Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Rachel Reeves (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 16 April 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill on Finance (No. 4) Bill.


Finance (No. 4) Bill

The analysis of the measures in the Budget shows that the changes to the personal threshold are not a progressive policy, as hon. Members seem to be claiming. In fact, they benefit those dual income households on higher salaries much more than they benefit the poorest people in society, many of whom do not pay tax. Of course, the changes do not benefit pensioners at all as they are seeing their tax allowance frozen. As a result, many pensioners will lose out by up to £83 whereas people who are coming up to retirement will lose out in the tune of more than £300 a year. The Chancellor of the Exchequer's new economic model—this idea that we will have a rebalanced economy with lower borrowing, more saving and more investment—has failed to materialise. Indeed, the precise opposite is predicted. Their plan has failed: the policies are hurting, but they are not working. This Finance Bill, which was a chance for the Chancellor and the Chief Secretary to learn the lessons and to start to repair some of the damage that they have done, has been a huge missed opportunity.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
543 c42 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Child benefit Alcoholic drinks Charities Business Corporation tax Banks Caravans Air passenger duty Housing Donors Income tax Excise duties Fuels Fiscal policy Economic situation Foreign companies Pension credit Personal income Pensioners Low incomes Pensions Prices Welfare tax credits Small businesses Tax allowances Tax avoidance Taxation VAT Stamp duties Tax rates and bands Stamp duty land tax Age allowances
Legislation
Finance Bill 2010-12 to 2012-13
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk