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

I thank my right hon. Friend for that intervention. It is good to hear from a Member who is a little more in touch with the realities facing businesses up and down the country. As she points out, many small businesses are being starved of cash because the Project Merlin agreements for bank lending were not worth the paper they were written on, and at the same time the Government have done nothing in this Budget to help small businesses. The Opposition have proposed a national insurance holiday for all small businesses taking on new workers. That would go a long way towards trying to relieve some of the pressure on the small businesses that are struggling so much right now. The Opposition hope to see measures in the Finance Bill and the Budget to get the economy moving again, to give hard-pressed businesses and hard-working families a break and to give young people who are looking for work some hope for the future. We would be cutting national insurance contributions for small businesses taking on new workers, we would be cutting bills for hard-pressed families by reversing the Chancellor's badly timed VAT increase, and we would be funding new jobs for young people and new investment in affordable house building by taxing excessive bank bonuses. Hon. Members do not have to take our word for it—the damning judgment of the Government's own Office for Budget Responsibility should really worry Members on the Government Benches. Box 3.1 on page 46 of its latest economic and fiscal outlook, headed ““The economic effects of policy measures””, says that the only policy measure with a measurable economic effect is the cut in corporation tax, which it says will lead to an"““increase in the level of GDP of 0.1 per cent by the end of the forecast period.””" So in the whole Budget there is just one measure that will have any impact on growth whatever, and that is an impact of 0.1% in around five years' time. Beyond that, the OBR says in its policy costings document:"““We have made no other material adjustments to the economy forecast as a result of Budget 2012 policy announcements.””" When it comes down to it, the measures in the Bill will do nothing to change the gloomy growth forecasts, nothing to ease the squeeze on living standards and family budgets, nothing to get businesses investing at the rate required to regain our place in the global economy, and nothing to create the new job opportunities that are so desperately needed by today's younger generation. No, instead of taking serious steps that might help to make up the ground our economy is losing, the Chancellor and his Chief Secretary have turned from their failed experiment in expansionary fiscal contraction and resorted to the notorious Laffer curve as their latest excuse for an economic policy which hits hard-working families and rewards those who are already very wealthy. It is the last refuge of a Government who have lost any sense of purpose beyond the protection of privilege. Those who are unfamiliar with the obscure corner of esoteric economic theory that is the Laffer curve might like to take a lesson from the Business Secretary who recently explained it. He said it was"““an all purpose, but weak, rationale for cutting the taxes of rich people””" which has"““been correctly dubbed 'voodoo economics'.””" Indeed, he told his party conference—perhaps some hon. Members on the Government Benches remember this—that some people believe"““that if taxes on the wealthy are cut, new revenue will miraculously appear. I think their reasoning is this: all those British billionaires who demonstrate their patriotism by hiding from the taxman in Monaco or some Caribbean bolt hole will rush back to pay more tax but at a lower rate.””" As he said to his conference, ““Pull the other one!”” Perhaps we should instead take a lesson from the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, who warned:"““We should remember that in 1981, President Reagan based most of his policies on the drawing of the Laffer curve done on a serviette…President Reagan used that as the basis for his policy of slashing taxes, and the United States Treasury went into huge deficit…The evidence to support the Laffer curve is weak.””—[Official Report, Standing Committee B, 4 May 1999; c. 66.]" I agree, but those lessons are now being forgotten and we have the same old Tories dusting down the same old trickle-down economic theories. It did not work in the 1980s and it will not work today either. People will see it for what it is: out of touch and the same old Tories.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
543 c43-4 
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