Proceeding contribution from Mark Field (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 6 July 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance Bill.
Finance Bill
I suspect that the consideration of clause 4 always brings out a certain sensitivity in Labour Members. However, I thank the Financial Secretary for his considered reply. As ever, my hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Mrs. Villiers) made an excellent contribution based on her great experience as a Member of the European Parliament. She rightly stressed the uncertainty and complexity that has crept into domestic tax law. Let us be honest: that has not happened only in the past eight years; the problem goes back many years. However, as I said earlier, there has been no consolidation measure since 1988. I thank the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Chris Huhne) for his support. I must make a small confession about his somewhat belated entry into the House. I first voted in the 1983 general election when I lived in my home town of Reading. The constituency was Reading, East and the SDP/Alliance candidate was none other than the hon. Gentleman. Four years later, when I was at university in Oxford, in the constituency of Oxford, West and Abingdon, the hon. Gentleman was also the candidate. I hope that he will not move to the Cities of London and Westminster because that would make it a hat trick. I thank the hon. Member for Bristol, West (Stephen Williams) for his brief contribution, despite his exposure of the fact that not all the thoughts that I expressed were entirely mine. I accept the Financial Secretary’s comments about the second Chamber. My remarks were slightly obiter dicta. I simply tried to speak a little about modernising the House of Lords and part of the contribution that it could make. I did not suggest that it could do fundamentally more than perhaps considering aspects of financial and tax legislation. However, I accept that many of the concerns that we have expressed go back beyond 1910. I know from my role as Member of Parliament for the City of London about the privileges that exist to this day in the City. In this place, they relate to financial power having moved away from only one side of Parliament. I accept that complexity is a two-way street. Inevitably, accountants, tax advisers, lawyers and so on have a large vested interest. However, the Financial Secretary rushed too quickly over my earlier point that the obscurity and complexity of many new laws and regulations on tax encourage avoidance. Conservative Members believe that it is high time for a review, although I accept the good nature of earlier comments. I therefore believe that we should vote on the new clause.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 436 c338
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Children Debts Land Insurance companies Law Excise duties Freight Fuels Inheritance tax Double taxation Investment trusts Oil Property transfer Reform Tax avoidance Taxation VAT Trusts Rural areas Stamp duty land tax Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Finance Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:17:21 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_256804
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_256804
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_256804