UK Parliament / Open data

Finance Bill

Proceeding contribution from Justine Greening (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 2 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on bills on Finance Bill.
I understand what the hon. Gentleman has said. I tabled new clause 3 because I felt that it was better for us to debate the matter this year, and the new clause was the best way of enabling us to do that. I think we would all much prefer the Government to say today that they will not proceed with the retrospective element. What I am keenest to do, however, is give the House a voice, so that we can send a message to Ministers that we do not want their proposal to progress and we do not want to wait until next year's pre-Budget report to find out that it will be ditched. If that is to happen, we need it to happen now for the sake of the families who will be affected. I accept that my new clause may not be the most elegant, but it does give us a chance to have our say in this Parliament sooner rather than later. It would not be a complex matter to reverse the decision. It is not like the 10p tax rate fiasco. We know exactly what we need to do, and we can do it now—and we know how to do it, too, which is by voting for new clause 3. We agree with green taxes, but not with punishing people for decisions they made years ago and they are in no position to change. There have been two big problems with this year's Budget: the 10p tax rate fiasco and vehicle excise duty. We have corrected one—we know the Government will listen when forced to do so—and we now need to correct the second.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
478 c911 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Legislation
Finance Bill 2007-08
Back to top