Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Hanson of Flint (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 4 May 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance (No. 3) Bill.


Finance (No. 3) Bill

We have known each other since our elections to the House on 9 April 1992, Mr Evans, and as ever, I shall try to keep to your strictures as the good Chairman that you are. You will note that amendment 8, which you did not select, would have prompted a wide-ranging discussion on the impact on child care. I am trying to focus on clause 35 and not to stray into amendment 8 or the issues that my hon. Friend the Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne) touched on. However, those issues are important when we are looking at the impact of clause 35 on a particular group of people, because that same group of people will lose child benefit and a range of other child care support measures because of their income, and that will shatter the principle of universality that my hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Grahame M. Morris) mentioned. The Opposition will listen to the debate on clause 35, but we might oppose it. However, there are important points to be examined and answered in detail today. First, how do we use the resource? Secondly, how do we implement the policy? Thirdly, will the Minister answer the challenges made by external bodies about the operation of the clause in practice?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
527 c723 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Childcare Business Corporation tax Capital allowances Investment Equipment Economic growth Manufacturing industries Tax allowances Taxation Tax rates and bands
Legislation
Finance (No. 3) Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk