Proceeding contribution from Lord Lea of Crondall (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 8 April 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance Bill.
Finance Bill
I am grateful to the noble Baroness. So this so-called jobs tax is going to create unemployment, as opposed to the alternative, which is so-called efficiency savings. If one is going to reduce expenditure by £10 billion, £20 billion or £30 billion, where is that expenditure saving going to be produced? It will be produced overwhelmingly on wages and salaries. So what the noble Baroness says is pure poppycock—perhaps she would comment about whether another word could be used. She sheds crocodile tears about jobs, but for every £10 billion or £20 billion, would not an equivalent number of jobs, if not more, be lost for the same amount of money?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 718 c1683
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Civil liberties Alcoholic drinks Banks Borrowing Cider Incentives Excise duties Interest rates Economic situation Individual savings accounts National insurance Personal savings Pay Pensions Postal services Public sector debt Taxation Tax rates and bands Telephone services Unemployment Second homes
- Legislation
- Finance Bill 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 21:00:12 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_638407
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_638407
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_638407