Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Justine Greening (Conservative) 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 am pleased that the hon. Lady has raised that point, because it gives me the opportunity to be crystal clear again—alongside the statements that I made in Committee, and those that she knows I have made to the Select Committee of which she is a member—that this policy is not a subsidy for the nuclear industry. As was pointed out in the previous debate by my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol West (Stephen Williams), who I am pleased to see in his place following his contribution to the Committee stage, this is a tax on carbon, not on nuclear fuel rods, as happened in Germany. The reason why nuclear is outside the scope of the tax is that uranium and wind, for example, are not in the carbon price floor because, of course, they do not contain carbon. I understand the arguments that have been made, but they are a little like saying that because we have a tax on alcohol, that is a subsidy for the soft drinks industry. There is also a contradiction between what Opposition Members have been saying. They complain that this is a tax-raising measure, yet they also say that it is a subsidy. Those arguments are contradictory. Amendments 21 and 12 are unnecessary, and I hope that they will both be withdrawn. Question put, That the amendment be made. The House divided: Ayes 217, Noes 276.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
530 c1458-9 
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