Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Ed Balls (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 1 May 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance Bill.


Finance Bill

I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s contribution, which was detailed, incisive and informed, as always. As usual, he draws from the detail to make a wider point about the future direction of the country. On clause 67, I am grateful for his support for the intention behind the legislation. As he said, we consulted the industry in detail immediately after the pre-Budget report to make sure that we got the transitional arrangements right. It was put to me in our previous debate that the Government were slow in coming up with transitional arrangements; it was said that we did not do so until April. In fact, we had already come up with transitional pipeline arrangements, but the Association of British Insurers told us in April that some policies risked not getting the proper treatment because insurers had taken longer to process claims than they and the ABI had previously expected. That is why the amendments prolong the transitional period. I will reflect on the language issue; I will have to take advice on my hon. Friend’s question about the word ““But””—[Hon. Members: ““Why?””] Because I do not know the answer.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
459 c1414 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Codes of practice Crime Arrests Aviation Combined heat and power Climate change Bereavement benefits Fraud Income tax Electricity generation Police Pollution Powers Workplace pensions Pensions Life insurance Passengers Pension funds Tax allowances Taxation Revenue and Customs Renewables obligation
Legislation
Finance Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk