'War tax' protest lecturer faces the bailiffs

David Ottewell

December 04, 2003

| Submit Comments | Comments (26) | Previous | Next

OBJECTION: Birgit Vollm

A UNIVERSITY lecturer faces a visit from the bailiffs for refusing to pay what she calls government "war tax".

Dr Birgit Vollm, a 38-year-old psychiatrist at Manchester University, has been hauled before a court for failing to hand over income tax from freelance work.

She claims 10 per cent of her taxes go on military spending, and as a pacifist she should not have to pay.

Magistrates ordered Oxford-trained Dr Vollm to find the cash before the month's end, or bailiffs would take her possessions.

But the German-born scientist has no intention of paying - and told the M.E.N. she was ready to take her case to Europe under human rights law.

"I will not support weapons programmes and that is what the money would have been spent on," she said.

"I believe everyone has an intrinsic value and that cannot be traded off. Violence is not compatible with that right. I am seeking legal advice to see if there is any appeal or possibility of using human rights because it should be covered under freedom of thought, conscience and religion."

Peace promotion

Dr Vollm, who lives in Oxford Road, Manchester, and is an activist in the anti-Iraq-war Green party, appeared before Manchester magistrates for non-payment of £130 tax. The court ruled bailiffs would be sent in 28 days if the bill was not settled.

A spokesman for the Inland Revenue, which bought the case, said: "Tax and National Insurance go into a central pot and the government allocates it as it sees fit.

"No individual can determine how their tax is spent."

A Green party spokesman said: "No one should have to pay taxes for military purposes, just as no one should have to serve in the military if they have a conscientious objection.

"The Green Party is not a pacifist party - we have a defence policy - but we fully recognise the right of conscientious objectors.

"The government should allow people to state that they wish the 10 per cent of their taxes currently spent on arms to be spent on peace promotion instead."

Britain's defence budget is about £25bn a year - the biggest tax burden apart from health and education.

Should people be allowed to 'opt-out' of opaying tax if it is for military purposes?

| Submit Comments | Comments (26) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

Nicola Jones, Stretford (04/12/2003 at 11:52)

I think the lecturer should stick with her plans, and we should decide if the other 10% goes on war or peace.

I think the results would be very interesting.

Ace Riley, manchester (04/12/2003 at 13:00)

So now we have individuals making rules up. What we should pay our taxes to and if we don't agree we dont pay. The next thing is we won't want to pay for joe bloggs education because somebody doesn't agree with the lessons he takes. Does this woman think she is in the position to set the rules as she thinks ?If that is the case if in the last war we all refused to pay we would all be under nazi rule and she wouldnt have the choice to speak out "Freedom costs a lot.

Theatreman, Leicester (04/12/2003 at 13:30)

If she doesn't like our taxes, she could always go back to Germany.
Does she have British citizenship?

John Smith, Reddish (04/12/2003 at 15:25)

Maybe if the whole world was given the chance to say what our taxes are spent on (apart from health, education and crime), the majority would vote against further military spending. Then wouldn't it a safer place to live?

Ricky, Manchester (04/12/2003 at 16:37)

she needs to realise even if she doesnt want to pay for the war that 10% isnt purly for war it pays for the troops in britian keeping this country safe the and the kit we use for peace keeping in bosnia/kosovo/afghanistan/ireland

if she doesnt want to pay for this countrys defence she should go home

Martin Juckes, Oxford (04/12/2003 at 16:54)

It is the Government which should be in the dock for waging an illegal war and using indiscriminate weapons, such as cluster bombs, in areas where it was known that a large number of civilians would be killed. There is a case for defense spending, but nobody should be forced to pay for agression.

Andy Ridgway, Leeds, W. Yorks. (04/12/2003 at 18:10)

An excellent idea. I have no children, have never been unemployed and have no need of social services. I look forward to receiving around 90% of my taxes back, especially that proportion which employs people such as Dr Vollm.
The reason Dr Vollm can spout such nonsense is that countless numbers of people have died defending her freedom.
If I cannot have a refund of my taxes I would like to exercise the option mooted by the Green Party, and have it all spent on our armed forces.

Spencer Fitz-Gibbon, Longsight (04/12/2003 at 18:46)

Normally decisions about taxes are a matter for democracy. But armed violence is just so different an issue from anything else we spend our taxes on, that we need to make an exception in this case. Birgit Vollm is right to assert her principles - not least because despite being a pacifist, her taxes have just helped pay for an illegal, immoral, counter-productive war in Iraq - and the Green Party is right to have a policy that would allow people a conscientious objection to paying taxes for military purposes.

Simon Heywood, Sheffield (04/12/2003 at 19:24)

I have just finished reading "Weapons of Mass Deception," a book about the media during the invasion of Iraq: the thousands of Iraqi civilians killed in US and British bombardments: the lorry-loads of civilian corpses, the children maimed and killed by US and British cluster bombs, the fact that an invasion wasn't even needed to get rid of Saddam - and the successful efforts of the coalition to keep all this out of the news. If more people were prepared to act with Dr Voellm's courage and principle, the world would be a safer and saner place.

John Cummings, Whalley Range, Manchester (04/12/2003 at 20:26)

Dr Vollm is a brave woman. It is shameful that people should have to go to prison for the right to prevent ou taxes being used to kill, destroy and maim. The right to conscientious objection is fairly irrelevant if all of us are forced to pay others to kill for us.

Mark, Glasgow (04/12/2003 at 20:56)

Hopefully when the baliffs catch up with her they'll also charge her for the resulting costs incurred to the legal system; such that law abiding tax payers aren't forced to pay for such trivial wastes of the tax payers money. If she still refuses to pay and gets sent to prison, I'd like to withold the portion of my income tax that is used to pay for her food. Pathetic silly woman

Derrick Golding, Wythenshawe, Manchester (05/12/2003 at 07:32)

I welcome this form of protest. I am opposed to the military action but ignored by my MP and the Government yet I still have to pay for their actions? I willingly pay taxes for the good of society but the actions of Bush & Blair have not been for the good of the people of Iraq, We've just learnt that the UN children's bureau UNICEF said they (cluster bombs dropped by us) had caused more than 1000 child injuries since the US declared an end to hostilities in Iraq. Each day there are casualties on both sides and no sign of a peaceful solution, why am I forced to pay for this mindless violence when I want my money to go to peaceful solutions? Sadly the way forward as being recognised by so many people appears to be civil disobedience, and its across the whole of society: petrol campaigners, anti globalisation, anti war, pro hunting... Obviously the Government are not listening.

Sophie, Manchester (05/12/2003 at 09:44)

I'm quite astonished at the racist comments on here. Easy to see why the BNP are having such an easy ride - "send them back to where they came from" can be used blanketly against all nations after all. It's just as well the rest of the world doesn't think the same of us...
I'd just like to mention that, since we are told over and over again that we are living in a democracy, it's exactly people like Birgit who test where the boundaries of that democracy lies. Britain is one of the biggest exporters of arms in the world - we make more money per year selling weapons to developing countries than we give them in aid. For a resident of this country to say that they would prefer their 10% military tax to be spent on something that will actually benefit the world and not just destroy another tiny bit of it is surely admirable? She's not saying she won't pay taxes, just that she wants that 10% be spent on something socially useful, not more Depleted Uranium to poison foreign lands for the next 200 years. I hope she takes the case to the highest level and that it raises some very pertinent questions about our definition of "civilisation". Hey, we're supposed to having a "Big Conversation", remember guys?

joe jenkins, north wales (05/12/2003 at 09:58)

Imagine two blokes knocking at your door and demanding you give them money to buy weapons to kill people you don't even know. Well, our present system works this way. Of course people should have the right to withhold 10% of their taxes if they go towards immoral purposes. Our taxes have gone to buy and use weapons that have killed countless { there are no Iraqi body counts!} innocent men women and children. This was an immoral war not a Just War {no leading churches supported it} and it was fought without the backing of the UN. Well done to Birgit for refusing to pay towards such iniquities.

Sarah Stuart, Withington, Manchester (05/12/2003 at 10:02)

Millions of people marched to show their opposition to the war and the Government didn't listen. What other options do people have? Isn't this similar to the way the poll tax was defeated? I'm not old enough to remember that much about it but that's the impression I have.

ViroBono, London (05/12/2003 at 11:04)

This woman has found a novel way to carry out New Labour policy i.e. to undermine the military and cutback defence spending at every opportunity. As I do not have children, can I elect not to pay that portion of my outrageously high taxes which goes to education, so I don't have to pay the salaries of wretches like Frau Vollm?

Theatreman, Leicester (05/12/2003 at 13:52)

Doesnt this soap dodger realise that the tax goes towards defence and that money for war comes from a different 'chest'?

Robin Brookes, Devizes (05/12/2003 at 17:05)

Well done Birgit! It takes courage to stand up and be counted. For the IR to say that the money all goes in one pot and cannot be allocated is not true. They take account of NI and Charities Aid. All we need is one box on the tax form to declare our wish to have that 10% of taxes put to peace building. There is a Global Conflict Prevention Pool set up by this Government and it is precisely where our money should be going. It is anachronous that Blair is fighting this war in direct contravention of the aims of the GCPP.

Chris, Exeter, Devon (05/12/2003 at 17:17)

If she objects to the UK Defence Policy, then she should be sent home to Germany, where if I remember correctly they were anti Gulf War 2.
Lets look at this another way "This women is teaching the future People of this Great Country, and telling them not to pay tax's" She should be Dpeorted NOW, for anti BRITISH Views??"

Lance Crookes, Manchester (07/12/2003 at 22:07)

In my experience I have come to see that when some people make a principled stand there are always those who stand in the sidelines jeering from a safe distance. These vacuous people always find much to rant about but are never seen actually DOING anything to help their fellows, are never willing to put their head on the line and generally are of so little principle that they don't even have a mast to nail their flag to. So how about something constructive, from you detractors, which will promote a path of freedom and love in the world rather than perpetuating a history of hatred and scorn. And to those of you hung up on number crunching, how much, do you think, of your taxes went towards the anti war movement to facilitate a balanced debate by our democratically elected rulers?
Well done Birgit.

Rani, Manchester (09/12/2003 at 11:20)

Dr Vollm has taken an admirable stance, knowing that it comes with big risks. Not many professionals will taken an active stand against the wrong-doings of the Gvt. It's interesting to read some of the comments against what she's done on this site. They're general extreme and quite aggressive, calling for her deportation because she's not originally from Britain. It shows that a group of people have no tolerance for people willing to have a wider perspective on the world,and compassion for innocent people being murdered. I say good luck Dr Vollm, there are many people behind you!!

David, Manchester (10/12/2003 at 11:33)

Incredible. Does this woman truly believe that if the British spend less on the military we will all live in a safer place?

Just because we spend less does not mean that the Iraqi's, Afghans etc... will decide not to attack.

These people have attacked, raped and pillaged causing untold damage to millions of people (men, women and children) often through methods so inhumane that are beyond the grasp of sane people.

The fanatics would see us spending less on the military as an incentive to attack.

Remember they have no fear of death and believe murdering Westerners and those that dont truly 'believe' to be a good thing for which they will be rewarded in heaven.

All this is before the dispicable way they treat women who they would like to keep under lock and key and not educate. These terrorists throw acid at women who disobey them, only stopping there, if they are feeling merciful.

The fanatics are the people the miliary are trying to stop. If this woman believes that paying to stop these atrocities is wrong then she, and her family should be sent to Iraq and all the other countries, Rwanda, Afghanistan etc... to see what is really happening in the world.

It wouldn't take long for her to change her mind.

Failing that she could of course return to her native country, or possibly the rock she has been hiding under for the past few years.

Ray, Stockport (10/12/2003 at 13:10)

I was born in Coventry in June 1940, a few months before the Luftwaffa razed the place to the ground. I am told the anti-aircraft guns ran out of ammunition, leaving the city defenceless. While I was against the invasion of Iraq, the fact is that if you turn the other cheek there will always be some bully tempted to land a punch on it. And it's easy to make a principled stand when there is someone else around to cough up your dues and take the blows on your behalf. But what really interests me about this story is that the lecturer concerned isn't refusing to pay the taxes from her day job, but the pittance the Inland Revenue says is owed from her freelance work. Hmmm.

Gabriele Kobras, Germany (11/01/2004 at 17:42)

I live in Germany, so I had not to decide about my taxes in regard of the Iraq war, since the german gvt decided against it, but I am definitely of the opinion of Dr. Voellm and of the major part of the people who commented this story.

Individuals in every country, if Great Britain or Germany should be allowed to decide, if their taxes used for military purpose or instead for peacekeeping.

I admire Dr. Voellm for her courage and hope she will find many people who are of her opinion.
Gabriele Kobras, Schwaig bei NC

Darren, Norwich (12/12/2005 at 15:39)

Damn right people should be able to opt out of paying for war. Maybe it's the only way to stop senseless slaughter!

()

Report

News