Proceeding contribution from Jeremy Browne (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 1 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance Bill.
Finance Bill
I am having difficulty getting to the nub of my argument, so perhaps the hon. Gentleman will allow me to make a little more progress—[Interruption.] I have been very generous and taken many interventions from Labour MPs who are suffering from a collective guilt complex. As a result of this deliberate political calculation, 5.3 million people lost out. The Government's response was initially one of denial, and the Prime Minister told the Treasury Select Committee that no one would lose out. However, there now appears to be an acceptance, including by the Prime Minister, that more than 5 million people will lose out as a result of the changes that he announced. There was then a long and protracted process while the Government tried to decide what to do and the right hon. Member for Birkenhead held a gun to their head. Then the announcement was made that the Government were going to borrow £2.7 billion, £2 billion of which would be given to people who were net gainers in any case. And we are now in a position of having 1.1 million people who are still losers. What can we learn from that process? I have tabled a new clause and an amendment. The new clause seeks to ensure that, when changes are made to the levels of income tax, a proper assessment is made of the impact of the changes. One of the biggest lessons from this hopeless process must be that sleight of hand—the rabbits being pulled out of a hat—will be consigned to history, and that there will be greater transparency in the setting of taxation. Members of the Treasury Select Committee and Members who wish to participate in debates in the Chamber should be able to have the information clearly and concisely set out on who will be the winners and who will be the losers. We should not have to rely on organisations such as the Institute for Fiscal Studies. It is an excellent organisation, but there is no reason why it should have the job of telling Members of Parliament the implications of Government policy for people on low and middle incomes. Amendment No. 6 would require the Chancellor to report within six months on the impact of the 10p compensation mechanism on people earning less than £13,000 a year. Labour Back Benchers have expressed support for the principle behind the amendment, which is to ensure that this issue does not disappear into the long grass of politics. We do not want a situation in which everyone vents their fury and expresses their reservations here, after which the Government push their measures through using their natural majority and everyone forgets about the 1.1 million people who are still losers as a result of this change. The Liberal Democrats are keen to guard against that, and I would urge Members on both sides of the House to support amendment No. 6. The hon. Member for North-West Leicestershire estimated that between 2,500 and 3,000 people in a typical constituency remained losers, and the amendment would ensure that their interests would not be forgotten when the political debate rolled on to new territory.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c762-3
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Appeals Families Fixed penalties Income tax Information Insurance Inheritance tax Low incomes Tax allowances Tax collection Taxation Tax rates and bands Revenue and Customs Personal budgets
- Legislation
- Finance Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:03:27 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488940
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488940
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_488940