Class 4 National Insurance Contributions

Debate between Lord Hammond of Runnymede and Wes Streeting
Wednesday 15th March 2017

(7 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hammond of Runnymede Portrait Mr Hammond
- Hansard - -

As I said in the Budget speech and previously in the autumn statement, we are seeking to do three things: to keep Britain on track for balancing the budget as early as possible in the next Parliament through fiscal discipline; to invest in Britain’s future to raise our productivity and ensure a decent standard of living for everybody across this country, on which we made further steps in this Budget by investing in skills; and to ensure that we have enough fiscal headroom in our fiscal position to allow for any events that arise over the coming years. We need the ability to manoeuvre as we go through what will be a period of unusual uncertainty in the planning of our economy.

Wes Streeting Portrait Wes Streeting (Ilford North) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

More than 10,000 people in Ilford North will welcome the Chancellor’s damascene conversion to the novel idea that parties might keep the promises in their manifesto. What does it say about the competence of this Government, on a day when they reveal that there are no costings for a hard Brexit, that this year, on his watch, we will have two Budgets, two policies on national insurance in a week, and a £2 billion black hole in his Budget? Whatever happened to the long-term economic plan?

Lord Hammond of Runnymede Portrait Mr Hammond
- Hansard - -

I have set out our long-term plan. The hon. Gentleman knows the fiscal figures, because they were published last week. As I have said, I do not resile at all from the commitment that I have made that we will, overall, be broadly fiscally neutral. I will introduce additional measures—[Interruption.] Well, it would not be appropriate for me to do so today, but I will bring forward additional measures in the autumn Budget to address the cost of the changes that I have announced today. By the way, if I could just give him a piece of advice, before he goes in too hard on keeping manifesto promises, he might just want to check his own party’s record in government on that particular score.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Hammond of Runnymede and Wes Streeting
Tuesday 28th February 2017

(7 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hammond of Runnymede Portrait Mr Hammond
- Hansard - -

What I can do is give my hon. Friend a guarantee that I will follow all proper procedures. Unfortunately, I cannot give him a guarantee that that will necessarily lead to the outcome that he seeks.

Wes Streeting Portrait Wes Streeting (Ilford North) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The former Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Tatton (Mr Osborne), has said that withdrawing from the single market would be

“the biggest single act of protectionism in the history of the United Kingdom”

and that the Government have chosen not to make the economy the priority. Is the former Chancellor launching a soft coup, or has he got this Government absolutely bang to rights for their economic vandalism?

Lord Hammond of Runnymede Portrait Mr Hammond
- Hansard - -

The hon. Gentleman understands very well that being a member of the single market was not an option for the UK given the clear views expressed by the electorate in the referendum, but having comprehensive access to the single market will deliver the great majority of the benefits that he seeks from single market membership.

Autumn Statement

Debate between Lord Hammond of Runnymede and Wes Streeting
Wednesday 23rd November 2016

(7 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hammond of Runnymede Portrait Mr Hammond
- Hansard - -

That is absolutely right. We made that commitment in our election manifesto; it was a commitment on which we were elected. Despite the difficult fiscal circumstances, we will deliver on that commitment.

Wes Streeting Portrait Wes Streeting (Ilford North) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the Chancellor for agreeing to the request made by me and my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds West (Rachel Reeves) to reintroduce the distributional analysis of the Budget. I have looked at that analysis and, in spite of a bit of tinkering with the methodology, it is clear that, as a result of the tax and welfare changes in this autumn statement, the bottom three deciles—the lowest-income households—will be left worse off than the highest earning group of households. How can he possibly justify that? As well as helping the “just about managing”, will he commit to helping the people who are barely managing or cannot manage at all?

Lord Hammond of Runnymede Portrait Mr Hammond
- Hansard - -

Our intention will be to try to ensure the fairest distribution possible. I welcome the debate that the hon. Gentleman and others have stimulated on the appropriate way to present distributional analysis—the issue is not completely cut and dried or straightforward—but I say this to him: we were elected on a manifesto commitment to get welfare under control. Working-age welfare had spun out of control between 1980 and 2010. We have now got it back under control, which implies that we have had to take some tough decisions. We have taken them. I will accept and explain the consequences of those.

European Affairs

Debate between Lord Hammond of Runnymede and Wes Streeting
Thursday 25th February 2016

(8 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hammond of Runnymede Portrait Mr Hammond
- Hansard - -

I will in just a moment.

So the question is this: should we stick with what we know, bank the gains that the Prime Minister has brought back from Brussels, and continue to fight from the inside for reform, or should we take a leap into the dark? For me, the answer is clear: I am a sceptic who will vote with my head to remain because I know in my heart that that is what is right—what is best—for Britain.

Wes Streeting Portrait Wes Streeting (Ilford North) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I share the Foreign Secretary’s view that what the Prime Minister has returned with is better than what we had before, but will he say something about the legal of status of the agreement, particularly the assertion by the Lord Chancellor, no less, that it is not legally binding? I respect the fact that the Lord Chancellor takes a different view from the Prime Minister, but how can his position as a senior legal Minister for the Government possibly be tenable when he is arguing that the deal is not legally binding and the Downing Street position is the precise opposite? Surely his position is untenable and Cabinet collective responsibility has been stretched too far.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Hammond of Runnymede and Wes Streeting
Tuesday 12th January 2016

(8 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hammond of Runnymede Portrait Mr Philip Hammond
- Hansard - -

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her question. Fortuitously, I was in Japan on Friday conducting a strategic dialogue with my Japanese counterpart. The strategic defence and security review published last autumn identified Japan as Britain’s principal security partner in Asia. That will continue to be the case and we are building that security partnership while strengthening our trade and investment partnership.

Wes Streeting Portrait Wes Streeting (Ilford North) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

T8. Ahead of his visit to Sri Lanka shortly, will the Minister give an undertaking to the House to raise with the Sri Lankan Government, notwithstanding the progress they are making, the recent allegations of human rights abuses, the demilitarisation of the north, political detainees and, crucially, the international involvement of judges and prosecutors to give everyone the confidence we need that people will be brought to justice for human rights violations and war crimes?