Proceeding contribution from Lord Sassoon (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 March 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on National Insurance Contributions Bill.
National Insurance Contributions Bill
My Lords, Amendment 7 would insert a new clause into the Bill with the aim of requiring the Treasury, following the day on which the Act is passed, to review the operation of the regional employer NICs holiday under Part 2 of the Bill and to provide an annual report to Parliament. The amendment would require the annual report to contain information by region. At the risk of being accused of piling Pelion on Ossa, it is important to get the comparison between what is proposed by this amendment and what I shall go on to say the Government propose to do. It is important to get it straight. I hope that I am not going into any unnecessary detail but I will clarify what is going on in the proposed amendment and what the Government seek to do. The amendment requires that the annual report should contain, by region, "““(a) the number of businesses availing themselves of the secondary contributions holiday; (b) the number of employees designated as qualifying employees under the scheme; (c) the total expenditure saved by businesses under the scheme; and (d) an assessment of the demand to apply the regional holiday to different areas of the country””." As I said in Committee when we discussed amendments of a similar nature, I think that this amendment is motivated by a wish to encourage transparency—the noble Lord, Lord Davies, has confirmed that—and to ensure that proper consideration is given to how the holiday operates in practice. I shall attempt to explain to noble Lords why the amendment is unnecessary. First, as I said in Committee, my honourable friend the Exchequer Secretary explained in the Public Bill Committee in another place that there is no budget as such for the scheme. Anybody contemplating starting up a new business can be confident that there is no budgetary constraint on the scheme. The holiday will continue as proposed regardless of how many successful applications are made. If a large number of additional new businesses are formed as a result of the policy, this would help to increase Exchequer revenues. The expected costs of the scheme were set out in the policy costing document at Budget 2010. Secondly, on the point on which the noble Lord, Lord Davies, focused his remarks, the Government are committed to increasing the transparency of tax policy-making and of the tax system more generally. To that end, I am happy to repeat the undertaking, which I have mentioned before at different stages of this Bill, made by my honourable friend the Exchequer Secretary in another place to provide to Parliament and the public updates before the end of the calendar year on the operation of the scheme, including information at regional level. As I said in Committee, we envisage a factual report regionally and nationally covering the number of new businesses applying, the number of applications rejected, the number of qualifying employees for whom a holiday has been claimed and the amount claimed. The only significant difference between the commitment that the Government have made and the amendment that we are debating is that the latter would require, "““an assessment of the demand to apply the regional holiday to different areas of the country””." I am not completely clear about the meaning of these words and how what is suggested would operate. The noble Lord, Lord Davies, did not address the detail. The substantive point is that the Government do not see the need to report annually on the demand to apply the holiday to different areas of the country. We can assess that now and I do not expect the assessment to change. There is, of course, strong demand from excluded regions to enjoy the benefit of a holiday that they would like to have, but we have debated that already and the House has this afternoon formed a view on excluded regions. The position remains as we have debated it, so I am not sure how that part of the amendment would achieve anything. The Government’s objective remains to target resources at those regions most in need. The Government do not expect the objective to change. By tabling this amendment again, the noble Lord has given me the opportunity to restate for the avoidance of doubt that we will come forward with a transparent and comprehensive report on an annual basis. With those reassurances, I hope that the noble Lord will withdraw the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 726 c27-8
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Charities Employment Finance Increases National insurance NHS National Insurance Fund Public sector National insurance contributions New businesses Regional planning and development
- Legislation
- National Insurance Contributions Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:16:31 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_724626
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_724626
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_724626