Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 28 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on National Insurance Contributions Bill.


National Insurance Contributions Bill

Again, I am grateful to the Minister for his response. I would like to reflect a little on what he said on Amendment 3 and the application of Clause 7(3) but we see the import of that response. Of course, I shall not press any of these amendments this afternoon. I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, about the take-up of the scheme as conceived; if it does not use the resources and if there is a view to possibly recasting it, the value of new jobs for existing businesses is certainly something that the Government might consider including. I entirely accept, as we all would, that you have to strike a balance on the cost of these things and on where you draw the line. I would hang on to my point and spend a little time trying to bust the anti-avoidance provisions. By and large, I think they are pretty secure. The more targeted it is, the greater the risk of avoidance arrangements and people trying to take the benefit of something which is not intended. Obviously, the broader the scheme, the less likely that is to happen. In the interim, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 3 withdrawn.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
725 c87GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Charities Apprentices Greater London Increases National insurance NHS National Insurance Fund National insurance contributions Staff Part-time employment New businesses Tax rates and bands South East
Legislation
National Insurance Contributions Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk