Letters
Budget bonus
Sir: Why is it that press coverage of impor- tant events is distorted so often by the pessimistic editorial desire to report only bad news, so that items of considerable in- terest often become buried beneath the morass of gloom?
A recent example of this folly is to be found within last week's Budget. One piece of legislation which was hidden by the ban- ner headlines of 'cigarettes up 3p, wine up 5p, etc' was the tax relief provision for new company start-up. This has far-reaching implications which, if enough people were alerted by the media, could go some way to easing the current unemployment situation. Essentially this measure encourages invest- ment in new and existing small business by making it easier and cheaper for investors to buy shares. The problem is that because of the way this legislation is presented by the media the main potential beneficiaries (the unemployed who are not necessarily financially sophisticated) are unlikely to understand it or to realise its implications.
I suggest that Jobcentres should be in- structed to alert people to the potential benefits and to the fact that capital is not a necessary prerequisite. It would be an enor- mous psychological boost to be told that one had the chance to start a new business rather than that, for the umpteenth successive week, there were no vacancies. This sort of imaginative approach might provide the vital spark needed to lift someone who is unemployed out of the dehumanising 'Catch 22' position.
Why, I wonder, have the media grossly underestimated one of the most significant items in the Budget?
Nicholas Davies 128 High Street, H ungerford, Berkshire
Previous page
