Proceeding contribution from Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 28 March 2006. It occurred during Budget debate on Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation.
Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation
A policy review is being undertaken by my party. We have a realistic chance of being elected to government, unlike the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues. There are other gimmicks, too. The planning gain tax will be organised on a regional basis. Does that mean that my constituents in Peterborough, where there is high growth and lots of house building, will suddenly find that tax going to Thurrock, Great Yarmouth or other Labour-voting areas? There was nothing about manufacturing in the Budget. I pay tribute to the right hon. Member for Oldham, West and Royton (Mr. Meacher), who has 30 years’ experience in this place, and the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Helen Goodman) for talking about manufacturing. In my constituency, in a city famous for its railways and engineering, 4,500 people have lost their jobs. Employment is down by 28.7 per cent. Under this Labour Government, whose members constantly attacked the Conservatives throughout the 1980s for their record on manufacturing jobs, we have seen a reduction from 15 per cent. of the economy to 12 per cent. of the economy. That is not a record to be proud of. On the stamp duty threshold, even the Council of Mortgage Lenders has said that the policy will not work, because the threshold has not gone up in line with inflation and price rises. House prices in my constituency have risen by 100 per cent. in the past five years. Reference was made to the impact of tax credits on the poorest in our society. There still is a 60 per cent. marginal tax rate. If someone on the minimum wage has the tax credits taken away when he works, the basic rate of income tax and the tax credit removal, combined with national insurance contributions, will mean that he pays a 60 or 70 per cent. real marginal rate of taxation. That is not good enough. Yes, I pay tribute to the Government for at least trying to do something about child poverty, but the Chancellor should not forget the overall tax burden that falls on ordinary working families, not just the rich people in Chelsea tractors. I notice that the Chancellor paid tribute to the class war, keeping the ““red in tooth and claw”” leftist battalions on the Back Benches happy, but it was meaningless. It was student union gimmick politics—I am not referring to the hon. Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Harry Cohen). I shall concentrate on two areas. We hear a lot about health and how health spending is the great panacea that will solve the problem of the NHS and the infinite demand for health care, but there was not a word about health in the Budget. Health is now embarrassing. The Secretary of State for Health said just two months ago that the deficit was unlikely to be more than £200 million. That is typical of this Labour Government: they are only out by a factor of five, because by the end of the financial year the figure is more likely to be £1 billion. After nine years of the stewardship of the Chancellor, my constituency is losing 185 NHS jobs. Decent, hard-working and professional people are being thrown on the scrapheap. We have a cumulative budget deficit of £10 million over two years. Three wards are closing. That does not take account of the crisis in NHS dentistry in my city. Older people, children and young families are all being denied preventive dental treatment. We know that the Chancellor is keen on dentistry. He can get his teeth fixed at extremely high cost as part of his Trinny and Susannah-style makeover in preparation for moving next door to No. 10, but unfortunately my constituents cannot. It is no good talking about gimmicks, such as paying consultants only a 1 per cent. increase in salary. The Chancellor knows full well that there are only 34,000 consultants, which is a drop in the ocean compared with the increase that he is paying to other health care workers. Together with things like the working time directive, ““Agenda for Change”” and the botched GP and consultant contracts, which overran by £390 million, that has brought a structural deficit to a majority of trusts. We need not even mention manipulation of the national tariff. I, and probably other hon. Members, cannot remember the last time the NHS so mismanaged the national tariff that it had to withdraw it and bring it out again. The hon. Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) will no doubt speak eloquently about the cuts in mental health services in Peterborough and Cambridgeshire. Those are the most destructive cuts. Many of the young people affected by the cuts are vulnerable and need help. Their services are being cut hugely.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 444 c754-6
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Decommissioning Business Corporation tax Climate change Equality ICT Education Income tax Energy supply Industry Fiscal policy Economic situation NHS Nuclear power Regulation Regional planning and development Research Science Productivity Budget March 2006
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 21:50:05 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_312830
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_312830
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_312830