Proceeding contribution from Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 5 July 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance (No. 3) Bill.
Finance (No. 3) Bill
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his rather long intervention. As well as the Work programme and investment in apprenticeships, the Government have a growth strategy to develop the new jobs of the future—into which, incidentally, the future jobs fund was not necessarily placing people. For instance, there are many initiatives in the green economy, with the green deal that has come along as well, that will help the young unemployed. I mentioned the situation to emphasise that the problem is not new. The previous Government struggled hard with it as well, as I pointed out in the previous Parliament. I have been consistent in what I have said across both Administrations. The purpose of amendment 13 is to reintroduce, or at least to examine the case for reintroducing, the bonus tax that the Labour Chancellor introduced in 2009. As I recall, the purpose of that bonus tax was not to raise revenue, but to change behaviour. It was an attempt to persuade the banks that they should not be introducing bonuses at that time, when many of them were dependent on state funds to continue in existence. I also recall that the anticipated proceeds of that bonus tax were about £500 million. In fact, as we have heard on many occasions, it raised in gross terms more than six times that amount, so it did not change behaviour at all. It seems that the Labour party in opposition has switched the underlying purpose of a bonus tax. I share the moral outrage that many people feel about the level of bonuses being paid by some institutions. I am a free market liberal, so I believe it is up to a company to decide its own remuneration package and justify it to its shareholders, but in the current climate, when many families around the country are facing difficulty, some of the decisions taken by remuneration committees in the City cross the threshold at which it is right that some of us in this place express moral outrage at what they have been doing. The culture of people paying huge amounts of money to themselves is not a new phenomenon in this Parliament. I remember Lord Mandelson, before he became the Trade Secretary in the previous Parliament, saying that new Labour was ““intensely relaxed”” about people becoming filthy rich. The hon. Member for Nottingham East looks faintly embarrassed at my reminding him of that phrase, but when the Labour party was in government it encouraged that culture. We should not let Opposition Members forget that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 530 c1395-6
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Accountancy Companies Costs Corporation tax Banks EU countries Environment protection Energy Electricity generation Industry International cooperation Investment trusts Pay Money Young people Tax collection Taxation Unemployment Carbon emissions Bank levy
- Legislation
- Finance (No. 3) Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 17:05:10 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756591
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756591
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756591