UK Parliament / Open data

Finance Bill

Proceeding contribution from David Gauke (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 1 July 2014. It occurred during Debate on bills on Finance Bill.

It is a pleasure to respond to this short debate. The hon. Lady has an admirable ability to make unreasonable requests in a very reasonable way, and it falls to me once again to decline her offer, as Treasury Ministers have done in the past when a review or report is sought from them during a Finance Bill debate.

Let me quickly try to address some of the points raised, the first of which relates to the impact on the industry, the competitiveness argument and what we can do to assess that. It is worth pointing out that this measure came into effect only on 30 March, and it will take longer than six months for evidence of how the benefits of the change are accruing to investors to become available. So the report requested in amendment 67 will not adequately be able to do justice to that question.

Another area we have debated on a number of occasions is who benefits from this measure, and I will return to our little engagement on hedge funds. It is worth pointing out that the National Association of Pension Funds, the Association of British Insurers and the Investment Management Association stated their disagreement with the Labour party’s position and its policy proposal last year to reintroduce the schedule 19 charge. They say it would

“impose a £145 million annual cost on the ordinary savers, investors and pensioners, who are the beneficiaries of its abolition.”

That would weaken the UK’s competitiveness as a place for funds to be domiciled. If we are competitive in this sector, we will have more growth and more jobs. Let us be clear that this is not about jobs in the City of London—not that there is anything wrong with jobs in the City of London. The fund management industry directly employs 30,000 people throughout the United Kingdom, and about a half of those jobs are linked to fund domiciles. The jobs are located in many, if not all, the regions and nations of the United Kingdom.

4 pm

The hon. Lady asked what was in it for her constituents in Kilmarnock or the constituents of the hon. Member for Inverclyde (Mr McKenzie), and I can tell her that the fund management industry employs 3,600 people in Scotland. I am sure that all of us in this House want to preserve and protect those jobs and ensure that the UK is competitive. The jobs involve operational and administrative matters, such as IT, compliance and legal audit services, all of which are relevant and jobs that we want to support and preserve.

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
583 c805 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Back to top