---

Finance Bill

We would have had a considerably longer period between our decisive decision at the time of the pre-Budget report and the eventual enactment of the Finance Bill provisions, though our decision to act would not have been delayed because at that time the revenue risk was too great. I am not going to say that there are no lessons to be learned from the experience. In retrospect, the Government could have been clearer about their intentions and I believe that both the Government and the insurance industry together could learn some lessons about the process involved in tax policy making. Indeed, I spoke earlier today to the director general of the ABI about how to learn such lessons for future tax policy. In conclusion, the decision was taken in order to restore the Government’s intentions to protect the tax base and to ensure that what we set out to do and what the Finance Bill legislated for—to tax advantage retirement saving—was, in fact, what happened. It was never our intention to tax advantage assurance. I do not think that the hon. Member for Fareham is proposing so to do, but if he wants to stump up the £500 million necessary to oppose the clause, I will be very interested to find out how he is going to pay for it. Question put, That the clause stand part of the Bill:— The Committee divided: Ayes 262, Noes 145.