National Insurance Contributions Bill

The hon. Gentleman can always rely on me to be caring and sensitive, particularly when responding to his points. It is a question of judgment. We are in new territory, and we have made the decision that that is where we should be in terms of the taxpayers and what the Government are entitled to expect in respect of our own certainty. We have heard a great deal today about certainty for others. It seems to me that the taxpayer, the Revenue and the Government are entitled to stability. We should never get ourselves into a situation in the House where we say that we all agree that avoidance is unacceptable and then spend most of a debate trying to legitimise avoidance by saying that in some circumstances it may be acceptable. That cannot be appropriate. My hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Wright) made an excellent contribution, as ever. He made the point that this is not a party political issue at all. Previous Governments have moved repeatedly to close down loopholes. The right hon. Member for Hitchin and Harpenden (Mr. Lilley)—a former Secretary of State in the previous Government—made several such decisions. My hon. Friend also underlined that this is about fairness. We must assure all our constituents—whatever their income or background, or wherever they live—that this country’s tax system will treat them equally under the law. He was right to make that point. The hon. Member for Croydon, Central (Mr. Pelling) accused my hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool of begrudging the City of London its success. My hon. Friend did not say that, but let us be clear that avoiding tax has nothing to do with the City of London’s excellent reputation, of which every hon. Member should be proud. In fact, linking tax avoidance to the people who function in the City damages its reputation and is unfair to the vast majority of people who work to create wealth successfully there. The hon. Gentleman and many other hon. Members referred to the complex nature of the tax system. Much of the complexity in our tax system is a consequence of avoidance. We should be telling those who avoid tax as a matter of course that they need to change their behaviour and that they cause much of the complexity, although I am shocked that he could think that PAYE is complicated. The hon. Member for Ludlow (Mr. Dunne)—in a usual, very cheap shot—said that the Prime Minister had woken up to globalisation recently. That is an astonishing claim because, as I have said, the Government’s whole economic framework is designed to put this country in the best possible position to respond to the perpetual challenges that globalisation throws at it. Our Prime Minister and our Chancellor have been leading the debate in the European Union and the international community about the need to be outward looking and to consider what is happening in India, China and the rest of the world, but the Conservative party has the cheek to suggest that, somehow, we have only recently woken up to those challenges.