Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Andrew Love (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 3 May 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance (No. 3) Bill.


Finance (No. 3) Bill

Absolutely. The merit of the amendment is that it would give Parliament, and particularly the Government, the opportunity to review the operation of the levy, as well as providing the banking sector with other opportunities to make a contribution to sorting out some of the deep-seated economic problems in our country. I hope that the Liberal Democrat part of the coalition will be sympathetic to our arguments and speak up where it matters, to try to get the Government to recognise that there is an alternative that would be good for the economy and good for our society. A second issue is house construction. In my local authority area we have the fourth worst housing stress in the country. Things are difficult, and they are going to get significantly worse. I mentioned earlier the Government's incoherent construction policy, with its homes bonus that is not a bonus, and its planning system that is so riddled with inconsistency and lack of certainty that major construction is now off the agenda. It is a system that allows local considerations to dominate and outweigh much-needed construction in different parts of the country. I can see only a bleak future for public and private housing construction—but our proposal provides one small, modest way in which the Government could improve the situation.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
527 c547 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Banks Financial services Excise duties Fuels EU economic policy Exploration Economic growth Oil Pay Natural gas Public expenditure Prices Offshore industry Regulation Taxation VAT Tax yields North Sea oil Bank levy
Legislation
Finance (No. 3) Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk