Proceeding contribution from Lord Hanson of Flint (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 23 November 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on National Insurance Contributions Bill.
National Insurance Contributions Bill
My hon. Friend makes a very valid point. I do not begrudge the people of Tatton anything, and I will tell him why. I was once a Labour councillor in the Tatton constituency. I represented the ward of Rudheath and Whatcroft, and I was the leader of the Labour council that covered half the constituency at that time. I have absolute faith in those areas, but there is deprivation in Tatton. In fact, Neil Hamilton, a former Member of this House for that area, was my pair when I first came here. Such is life! But that is another story. Tatton has one of the lowest levels of unemployment in the country. That constituency, which is represented by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, will get the benefit of the national insurance holiday to start 10 employees, but Portsmouth North will not. Neither will Brent North, Edmonton or Lewisham. The constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (John Cryer) will not get that benefit either—
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 519 c201-2
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Business Employment Employees' contributions Employers' contributions Increases National insurance contributions New businesses Tax allowances VAT Tax rates and bands Labour market
- Legislation
- National Insurance Contributions Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 13:52:23 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_684404
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_684404
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_684404