Most people would pay more in tax if it meant safeguarding the NHS, according to a new ComRes poll for the Independent.
Most people would pay more tax if it meant safeguarding the NHS, according to a new ComRes poll for the Independent.
Over half (57 per cent) of those surveyed agreed that they would be prepared to pay more tax to maintain the current level of care and services, while 41 per cent disagreed.
The poll comes at a time of increasing strain on the health service, with even senior Tories warning that the NHS would “collapse” if funding was not increased in the next parliament.
But the polling may not provide much comfort for Labour, who have been considering a ‘health tax’ as part of a plan to head off an NHS cash crisis. Just 33 per cent of people trusted Ed Miliband to protect the NHS, compared to 29 per cent who trusted David Cameron.
Meanwhile despite hostility on the left toward private sector involvement in health provision, two thirds of those surveyed (67 per cent) said they did not mind if health services were provided by a private company as long as they remained free of charge. 30 per cent disagreed.
Head of political polling at ComRes Tom Mludzinski said the NHS would be a “key issue” on which the 2015 General Election would be decided:
“The fact that most Britons say they are willing to pay more in tax in order to protect the NHS just goes to show the peril of being seen by voters to neglect it,” he added.
According to ComRes, Labour’s lead has dropped from five to two points since last month, and is now on 32 per cent. The Conservatives are unchanged on 30 per cent while UKIP are up four points to 18 per cent. The Liberal Democrats are down one point to a record low of 7 per cent, and other parties on 13 per cent (no change).
ComRes interviewed 1,005 adults in Britain by telephone between 27 and 29 June. Data is weighted to be democraphically representative of all GB adults.
Related stories
3 Responses to “Public supports tax rise to pay for NHS”
Bernie Evans
Fact is , the rich do not pay enough!
When the austerity measures began in 2010, political commentators of all persuasions were surprised by the ratio of cuts to tax being in the region of 80:20, and Miliband needs to have the courage to say that his party will change it dramatically. Rawnsley mentioned some of the obvious ways a future Labour government would “raise extra revenues from tax rises targeted at the wealthy”, but there is intellectual and economic support for more. Piketty has shown the Laffer curve to be economic nonsense, and recommends that high-earners in the United States should pay 80% tax, so Labour has the ready-made theoretical justification for an all-out attack on inequality. Even the IMF has admitted the rich in Britain can afford to pay more! Labour has already unveiled plans for a 10% starting tax, and could develop this further with a sliding scale for income tax, so that by the time earnings reached between £65K and £150K the rate would be 45%. From £150K to £200K, it would rise to 50%, increasing incrementally, and stopping at 80%. Would that appear unreasonable to the majority of people in this country, where the number of food banks has increased exponentially under this government, and where average earnings are around £26K, an amount earned in two and a half days by the FTSE 100 bosses? Working full time on the current minimum wage yields the disgraceful annual gross income of around £13000. Parties which do not pledge to change drastically this situation, in the 7th richest country in the world, do not deserve anyone`s vote!
bbhh
Over half (57 per cent) of those surveyed agreed that they would be prepared to pay more tax to maintain the current level of care and services, while 41 per cent disagreed.
—————————————
How does that equate to supporting a pay rise? I am pretty sure the public expect a proportion of that money to be spent on equipment, buildings, medicines and so on. And some on salaries. NOT ALL!
bbhh
And a mansion tax could raise billions to pay for social housing.