl. If the present system seems inequitable, a little thought will show that its inequities are more apparent than real; the head of a household pays rates on behalf of each member of the household, and flat-dwellers and occupants of rented houses pay their share of the rates in the form of rent

The “ hardships at present experienced by older

“ home-owners on large sections ” are to. some extent self-inflicted; these ratepayers can usually subdivide their sections, take in tenants, or sell their houses in exchange for smaller, lower-rated properties. None of the correspondents acknowledged that one of the main causes of rate increases—wage increases, negotiated

at national level—is quite beyond the control of any local authority. While inflation continues it is absurd to suggest that rates can be stabilised, unless economies are made. Where would pensioners suggest that the axe should fall? On street-cleaning or refuse collection? On the Transport Board’s concession fares for pensioners? Or on the City Council’s and borough council’s cheap housing for the aged?

The general tenor of the correspondence suggests that some of those who have benefited most from the Welfare State are the first to criticise it and the last to concede that the welfare of other sections of the community deserves consideration.