Proceeding contribution from Simon Hughes (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Monday, 28 June 2010. It occurred during Budget debate on Budget Debate.
Capital Gains Tax (Rates)
The right hon. Lady's attack appears to be that the measures introduced by the Government are ideologically driven—something that is difficult to justify with regard to my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury; the Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions, my hon. Friend the Member for Thornbury and Yate (Steve Webb); and others, who have a record of campaigning for the poor and disadvantaged. Might not the same fallacious argument explain why, for 13 years, the Labour Government never linked pensions to earnings? Was that an ideological option? I hope it was not but if it was, the right hon. Lady cannot make the argument, because it is fallacious.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 512 c614
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Children Child benefit Allowances Housing benefit Employment schemes Economic situation Incapacity benefit Economic growth Medical examinations Poverty Pensions Older people Lone parents Public sector debt Pregnancy Social security benefits VAT Unemployment Uprating Cuts Employment and support allowance Budget June 2010
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 17:19:10 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_649455
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_649455
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_649455