Of course, these are tickets that have been paid for in good faith. As I understand it, the purpose of this tax measure was to change people’s behaviour, but it is now being applied to decisions that have already been made. There is a basic lack of logic in the Government’s proposals.
The hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Helen Goodman) made the reasonable point that a lot of money is at stake—£100 million or something of that order. Those who oppose the measure—Opposition parties, rebels or whoever—will be challenged on how they would fund the deficit. I do not have much of a problem with that, because our approach to aviation taxation is not that it should be tax-neutral. We believe—I do not know whether the hon. Member for Christchurch shares this view—that aviation taxation should be quite a lot higher to capture all the environmental externalities involved, and we have set out the case for that. Our proposals would raise substantially more revenue than the Government’s proposals, not less.
The amendment involves an important issue of principle that has been well expressed, and we are happy to support it.
Finance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Vincent Cable
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 1 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
459 c1421-2 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:01:29 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_393969
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_393969
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_393969