Well I'd just point out the records and data already freely available to central Gov before folks get too carried away with the whole standard
'totalitarian' riff.
For people living in the UK (and some abroad) H.M.'s British Gov already has almost everybody's' employment and income data through tax & National
Insurance records, taxes on savings, VAT receipts, vehicle registration & duty data, child benefit records, they know all about your property through
the land registry and council tax data.
There are other sources but hopefully you get the idea?
That's a hell of a lot more comprehensive a set of data than a supposedly scary 'computer system' or program (never properly named) which
identifies so-called 'nice areas'.
In fact this story is typical Daily Mail;
They completely ignore the actual reality of the situation already so that they can inflate and pretend any changes or the latest news is a huge scary
'threat'
(and even better it's from those - as every Daily Mail reader knows thanks to their daily indoctrination
- 'secret police-staters' this
Labour Gov!
).
Note how the 'system' (or Gov program it's supposedly a part of) is never specifically referred to by it's official name
(which is quite handy as it stops anyone cross-refing to any other sources/stories for a look at the way this is reported elsewhere).
It's all just cos the Daily Mail said so.
.....and you know how politically unbiased and reliable they are (not).
But they have a market......s'funny, if tragic and deeply sad, how so many of 'us' seem to love all that obvious cr@p tho, eh?
BTW the reference to Northern Ireland property taxes?
Pathetic stupidity, they're laughing at you and your (understandable) ignorance.
Their claim that our recent local rate rises was thanks to this 'system' and that it has created a huge rise in our property tax is simply a gross
distortion of what happened here.....actually no, in fact it's quite patently
an outright lie to the ignorant to manipulate them; is actually more like the truth.
ie typical Daily Mail.
'We' in NI haven't had a property 'revaluation' since 1976.
That is why 'we' have had a note-able rates increase (we don't have council tax, we have the old rates system here still).
If you don't know about domestic and business property taxes and 'revaluation' in the UK (or as here they funnily enough 'forget' to mention this
aspect of the story or you've simply forgotten the last time it happened in England it is over 10yrs ago now) then I guess that makes you a sucker
for this kind of half-truth and outright distortion.
Revaluation is a perfectly normal part of property taxation and is supposed to happen everywhere in the UK so as to reflect the changes in property
values over the years since the last time it was done.
It's kind of based on prices but also how relative they are to each other (areas can become desirable or not over time).
It happened in England and Scotland under the tories in the mid 1990's and has just happened in Wales in 2005.
Unfortunately revaluation is usually avoided like the plague and it's normally left for ages because spineless Govs fear the electoral effects it
usually brings.
....but the true effect of this is simply to store up trouble for someone else on another day.....and if you are in Gov for long enough it can be a
real horror story boomeranging back on you (as the tory party in the mid 1990's found out).
This Gov has now sensibly set a proper legal 10yr timetable where revaluation must occur to remove the 'political football' effect.
Scotland has moved to a set 5yr timetable.
But as for this story?
It is simply a typical Daily Mail lie to say this is happening just because of this 'big brother computer system'.
I know it doesn't really go with the flo but does anyone ever stop to consider that it might just be really all about what the Gov have said it's
all about,
(ie to enable better and more responsive Gov via better data collection to add to and improve their already large data portfolio?).
Just maybe?
But as for the Daily Mail here?
A bunch of lying liars lying to us; as per.
[edit on 30-10-2006 by sminkeypinkey]