Finance (No. 2) Bill

Debate between Alison Thewliss and David Gauke

Monday 11th April 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Gauke]

It is customary, with changes in VAT rates, to give retailers notice. It is not usual for VAT changes to be put in place on the date of Royal Assent, as notice is usually provided. I reassure my hon. Friend that the intention is to provide a short period of time, following Royal Assent, in which retailers will have an opportunity to adjust prices. This is no desire by the Treasury to kick this into the long grass—we want to make progress on the matter.

[Alison Thewliss (Glasgow Central) (SNP)]

rose—

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Gauke]

I will certainly give way to the hon. Lady, who also deserves recognition for her efforts campaigning on this matter.

[Alison Thewliss]

Will the Minister tell the House exactly what he is going to do to ensure that that price reduction is passed on to consumers by retailers, who should not seek to continue to sell the product at the same price?

[Mr Gauke]

Pricing is essentially a matter for the producers, retailers and customers. We would certainly expect the reduction to be passed on, and I have no doubt that considerable attention will be given to what happens to the pricing of sanitary products after the VAT reduction, and there will be pressure on retailers to pass on the benefits to customers. We do not have a position—we do not have the capability to direct and order people—and we do not have a prices policy as such, but we expect that the reductions will be passed on to customers.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Alison Thewliss and David Gauke

Tuesday 19th January 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Gauke]

One point I would make is that thanks to Margaret Thatcher’s renegotiation of the rebate and thanks to the current Prime Minister’s negotiation of the EU budget resulting in a real-terms cut, we are paying less than we otherwise would have done.

[Alison Thewliss (Glasgow Central) (SNP)]

6. How many staff in his Department earn less than £7.85 per hour.

Finance Bill (First sitting)

Debate between Alison Thewliss and David Gauke

Thursday 17th September 2015 Public Bill Committees

[Mr Gauke]

There are a number of ways in which the European Union and the rules that apply within it could be improved. A strong case is made from all parts of the House that greater flexibility in this context would be helpful, but the point I would make is that we see little indication that other member states, which by and large have higher rates—the average rate is 17%—share that objective. If there is a general move, we would support that.

Other than when an accession country joins the EU and negotiates a zero rate, there is no particular indication that the Commission or member states as a whole are prepared to introduce new zero rates. Indeed, quite a lot of the advice coming from organisations such as the OECD and the general position that the Commission takes tend to be against that, so I do not want to underestimate the difficulties.

[Alison Thewliss]

Will the Minister give way?

[Mr Gauke]

I will take one more intervention, but I am sure the Committee will want to conclude shortly.

[Alison Thewliss]

I thank the Minister for giving way, and I am glad he was able to make that correction, because I checked whether Ireland had a zero rate this morning on the Irish Tax and Customs website. I appreciate what he is saying about things being difficult, but this is about promoting what is correct and right. I seek an assurance that he will lead on this issue. Changes could and should be made in this instance to correct a long-standing injustice, and I would like to hear a wee bit more about the Government’s ability to do that.

[Mr Gauke]

I come back to the point that we are not stating that we do not see the case the hon. Lady is making, but that we should not underestimate the resistance to the introduction of zero rates. The UK already has zero rates to a greater extent than most if not all other member states. As I said, zero rates have been possible only on accession, which is why the Republic of Ireland has a zero rate. There is a reason why the Labour Government introduced a 5% rate, not a zero rate. We are supportive and we would like the rate to be as low as possible, but without wider EU reform and greater flexibility in this area—other member states have other priorities—it will be a challenge. I do not dismiss the issue: were we able to progress further, I would be sympathetic, but we should bear in mind the task ahead of us.

With those remarks, I hope that new clause 3 will not be moved when it comes to it, however much I sympathise with the intentions behind it.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 2 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Ordered, That further consideration be now adjourned. —(Mel Stride.)

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Alison Thewliss and David Gauke

Wednesday 15th July 2015 Commons Chamber

[Mr Gauke]

We will set out the details in due course, but it is perfectly reasonable to limit in future—this is prospective; this is for future births—the support that is provided to families to two children under the tax credits system, so that all households face the same consequences of decisions about how many children they have. That is what most families have to live with.

[Alison Thewliss (Glasgow Central) (SNP)]

2. If he will make an assessment of the effect of benefit sanctions on (a) levels of poverty and (b) social cohesion in Scotland.