Dilynwch ni: RSS

Arolwg yn datgelu bod 64% o blaid pwerau i amrywio trethi. Rydych chi’n dweud…

Cyhoeddwyd 13 Mawrth 2012 7 Sylw

Canfu pôl piniwn a gomisiynwyd yn ddiweddar gan y BBC fod 64% o’r 1000 o drigolion yng Nghymru a holwyd o blaid rhoi pwerau i amrywio trethi i Lywodraeth Cymru yng Nghymru. Mae crynodeb o’r canlyniadau ar gael ar dudalen newyddion y BBC. Dyma un o’r prif feysydd y mae’r Comisiwn yn ei ystyried.

Ond dim ond un pôl piniwn oedd hwn ac rydym am glywed eich barn chi.

Beth am gael golwg ar rai o’r dadleuon o blaid ac yn erbyn…..

Mae’r rheini sydd yn erbyn datganoli pwerau trethu i Lywodraeth Cymru yn dadlau mai Llywodraeth y DU ddylai wneud penderfyniadau am drethu a gwario ac y byddai cael cyfraddau trethi gwahanol yng Nghymru a Lloegr yn gallu achosi problemau i fusnesau ac unigolion.

Mae’r rhai sydd o blaid yn dadlau y byddai datganoli pwerau trethu yn golygu y gallai Llywodraeth Cymru gynnig y dewis i bleidleiswyr yng Nghymru rhwng lefelau gwahanol o drethiant a gwariant. Petai pobl Cymru am weld mwy yn cael ei wario ar wasanaethau cyhoeddus yng Nghymru ac yn hapus i dalu mwy o dreth i ariannu’r gwariant ychwanegol neu petai’n well ganddynt drethi is ond llai o wariant ar wasanaethau cyhoeddus yna gellir cynnig y dewisiadau hynny wrth ddatganoli’r pwerau, a thrwy hynny wella atebolrwydd ariannol Llywodraeth Cymru.  

Felly, beth yw eich barn chi?

Os ydych chi’n cytuno â’r 64 y cant yn y pôl piniwn sy’n credu y dylai pwerau trethu gael eu datganoli i Gymru, ydych chi’n credu y dylai’r pwerau dros yr holl drethi gael eu datganoli neu dim ond rhai? Os rhai yn unig ddylai gael eu datganoli, pa rai a pham?

Os ydych chi’n anghytuno â’r 64 y cant yn yr arolwg, rhowch wybod i ni. Pam nad ydych chi’n credu y dylai pwerau dros drethi gael eu datganoli i Gymru?

Rhowch eich barn.

Sylwadau (7)

  1. ralph griffiths yn dweud:

    In principle there is much to be said for a devolved administration having considerable control over the raising and expenditure of revenue in the region served by the devolved administration. In practice there must be reservations as to the ability and capacity of the present Welsh assembly government being able to do so effectively and responsibly. Among the concerns are:

    (i) The capacity and knowledge of the present devolved elected members of the administration to discharge this responibility are not self-evident, and of the present civil service to advise on and implement the necessary measures. There have been sufficient inefficiencies, even scandals, in the past decade to give pause for thought

    (ii) The evident reluctance of the assembly government to seek independent advice publicly from qualified individuals and even its own advisory boards, a number of which have been disbanded, is regrettable. Greater rather than less publicly scrutiny would be called for.

    (iii) An apparent lack of training of elected members is a concern.

    (iv) A commitment to cooperation between the British government and devolved administrations is essential for the satisfactory progress of public affairs, which would be even more necessary if greater financial responsibility were devolved. The present state of disfunction on this important level gives cause for concern from both points of view: the public are electors to both parliament and the devolved assembly.

    • Ieuan Evans yn dweud:

      The legitimacy of the Assembly cannot be in any doubt .The failed No Campaign will no doubt disagree and refuse to accept the democratic will of the people of Wales.
      What Wales needs now is the ability to have control of raising some of its own funding through taxes and borrowing . It’s an entirely logical progression from the last referendum and something that is totally within the ability of the assembly. To make the Assembly accountable is obviously desirable.
      I do believe however, that in addition to the current taxes, the Assembly should have the ability to implement unique Wales only taxes. The control of Wales resources in power and water should be devolved to the Assembly to allow the Assembly to develop two new taxes , namely
      1. A reservoir Tax based on the water extracted and exported to other parts of the United Kingdom
      2. And likewise an energy tax to take advantage of Wales’ surplus power generation including wind turbines.

      Its important that these Welsh assets should be made to benefit the people of Wales and ensure that Wales doesn’t suffer the horrendous legacy of the coal and slate industry whereby the industry only benefitted the wealthy cities

  2. R Trezise yn dweud:

    Varying taxation – what does that actually amount to ? The ability to apply a supplementary income tax would seem to be a logical first step. I doubt the Westminster Govt would permit anything more than perhaps two or three pence in the pound as this could affect the total UK money supply and economic activity – changes to taxation could modify domestic and business borrowing decisions. The danger then is that the Westminster Govt might be tempted to reduce the grant to balance the extra tax take. Back to square one – or worse?

    This supplementary tax would then I guess be the security on which borrowing could be made for specific projects. What interest rate would be available to the WAG – not the two or so percent that the UK Govt has access to I doubt. The Welsh Govt could of course issue bonds but what interest rate would secure demand and would they be tempted to roll them over and thus run their own deficit ? This is unlikely to be permitted by Westminster as it would directly increase the UK borrowing total and add to the liability of the whole UK population.

    Then we come to the idea of total control over the levy and collection of taxes. This I suggest would potentially amount to De Facto independence. Consider what taxes actually do. Well amongst other things the three most important are:

    1. They can be used to influence both the overall total and sectors of economic activity within the country.

    2. It recycles money previously borrowed (via bond/gilt issue) and spent into circulation by the Government.

    3. Most importantly, it validates and establishes demand for the sovereign national currency as the government demands sole payment of taxes in that currency. The public and business are usually complicit in this as they require a universally accepted means of exchange.

    Now imagine that the Welsh Govt was able to change or add to the current accepted method of tax payment. The options could be gold (an historical favourite), some other commodity, or dare I say a “Welsh pound”. Once you establish your own currency via taxation and take the short step of opening a central bank, you effectively become an independent sovereign nation. Would the Westminster Govt ever permit this; answers on a postcard to………..

    The idea of Welsh monetary independence (i.e. its own currency and central bank) has its attractions; just consider the ICB (Independent Commission on Banking) report published last year. The proposal of radical banking and monetary reform was kicked most firmly into touch – reform we urgently need I believe. The real driver of current economic stagnation has been the end of cheap energy, most critically oil. The monetary system that has developed globally is reliant on constant economic growth and it has been cheap energy over the last 100 or so years which made that possible – much of that Welsh coal for the UK and other importing countries! Wales retains a vast potential for energy provision/export and a monetary/banking regime that fosters sustainable development of this potential and is capable of functioning with little or no growth is urgently needed – this of course includes taxation.

  3. Phil Harding yn dweud:

    Some very interesting comments here. I like Ieuan Evans ideas of controlling Wales resources in power and water – why should we be giving them away particularly at a time when Wales economic GDP is worse than Greece and Romania. I do believe that we will be stronger if we remain as part of the United Kingdom; but I also believe strongly that Wales needs a stronger Government with tax-raising powers, similar to Scotland. Such a stronger Government would than be able to negotiate with Westminster from a more powerful base and be in a better position to re-negotiate the Barnett formula.
    It often appears to me that we lack self-confidence as a nation and a greater self-esteem should result from a more powerful Goverment that understands the needs of the people of Wales.
    However the points raised by Ralph Griffiths on greater training required for elected members and co-operation between devolved administrations and Westminster are very important. Sensible and wise Governance is essential if our own Welsh Government is to be successful in turning-round the ailing Welsh economy; more powers to our devolved Welsh administration can be a vital stimulus for Wales if our elected members have a strategic plan and understand how to implement it effectively.

  4. leigh richards yn dweud:

    It hardly seems fair that while the scottish parliament is set to gain even further powers to vary taxes (and without even having to seek the approval of the scottish people in a referendum) our welsh government has no fiscal powers whatsoever. Even tiny community councils in wales have tax varying powers.

    Its high time this wholly unfair situation was addressed, and i hope the silk commission will address this when it makes its recommendations. Why should a welsh government be disadvantaged in this way? It simply cannot be justified on any grounds!

  5. annwilliams yn dweud:

    I agree that we as a country should have at the very least variableincome tax levels the same as in Scotland ,we always seem to be an afterthought to the UK government, always left behind and beign paid lip serviceWhy do we put up with it?I hope that the commission recommends tax raising powers to our government,i also hope that the current Welsh government have the courage to accept them.We should as a Nation feel more confident and be prepared to say YES,we can do this.

  6. Daniel Lawrence yn dweud:

    I agree that some powers over taxation should be devolved to Wales. I am largely in favour of those powers recommended by the Changing Union Partnership in 2012 that Welsh Government should be responsible for raising at least some of the money that it spends to increase accountability and boost economic growth. Currently the National Assembly for Wales receives a block grant from the treasury that the Welsh Government is almost completely free to do with as it likes. This has created a situation where Welsh politicians can argue for spending money in areas without having any responsibility for actually raising that money. That means they have no incentive to promote economic growth and politicians or parties that may wont to argue for less spending and therefore less tax cannot offer this choice to the electorate.

    There is also the problem that the current funding system means that the Welsh Government is tied to the policies on the UK Government in England because of the effects of the Barnett formula via consequential funding. Devolving some tax powers would be a step on the road to replacing the Barnett formula with a simple needs based formula as recommended by the Holtham Commission.