Proceeding contribution from Lord Redwood (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 24 April 2012. It occurred during Debate on Section 5 of the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993.
Section 5 of the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993
So far the strategy has generated quite a lot of new private sector jobs, which is very welcome, but it is obvious that it needs to generate many, many more over the next three years if it is to secure the savings on welfare benefits that I am sure all Members wish to see. It is nonsensical for Opposition Members to say that the poor will be paying the taxes. We have just seen a big increase in thresholds which takes many people out of income tax altogether at the lower end of the income scale. Moreover, if the hon. Gentleman looks at the Red Book, he will see that there will be a sharp acceleration in self-assessment income tax—the income tax that is paid mainly by the rich—once we get the rate down. I know that Opposition Members do not like reading the figures in the Red Book, but it provides a much better case than Ministers ever provide for why we need to get back closer to Labour's rates of income tax. One of the things that I most admired about the former Prime Minister and last Chancellor of the Exchequer but one was his insistence that 40% was the highest rate of income tax that could be charged to optimise the amount of money obtained from the rich. He stuck to that view throughout his time as Chancellor and most of his time as Prime Minister. We all know that he only put it in as a political trap at the end of his period in office when he could see the writing on the wall, but it is obvious from the Red Book figures that he was right: 40% is about as high as we can go to optimise the revenue. According to the forecast in the Red Book, the revenue will stream in after the rate falls to 45p. If Opposition Members look at the Red Book, they will see that last year, under the 50p regime, self-assessment income tax fell by an amazing 9%. That was because rich people who have a lot of freedom and ability to decide how much to pay themselves—I know that Opposition Members do not like that, but it happens to be the state of play—decided to pay themselves a great deal less. Both the outgoing and the incoming Governments had said that the tax was temporary, so they decided that they would hold back their income. It was obvious that they would do that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 543 c870-1
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Income tax Financial markets EU action Economic and monetary union EU economic policy Economic policy Economic growth Tax rates and bands Economic recession Stability and Growth Pact Office for Budget Responsibility Budget March 2011
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 17:00:42 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_825126
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_825126
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_825126