Proceeding contribution from Alan Simpson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 4 July 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance (No. 2) Bill.
Finance (No. 2) Bill
The hon. Lady’s initial questions were legitimate but matters were left open because it would be for the Chancellor and the Treasury to set a framework. It is inappropriate to try to nail everything down in the new clause—it does not try to do that. The process of operating a rebate is relatively simple. The Chancellor and the Treasury would devise the criteria against which a rebate could be claimed. One would define a period in which the works were to be undertaken and the process of reclaiming. There would therefore be a straightforward process of compliance. There are technical details to iron out but the problem is simply whether one wants to choose what I have described as an intervention point and whether one believes that it would work.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 448 c776
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Children Death Conservation Combined heat and power Annuities Dependants Environment protection Electricity generation Energy supply Divorce Excise duties Fuels Inheritance tax Income Mental illness Motor vehicles Oil Pollution Pensions Life insurance Petrol Scotland Religion Separation Taxation VAT Trusts Stamp duties Rural areas
- Legislation
- Finance (No. 2) Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 23:17:43 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_334901
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_334901
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_334901