Proceeding contribution from Chris Huhne (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 24 June 2010. It occurred during Budget debate on Budget debate.
Capital Gains Tax (Rates)
The hon. Lady clearly did not listen to my earlier answer. When looking at the distributional impact, it is very important, particularly with indirect tax measures, to look at the expenditure effects, not the income effects. The IFS report shows very clearly the enormous distinction between the conventional answer on the distributional impact on income and the answer when we look at the expenditure effects. The choice for this Government has been clear: either we manage the transition to lower borrowing to sustain the recovery, or we will have those choices yanked from our hands by the markets and we will face force majeure. It is far better to design a fair package, as we have done, than to have an unfair package imposed on us that no one has had the time or thought or energy to design. No fiscal package responding to a market emergency that I have ever seen has been fair, whatever Opposition Members may say. I spent five years of my pre-political life analysing sovereign risk and sovereign crisis. I was in Seoul before Christmas 1997, in Djakarta at the time of the food riots, and in Bangkok when the authorities struggled with the collapse of the Thai baht, and I never want to see a British Government have to go cap in hand to the International Monetary Fund as those countries did, as Greece is now doing and as the friends of the right hon. Member for Doncaster North had to do in 1976. Had we run the risk of contagion—of a sharp spike in Government and probably short-term policy interest rates too—the impact on growth would have been severe. The truth is that the course of action that the right hon. Gentleman and his friends recommend—the Micawberish course of hoping that something will turn up—would have put the British economy and British jobs in the international firing line, and no responsible Government would have done that. Frankly, I have enough respect for the intelligence and judgment of the right hon. Gentleman to believe that he would not have adopted that stance if he and his friends had been re-elected.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 512 c447-8
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Bank services Climate change Capital investment Housing Environment protection Government assistance Economic situation Economic growth Forecasts National income Public expenditure Pollution control Public sector debt Standards Taxation VAT Institute for Fiscal Studies Office for Budget Responsibility Bank levy Sheffield Forgemasters Budget June 2010
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 17:04:55 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_648935
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_648935
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_648935