Finance Bill

That is absolutely right. Returning to last year's Budget and the Finance Bill that followed, I think that the measures introduced only last year took £2.5 billion out of business. I suspect that the £500 million to which the hon. Gentleman referred made a large contribution to that £2.5 billion from business—at a time when it needed the money to invest as we went into the recession a year or so ago. The Chancellor also said in this year's Budget statement:""I will continue to monitor oil prices, but I expect that fuel duty will increase by 2p per litre in September, and then by 1p a litre above indexation each April for the next four years."—[Official Report, 22 April 2009; Vol. 491, c. 244.]" I was pleased that the Road Haulage Association contacted me today. It said:""At this challenging time, the last thing the haulage industry in Scotland needs is an increase in costs."" It went on to say, and this, I am sure, will please the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond), who spoke about the issue earlier:""The case for a regulator is as strong now as it ever was—there may have been a short lull in fuel price turbulence but this won't last. There are already signs that prices are on their way up again. At this desperate time for Scottish road hauliers—with numerous firms going bust—what is needed is a mechanism to ensure a ""measure of financial stability in these trying economic times. It must be remembered that fuel accounts for over 30 per cent. of a haulier's operating costs."" That is absolutely right. The price of oil is relatively stable at $50 a barrel and the price at the pump is relatively stable at 95p a litre, but it is likely that those prices will rise as the world comes out of recession or, indeed, if there are supply-side shocks. The oil price could rise dramatically, so the time is right now, when there is relative stability, to introduce the mechanism and smooth out the price spikes when they occur. I was delighted when the Conservative Front-Bench team U-turned last year and adopted the fair fuel stabiliser proposal. I remind them of what I said then: I do not care whether it is called a fair fuel stabiliser, a fuel duty regulator or what a previous Labour Transport Minister called it; I want to build a coalition around a sensible mechanism to deliver fairness and stability. We have the opportunity to push it forward again this year. The Budget also contained the predictable rise in alcohol duty, but, again, surely now would have been the time for a more sophisticated approach, taxing all drinks fairly rather than looking to the Scotch whisky industry as a cash cow and building on last year's two damaging rises that amounted to more than 13 per cent. I shall put that point into context, and explain why we need the fair taxation of alcohol, by referring to three drinks with exactly the same alcohol content: a half pint of beer at 4.93 per cent. volume incurs 23.06p in duty; a 125ml glass of wine at 11.2 per cent. volume incurs 26.75 in duty; and a modest 35ml measure of Scotch at 40 per cent. volume incurs 31.7p in duty. I have the speeches from previous debates, and I know that there are European issues in respect of the duty on alcohol. But it strikes me that we need a fairer approach to alcohol duty to prevent the Scotch industry from being seen as a cash cow. Gavin Hewitt, chief executive of the Scotch Whisky Association, said:""A duty increase during a recession is a real blow and follows last year's duty rises…the largest since the 1970s. The Government should be supporting all UK businesses, including Scotch whisky distillers, who have the potential to help drive the economy out of recession. Instead, our industry is being weakened by the alcohol duty escalator.""