Proceeding contribution from Alison McGovern (Labour) 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
That is probably the easiest intervention that I will ever get. In so far as I believe in the needs of society above the needs of capital, I am a socialist. However, as a socialist, I think that it is important to consider how the economy actually works, because unless we understand the functioning of the economy and what makes our society work well, we will not be able to live up to the needs of society or the demands of our fellow people. As my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry North West (Mr Robinson) mentioned earlier, something has gone wrong when we see such large bonuses and when a small group of people in the City of London can arrange extremely high salaries for themselves. However, this is not just a market imbalance; it is a power imbalance too. Something is going on that enables a small group of people to argue for a much higher salary than anyone else in society. As someone who cares about how the economy works, I call that market failure. Something is going on, and the situation needs to be questioned, thought through and rebalanced. That needs Government intervention. There could be an insider-outsider problem, in which some people are outside the small group who are able to arrange bonuses for themselves in this way and use their position as insiders to argue powerfully for the maintenance of their position, while others remain unable to enter the market. That is what makes me think that Government action is important in this regard. My hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham East (Chris Leslie) said that there was also a failure of transparency. Markets work well only in conditions of perfect information, but we do not have perfect information, and we have seen the lengths to which some people have gone in order to prevent transparency over pay and bonuses. The case for Government action on bonuses has been well made today by other hon. Members. I would argue that that, too, is politically uncontroversial. In fact, the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills told the BBC earlier this year that the coalition Government were ““fully signed up”” to ““robust action”” on curbing bonuses. Well, that is great. Our amendment should therefore be pretty uncontroversial, and I hope that hon. Members on both sides of the House will support the principle of what we are trying to do. My worry is that the Government have just not done enough. They have straightforwardly not lived up to the public's expectations on bankers' bonuses. I am also worried that the corporation tax cut that they have introduced will effectively hand money back to the profitable banks, and that not enough action is being taken to rebalance our economy. I could talk for many hours about manufacturing and the fact that the financial service sector should serve the productive economy, rather than the other way round, but my hon. Friends have already done that subject justice, so I will not detain the House further on that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 530 c1407
- 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 17:04:12 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756608
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756608
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_756608