Horse racing at risk from planned tax hike

 

Horse racing - the UK's second largest spectator sport

Our nation has a love of horse racing, which is the UK’s second-largest spectator sport, attended by almost five million people each year. The horse racing industry, which supports 85,000 jobs, is expressing major concerns over the Labour Government’s plans to increase betting tax from 15% to 21% in the autumn budget, an increase of 40% from the current rate.

The argument for increasing this taxation, is to align betting taxes on horse racing with that of slot machines and online casino games which is already 21%. However, this fails to recognise the key differences between these types of gambling. Unlike online casino games, British horseracing makes an enormous contribution to both employment and our society, and has vastly different rates of gambling related harm. Unlike online casino games, betting on horse racing is not available every few seconds, twenty-four hours a day. 

The British Horse Racing Association commissioned economic research, showing that raising the current 15% tax rate paid by bookmakers on racing to the 21% that online games of chance have, could have a devastating impact on the sport with a £330 million revenue hit to the industry in the first five years, putting 2,752 jobs at risk in the first year alone.

Horse racing is worth £4.1 billion to the UK economy, but it’s not just the national economy that risks being impacted, it’s more locally too. Racing at Goodwood brings huge numbers of visitors into West Sussex, which I’ve seen for myself both on trains and on the road. We also have horse racing at Fontwell, Brighton and Plumpton, and not far to the north of us is Epsom racecourse. 

So concerned is the industry that this extra tax will make British horse racing financially unviable, that in an unprecedented move, horse racing will be going on strike on Wednesday 10 September with no race meetings taking place. They are saying that British racing is already in a precarious financial position and this could push it over the edge. They need to be listened to, or we risk losing a valuable social, cultural and economic asset.

One year on - Crawley's young people are paying the price of Labour

AI image to illustrate article  

The previous Conservative Government left office with low unemployment. In stark contrast, it is well-known that every Labour Government there has ever been, has left office with higher unemployment than when they took office. Last week the latest employment statistics were published, which with it being July’s data, meant a year of Labour being in office could be analysed.

Clear trends have emerged that are concerning. Nationally, unemployment has risen for ten months in a row, by 206,000 in total, and the number of people claiming Universal Credit has soared by over a million, to eight million people. There are now almost four million people of working age who are on benefits with no requirement to find work.

While we get the national figures, we don’t tend to get much reporting these days of local unemployment statistics, so I looked them up in the House of Commons Library. Given what’s in there for Crawley, it perhaps comes as no surprise that Crawley’s Labour MP doesn’t proactively share this data

In Crawley we have 3,700 people claiming unemployment related benefits, which is a 5% increase in the number of people from one year previously. Now higher than the national average of 4.7%, the claimant rate in Crawley was 4.8% for July, up from 4.7% in June. Sadly, unemployment in Crawley keeps ticking upwards and while it is very bad news for those directly affected, it is bad news for our town as a whole and our local economy.

According to the House of Commons Library, half of the total increase in Crawley’s rise in unemployment over the last year has come from 18–24-year-olds. We have 590 of 18–24-year-olds in Crawley who are on unemployment benefits, which is a significant increase of 19% more people than a year ago. 

Crawley has historically been a place of low unemployment but now it has crept above the (rising) national average. It's heartbreaking to see young people being shut out of the world of work and the opportunities that ultimately brings. The National Insurance rise in particular has led to recruitment freezes and that disproportionately impacts younger people at the start of their working lives. It needs reversing and if (now we are in this doom loop that Labour created) that isn't possible, then even a halving of it could lead to firms hiring once again and doors being opened for young people.

The Government needs to change course. Labour’s economic policies of ever higher taxes, higher borrowing and higher spending will only continue to damage business, hurt the economy and fuel inflation. Ultimately it is people who are paying the price, and Crawley’s young people are paying a heavier price than most.   

Crawley belongs in West Sussex, not Surrey or London!

A 2022 map showing a potential future Greater London. 49 is Mole Valley. 47 is Reigate & Banstead. Both border London. 48 is Crawley. Moving Crawley into Surrey makes London expansion easier to take Crawley

In two-tier council areas like ours, local authorities are being forced by the Labour Government to merge to become a single-tier councils. An initial joint submission to the government was made by all eight councils in West Sussex, but an additional submission from Crawley Borough Council and Reigate & Banstead was sneaked in at the last minute, claiming a new single-tier council made up of these two councils was the best option.

That’s clearly ridiculous, including that the combined population of Crawley and Reigate is barely half the government’s required minimum population for all new single-tier councils. However, Crawley Labour are pushing joining Surrey hard, including a senior Labour councillor emailing all Crawley borough councillors insisting, “this is the obvious way forward” and “Let’s all get behind this option”.   

What might be the real agenda behind Crawley Labour trying to move Crawley northwards into Surrey? I have my concerns. The London Mayor, Labour’s Sadiq Khan, often makes statements about Gatwick Airport, which is not only outside London, but which has the additional Surrey/West Sussex county border further separating Gatwick from London, giving Crawley a strong second line of defence from being absorbed into Labour-dominated London. 

The secretive Crawley and Reigate submission repeatedly mentions London, and says “historic county boundaries are now illogical”. It references being “strongly connected to the London economy” and highlights railway links to London and the M25 and M23 motorways. Note that using the M23, the London/Surrey border near Coulsdon is only 12 miles from the Crawley/Surrey border at Junction 9.

Crucially, any new council with Crawley within Surrey will mean Crawley’s new council will border London! With London needing more housing, it’s easy to foresee Sadiq Khan and Crawley Labour then pressing for the London boundary to expand to absorb the new neighbouring council that includes Gatwick. 

One Labour Councillor in Crawley has already been letting his guard slip. At a seminar for Councillors on local government reorganisation held by Crawley Borough Council, when talking about the potential to join with Reigate and Banstead, one senior member of the Labour Cabinet said to everyone "We are all basically Londoners here in Crawley". 

Crawley has always proudly been part of our historic county of West Sussex. Our new single-tier council must remain within West Sussex and not move to Surrey, which feels like the first stage of an underhand two-stage plan to make Crawley and Gatwick part of a new London borough.