NationStates Jolt Archive

From the Evening Standard (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23550258-details/The+2012+Olympic+martyrs%3A+'We'll+go+to+jail+rather+than+pay+33+Games+tax'%2C+pledge+pensioners/article.do)

An elderly couple are vowing to go to jail rather than pay the 2012 Olympics surcharge on their council tax bill.

Tom and Rita Glenister insist the £33.33 levy imposed on London homes to cover the cost of the London Games is unfair.

They will appear in court later this month after ignoring repeated demands for the Olympic charge from their local council. If convicted they face up to three months in jail. Mr Glenister, 78, a retired civil engineer who worked on the building of the Channel Tunnel, is determined to become the first 'Olympic martyr' after widespread concern about the cost of the Games. He and his 76-year-old wife withheld the £33.33 charge from the first instalment of their £2,320 annual council tax bill.

'We have the money to pay this tax, but it is a point of principle,' he said from their home in Barnet, North London.

'Our Prime Minister has consistently told us the London Olympics will benefit the whole country but the only people paying directly for these Games are London council taxpayers. Why should Londoners alone pay for the Olympics? We are two old age pensioners who might not even be here in 2012. It's wrong for us to fund these hugely expensive stadiums and arenas that we might never visit.

'The Beijing Olympics were wonderful and our athletes did Britain proud by winning so many medals. But I didn't watch much of it on TV because I was on holiday and I won't be watching in 2012. There are thousands of people in London who feel the same way and they are now making their voices heard.

'But we are willing to go to prison on this issue.'

OK, so this is a little different to the usual band of C-tax martyrs, whom I have no time for at all. I also totally disagree with their methods, for they have put the borough council in an impossible situation. If they let this stupid couple go, they will face a slew of copy-cats. The Assembly will beat them for it too, as people in other boroughs would no doubt follow suit. However, if the borough makes good on it's words, and drags them to court, the papers, as we are seeing, will demonise them for "persecuting" supposedly "innocent" retirees. They should pay, and write to the Assembly, the borough council, and to the papers to make their views known.

All they are doing right now is creating a storm with no benefit to anyone, whilst stirring up more martyrs for the cause, which places a greater burden on others who live within the law, many of whom have far less means with which to meet their obligations than our dear martyrs, yet continue to do so.

However much I disagree with their methods, though, their point is a valid concern, and should be one raised by the Assembly with Westminster. The whole nation will supposedly benefit from the orgy of attention that is the Olympics, and it is being hailed as national achievement and our nations chance to bask in the limelight for a while. So, why is it that London alone should bear the cost of this extravaganza? Making London to pay for the entire Olympics is placing a huge burden on the people of a single city. If the rest of the nation is going to to benefit, then the rest of nation really should help pay.

A fair solution in my view is that the nation pay for the Olympic stage of the project, and London pays for the modification of the site into the "legacy", which it shall receive the most actual benefit from (or not, as the case may be).

Oh, I'm sure the point was raised. And ignored. I'm sure people have written opposing this Olympic tax. And were ignored. It's pretty easy to tell taxpayers to pay their taxes and go fuck themselves when they complain when they'll nod meekly, pay their taxes and go fuck themselves. People only check their shoes for shit when they catch a whiff of the stink. *nod*

Oh, I'm sure the point was raised. And ignored. I'm sure people have written opposing this Olympic tax. And were ignored. It's pretty easy to tell taxpayers to pay their taxes and go fuck themselves when they complain when they'll nod meekly, pay their taxes and go fuck themselves. People only check their shoes for shit when they catch a whiff of the stink. *nod*

Further posts are futile. LG has won this thread. *Retreats*:tongue:

However much I disagree with their methods, though, their point is a valid concern, and should be one raised by the Assembly with Westminster. The whole nation will supposedly benefit from the orgy of attention that is the Olympics, and it is being hailed as national achievement and our nations chance to bask in the limelight for a while. So, why is it that London alone should bear the cost of this extravaganza? Making London to pay for the entire Olympics is placing a huge burden on the people of a single city. If the rest of the nation is going to to benefit, then the rest of nation really should help pay.


First things first, you pay your taxes whether or not you have children in education or want a large military.

London isn't paying for the entire Olympics. London taxpayers are paying for £1billion of £9.3billion with £2billion coming from the lottery and the rest from the national taxpayer.

Londoners will enjoy a large boost in tourism related revenues (ie, hotel rooms, restaurant bills, taxi fares, store sales, etc), which most of UK will not get. If this couple wants to recoup their losses and make a bit of profit, they could probably rent out their living room for a couple hundred.

To be honest, I see it as a publicity stunt by a couple looking to make a statement in completely the wrong way. Maybe they don't like paying for the Olympics, neither do I, and I live in Sheffield and have nothing more than a passing interest in the Games.

I still see my tax being spent on a 9 billion pound event I don't follow and I can't exactly not pay the percentage of my income tax being spent on the Games, can I? Added to that the fact it will 'benefit the whole country' smells off to me. How can something in London help me here in Sheffield? Tourism? Or are we going to see a cut of the cash it brings in?

Also, having lived in Manchester during the run up to the 2002 Commonwealth Games, and seeing how the funding for the venues for that came from the city councils pockets and that of Sport UK, I think that getting the rest of the UK to foot the bill is cheeky at best, down right criminal at worst, and probably sits somewhere in between. Only 10-20% is coming from London's pockets, with 60-80% being snatched from central Government, according to various sources across the net, with Wikipedia settling on 13% and 63% respectively. If that's true, then I think Mr and Mrs Glenister should be thankful they're only paying £33.33, and not twice that.

It is truly criminal is that money is being pulled from council budgets across the UK to fund the event, and people in London have the gall to complain about £33.33.

They should sell their house and move somewhere else if they don't like it. Hartlepool for example.

And really, since the olympics will be far more accessible for people living in london than those living in say, loch tummel, or hartlepool, I hardly see how this is unfair.

Oh, I'm sure the point was raised. And ignored. I'm sure people have written opposing this Olympic tax. And were ignored. It's pretty easy to tell taxpayers to pay their taxes and go fuck themselves when they complain when they'll nod meekly, pay their taxes and go fuck themselves. People only check their shoes for shit when they catch a whiff of the stink. *nod*

This pretty much covers if, if they tried all legitmite way of getting there views across then they are doing right by not paying this unjust increase.

Who owns the arenas that the games will be held in, and what will happen to them after the event?

Point already raised is that Local Londoners are only paying a fraction of the cost. Another point is that London will benefit immensely from the improved infrastructure, including: sports, transport, new homes (the Olympic village), etc...

They are also lucky in that the extra tax bill is being added as a separate item and so will be forced to be removed once the games are over, as opposed to a general increase that you won't see go down again.

Also I don't think their claim about not living to see the games is valid (as harsh as that may be), because that's part of how the tax system works. It would be similar to complaining that they have to pay tax to fund an education that they won't use because they've already been through it.

From the Evening Standard (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23550258-details/The+2012+Olympic+martyrs%3A+'We'll+go+to+jail+rather+than+pay+33+Games+tax'%2C+pledge+pensioners/article.do)



OK, so this is a little different to the usual band of C-tax martyrs, whom I have no time for at all. I also totally disagree with their methods, for they have put the borough council in an impossible situation. If they let this stupid couple go, they will face a slew of copy-cats. The Assembly will beat them for it too, as people in other boroughs would no doubt follow suit. However, if the borough makes good on it's words, and drags them to court, the papers, as we are seeing, will demonise them for "persecuting" supposedly "innocent" retirees. They should pay, and write to the Assembly, the borough council, and to the papers to make their views known.

All they are doing right now is creating a storm with no benefit to anyone, whilst stirring up more martyrs for the cause, which places a greater burden on others who live within the law, many of whom have far less means with which to meet their obligations than our dear martyrs, yet continue to do so.

However much I disagree with their methods, though, their point is a valid concern, and should be one raised by the Assembly with Westminster. The whole nation will supposedly benefit from the orgy of attention that is the Olympics, and it is being hailed as national achievement and our nations chance to bask in the limelight for a while. So, why is it that London alone should bear the cost of this extravaganza? Making London to pay for the entire Olympics is placing a huge burden on the people of a single city. If the rest of the nation is going to to benefit, then the rest of nation really should help pay.

A fair solution in my view is that the nation pay for the Olympic stage of the project, and London pays for the modification of the site into the "legacy", which it shall receive the most actual benefit from (or not, as the case may be).

Meh! Go up to Manchester and ask them how much they would be willing to pay in extra tax for the 2012 London olympics.

£33 is not a hell of a lot and they have said that they have the money. Fuck it send them to jail under tax evasion laws, that'll learn em!

OK, so this is a little different to the usual band of C-tax martyrs, whom I have no time for at all. I also totally disagree with their methods, for they have put the borough council in an impossible situation. If they let this stupid couple go, they will face a slew of copy-cats. The Assembly will beat them for it too, as people in other boroughs would no doubt follow suit. However, if the borough makes good on it's words, and drags them to court, the papers, as we are seeing, will demonise them for "persecuting" supposedly "innocent" retirees. They should pay, and write to the Assembly, the borough council, and to the papers to make their views known.

All they are doing right now is creating a storm with no benefit to anyone, whilst stirring up more martyrs for the cause, which places a greater burden on others who live within the law, many of whom have far less means with which to meet their obligations than our dear martyrs, yet continue to do so.

However much I disagree with their methods, though, their point is a valid concern, and should be one raised by the Assembly with Westminster. The whole nation will supposedly benefit from the orgy of attention that is the Olympics, and it is being hailed as national achievement and our nations chance to bask in the limelight for a while. So, why is it that London alone should bear the cost of this extravaganza? Making London to pay for the entire Olympics is placing a huge burden on the people of a single city. If the rest of the nation is going to to benefit, then the rest of nation really should help pay.

A fair solution in my view is that the nation pay for the Olympic stage of the project, and London pays for the modification of the site into the "legacy", which it shall receive the most actual benefit from (or not, as the case may be).

Making the people of 'one city' pay some extra isn't unreasonable when most of the benefit is going to be for that one city. Indeed, they should be making Londoners pay a much bigger share.

And, it's a little disingenuous to talk about it in terms of 'one city'. If you were talking about... say, Leicester, with a population of a couple of hundred thousand, it might be a point - but somewhere in the ballpark of a fifth of ALL the population are in London. And - of course - in general, they are earning substantially more in London than they might be in - say - Blackburn, right?

If England plays it right, there's a bounce effect to be captured during, and in the wake of a well-executed event of this magnitude. So - make a choice - make an attempt like Beijing, which was pretty spectacular, and will be paying dividends for a generation... or a half-hearted shitty attempt like Athens.

From the
However much I disagree with their methods, though, their point is a valid concern, and should be one raised by the Assembly with Westminster. The whole nation will supposedly benefit from the orgy of attention that is the Olympics, and it is being hailed as national achievement and our nations chance to bask in the limelight for a while. So, why is it that London alone should bear the cost of this extravaganza? Making London to pay for the entire Olympics is placing a huge burden on the people of a single city. If the rest of the nation is going to to benefit, then the rest of nation really should help pay.


This.

I'm too young to remember if there was a tax imposed for the Atlanta games in 1996. Anyone know the answer to that?

This.

I'm too young to remember if there was a tax imposed for the Atlanta games in 1996. Anyone know the answer to that?

Who cares. The Atlanta games were shit. The US should be forbidden from ever hosting any sporting events - even inter-school friendlies - based on just how terminally shit the Atlanta games were.