Those of you who have been following the debate around the abolition of the lowest 10p rate of income tax will, no doubt, be more than aware that the changes came into force at the weekend.

In the light of this, and the recent rebellion from MPs within the Labour party, the government has come out and defended its decision.

According to Ed Miliband, the Cabinet Office Minister and close ally of Brown, a reversal of the policy would be "wrong" and it would make the system "less fair"

The conservatives have called the policy a "tax-grab" that targets the lowest paid, whilst the Treasury committee warned that, should these changes be enforced, childless single people earning less than £18,500, or anyone over the age of 65, would be the "main losers", losing up to £232 a year.

Labour MP, Chairman John McFall, referred to the Treasury committee's report as a "sober analysis" which "reminded the government of its responsibilities".

Mr McFall also noted that the "main losers", as referred to by the report, must receive "appropriate help" to ensure they get the right benefits, as they seem to be an "unreasonable target for raising additional tax revenues to fund the benefits of tax simplification and meeting the needs of children in poverty."

"While tax simplification is a laudable aim," he added, "it seems strange that the abolition of the 10p starting rate of income tax disadvantages mainly low-income households."

However, Mr Miliband was determined to highlight the successes of the budget, for the poorer citizens in particular, when he addressed the audience of BBC Radio 4's World at One.

"When you look at the overall effect of the last Budget there are 16 million households who gain, and the biggest gains go to the poorest 30% of people in our society," he said.

"Now, of course we could reverse all the changes made in that Budget but I think it would be the wrong thing to do, because I think it would make the tax system less fair than it is at the moment.

"And I think all the changes taken together make the tax system fairer and benefit the bottom third of our society, which is what a Labour Budget should do."

Despite the government's best efforts to justify the changes, criticism has been coming in thick and fast, and from all angles.

The Commons motion, signed by 30 Labour MPs was recently withdrawn after Greg Pope, who tabled the motion, received assurance from ministers that they would examine the impact of the changes.

However, former Labour minister Frank Field, is proposing an amendment to the finance bill - which confirms the system changes - requesting that the low-paid workers affected by the changes should be compensated as they are already an undervalued section of our society.

"This is a group we should be saluting, who do some of the best jobs in our society for the least money," he commented.

Predictably, Conservative leader David Cameron is not missing the opportunity to stick his foot in as he describes now as being the "the wrong time to ask the lower paid to pay higher taxes."

"People are seeing it when they are shopping, running a car or paying a mortgage," he added.

"Our approach must be to do what we can to stop this tax-grab on some of Britain's poorest people."

Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, is also getting in on the verbal assault with his 2 pennies worth - pardon the phrase - claming that the abolition of the 10p rate had been a "cheap political stunt" to allow Mr Brown to cut the basic rate of income tax by 2p "for the following day's headlines".

But, a spokesman for the prime minister responded by saying that "the reform we made to the 10p rate was an integral part of last year's Budget."

"That Budget included a reduction by 2% in the basic rate of income tax from 22% to 20% which will benefit millions of people.

"It will lead to a significant increase in pensioner tax allowance, a widening of the working tax credit and increases in child benefit and child tax credit."

When asked if changes could be made to reverse, or compensate for, the negative affects of the changes, he said: "This was a coherent package of reforms."

So then, a coherent package of reforms that will serve the majority or a political stunt that targets those who can ill-afford it? Let us know your views on the tax changes?