Former First Minister and Elder Statesman /u/mg9500 has joined the campaign trail for the Scottish Parliament as a backbencher for the first time. Having represented much of Lanarkshire in several parliaments much of his minor role in Edinburgh is based around representing many constituents who have over the years became ‘like family and friends’.

Aside from that, he is now devoting large parts of his time to compiling his autobiography and to academia. Having felt that his governments somewhat neglected economics, a gravitation towards that field was felt. The new idea which he has named ‘pyramid income tax’ was explained at a free public information seminar at the Town House in Hamilton (with adverts promising that it made more sense than the Quota 100 in Italy).

‘Thank you all for coming along this evening - I know the weather had been awful but it is Summer after all. Economic policy in the grander sense is of somewhat limited importance to the Scottish Government, despite Holyrood raising 55% of its own income with the major area of liberty being in personal income taxation. In any normal country this is the largest source of government income and is therefore ripe for economic examination.

As with any tax, the priorities are a sufficient level of income for services required and an element of fairness regarding the burden placed on individuals. Regarding the first, it has been shown, understandably, that lower top rates of tax discourage evasion and can therefore boost percentage return, perhaps not actual return however. Morally though, it is absolutely just that those like myself who are capable of paying a bit more do so, not least because we cannot tackle tax havens on our own - no single country could. An alternative - cuts all round - would lead to service cuts and turbocharged austerity the likes of which not seen under even the Cameron-Clegg administration. This explains the development of the banking system which we all understand today.

The aim is a rather simple one - the wealthier proportion of earners will see the higher part of these earnings taxed at a higher rate. The unfairness of the system is supposedly mitigated by ensuring that if you are just £1 over a threshold only that £1 is taxed at that rate, compared to £100, £1000 and so on. The problem is clear - if someone is paying say 30% on £10,000 there is no reason that they could not afford to pay 35% on the last £5000 of that income. This would ensure that the level of taxation more accurately matches the level of income taxable. And all we are doing are increasing the number of income tax bands in the process.

Consequently, I’ve developed a model that will take this to the most accurate level that I believe is reasonable to implement. The first £25,000 of earnings would be tax free, those on low incomes cannot be expected to struggle on more for universal public services. At £25,000 to £26,000 20% would be liable - a perfectly reasonable introductory rate. The income portion between £26,000 and £27,000 would have a liability of 20.5%. This would continue to increase at this rate until the portion of income above £125,000 is liable at 70%, again a quite appropriate top rate of tax as we have evidenced here in Scotland since my first government.

Now the question you’re all asking - why the name? Well simply if you arrange your income by bands on a bar chart with the lower bands the at the top, the amount of income contributing towards public services increases as you go down the chart. It looks like half of a pyramid. There is, however, one important thing to reiterate.

The sheer number of bands being created means that in effect the percentage of your income liable for tax is bespoke for your own earnings. This is, without doubt, the most progressive way in which to design a system of income taxation. Scotland can have the fairest tax system in the world, the best and most effective tax system in the world.

I’m proud to be running with this as my own policy idea in the upcoming election and I am not fussed about winning. We need to encourage this debate of ideas and rediscover the fact that it is a privilege to serve. Thank you.’

Mingling, de rigour in public by now, naturally took place afterwards. Organising were pleased to see that the majority of attendees were in fact locals and not some academics despite the rather theoretical matter being discussed. With a couple of billboards erected at the bottom of the street, the day drew to a close, all content with their work.