The Minister said this is following Calman: it is not following Calman at all. As the noble Lord, Lord Browne, pointed out, Calman recommended a power to deal with specified taxes. Why is the Bill completely open-ended on the subject of new taxes? If there are particular taxes that would fall within the criteria, why not say what they are rather than leave it open-ended? My noble friend criticised me for giving an example of existing taxes; I could think of other examples. Suppose Mr Salmond invents a new tax on oil and gas landed in Scotland, for example. One could think of all kinds of taxes, but to present this as arising from Calman is completely wrong. Calman suggested a limited ability in respect of those taxes which it was not appropriate to do at the moment for various technical reasons. The two I would think of are air passenger duty, which is actually not included in the Bill, and the aggregates tax. This, however, is much, much broader and more far-reaching. Why are we going for such an open-ended position?
Scotland Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 28 February 2012.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Scotland Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
735 c1260-1 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 18:39:46 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_812749
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_812749
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_812749