All 2 Debates between Lord Beith and Baroness Primarolo

2014 JHA Opt-out Decision

Debate between Lord Beith and Baroness Primarolo
Monday 15th July 2013

(11 years, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Beith Portrait Sir Alan Beith
- Hansard - -

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can I claim a reward for getting my amendment accepted before I have actually moved it?

Baroness Primarolo Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Sir Alan, you were just fractionally ahead of me. I seem to recollect that Mr Speaker said that the amendments would be formally moved at the end of the debate. Perhaps this is an indication that we should have the Government opening and closing a debate before we actually have that debate, so that we know where we stand. Mr Bryant, thank you very much for your point of order—

Child Benefit

Debate between Lord Beith and Baroness Primarolo
Tuesday 1st February 2011

(13 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Primarolo Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo)
- Hansard - - Excerpts

Order. Will hon. Members who are leaving the Chamber please do so quietly and as quickly as possible?

Lord Beith Portrait Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (LD)
- Hansard -

I have pleasure in presenting the petition of my constituent, Mr Paul Francis Dodd.

The petition states:

To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled.

The Humble Petition of Mr. Paul Francis Dodd,

Sheweth, that the Petitioner believes that the Government’s recent announcement regarding Child Benefit is unfair; that the Petitioner is a married man with a daughter aged 2 years; whose salary is £44,500 p.a., which is just inside the threshold for a higher rate tax payer; that the Petitioner’s wife gave up work to look after their daughter and has no income; and that from 2013 the Petitioner and his wife will not be entitled to receive Child Benefit.

Sheweth, that the petitioner believes that the Government’s proposals have two flaws; that a family with both parents earning a salary less than the higher-rate tax threshold, which could total around £88,000, will continue to receive the benefit; and that, if both parents earn a salary that is half that earned by the petitioner, £22,250, not only will they continue to receive the benefit, but they also receive two tax-free allowances for their salaries.

Sheweth, that the petitioner believes that revisions are necessary to the Child Benefit system; that the family income should be taken into account, not just the income of one of the individuals in a family; that the petitioner recognises that this is expensive, but he believes that it is the fairest way to judge a family’s income and hence its needs for benefit; that, if this is not possible, then a gradual phasing out of the benefit for earners over the higher rate tax threshold would be very easy to implement; that it would be easy to reduce Child Benefit by one percentage point for every £1,000 earned over the higher rate tax threshold; that this would still leave a majority of the benefit for those earners, such as the petitioner, who only just enter this limit; and that it would also remove Child Benefit for those who earn over £144,000.

Wherefore your petitioner prays that your honourable House urges the Government to review its policy on Child Benefit.

And your petitioner, as in duty bound, will ever pray, etc.

[P000882]