Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Alan Reid (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 6 July 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance Bill.


Finance Bill

I support the Chancellor’s decision not to increase fuel duty. Under proposed new subsection (1C), if oil prices were to rise, we would have to wait for six months, during which people would pay the higher rate of duty. Under the new clause, a small cut would be made in fuel duty; but, of course, that cut could not be refunded retrospectively to the motorists who had paid the higher rate of fuel duty. We know that oil prices fluctuate. Oil prices could rise rapidly, thus triggering the six-month wait to cut fuel duty, but oil prices could then fall and motorists would pay the lower rate of fuel duty until the next Budget, thereby causing a loss of revenue to the Exchequer. The new clause is simply impractical, as the hon. Member for Dundee, East admitted in moving the motion. We clearly have a serious problem. In the short term, the answer is for the Chancellor to act sensibly and not to increase fuel duty. In the long term, the answer is to move to a system of road pricing, with higher prices for urban roads and motorways and lower prices for rural roads.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
436 c375 
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