All 46 Debates between David Gauke and John Bercow

Thu 6th Jul 2017
Mon 21st Mar 2016
Budget Changes
Commons Chamber
(Urgent Question)
Mon 26th Oct 2015
Wed 2nd Jul 2014
Thu 18th Jul 2013
Tue 3rd Jul 2012
Mon 11th Jun 2012
Thu 22nd Mar 2012
Wed 8th Sep 2010
Tue 20th Jul 2010

Prime Minister’s Statement

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Saturday 19th October 2019

(4 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The time has come to uncork the Gauke.

David Gauke Portrait Mr David Gauke (South West Hertfordshire) (Ind)
- Hansard - -

The Prime Minister said that he wanted to leave with a deal, and he has shown determination and flexibility to reach a deal, for which he deserves credit. He will be aware, however, that unless we reach a free trade agreement in the next stage of negotiations, there is a risk that Great Britain will leave the implementation period without a deal with the European Union. Can he commit today to showing the same determination and flexibility to ensure that we reach a deep and special partnership through a free trade agreement with the European Union, before we allow the implementation period to come to an end?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 9th July 2019

(4 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I do agree with my hon. Friend, and I am interested by the insights into the Bottomley household. The fact that our current divorce laws introduce conflict at the point of divorce can make the break-up of relationships more confrontational than it needs to be in what are already difficult circumstances.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I believe that the hon. Gentleman has been married for 52 years.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

It is important that, where we have a benefit such as personal independence payments, we make an assessment as to whether those payments are going to the right people, and that, if there is an appeal against that, those appeals should be defended unless we believe that a mistake has been made. It is worth bearing in mind that, from memory, something like 4% of PIP assessments are overturned.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I call Dr Caroline Johnson.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I thank my hon. Friend for those remarks. I believe it is very important to this country that we respect the independence of the judiciary, and the rule of law is at the heart of what we are about as a country. I can tell him that my speech is available on the gov.uk website—I hope that this announcement will not result in that website crashing, but I assure the House that it can be found there.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Well, that sounds an intoxicating read.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 4th June 2019

(4 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I very much agree with that. I can tell the House that I wore a GPS tag for a couple of days, and was subsequently able to be informed of all my movements for the period concerned: precisely where I had been, and when. Thankfully I had not been up to no good, but it was a demonstration of how accurate and effective those tags can be. I believe that they have considerable potential for reassuring the public about community sentences, and about our ability to track those who might pose a risk to the community.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Secretary of State’s moral probity was never in doubt for a moment.

Jo Stevens Portrait Jo Stevens (Cardiff Central) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Secretary of State will know about the terrible legacy of the imprisonment for public protection sentence, and its negative impact on both reoffending and re-incarceration. Will he meet me, and my constituent whose son received an IPP sentence, to discuss ideas for reform of the licence that applies?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 12th March 2019

(5 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

Yesterday, the Government were pleased to give their support and time to the Children Act 1989 (Amendment) (Female Genital Mutilation) Bill, sponsored in this House by my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Zac Goldsmith). The Bill, which seeks to make a small yet important change to the Children Act 1989, offers both a sensible simplification of the court process and a useful extension to the family courts’ powers to protect girls at risk of female genital mutilation. It will add to the measures that the Government have brought forward to tackle FGM issues.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are very short of time. One-sentence questions will suffice.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 5th February 2019

(5 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer Questions 2 and 19 together.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. I think that the Secretary of State’s intended grouping of Question 2 is with Question 18, which was tabled by the hon. Member for Easington (Grahame Morris), who was looking mildly perturbed, but whom I hope will now be greatly reassured.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is good to see the hon. Gentleman reassured.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

We have made it clear that the probation system needs to improve, and we have taken decisive action to end current community rehabilitation company contracts and to develop more robust arrangements to protect the public and tackle reoffending. We have seen examples of good and innovative work from CRCs in Cumbria, where probation is being adapted to a rural setting, and in London, where CRCs are working with the Mayor’s office on programmes to rehabilitate offenders involved in knife crime.

I believe that public, private and voluntary organisations all have a role to play. The reforms that we are making are crucial to integrating the system better so that different providers can work more effectively together, and we will set out our proposals later this year.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend raises an important point. We are working with the Home Office to ensure that these orders are truly preventive in nature and put children on the right path away from a life of crime. These orders will give the police the opportunity to intervene earlier, and the court can include in the order a range of conditions that can be both prohibitive and proactive. They will be used only if the court is satisfied on the balance of probability that the child has carried a knife, or if they have been convicted of a relevant criminal offence and the order is necessary to protect the public or prevent crime. Sentencing is, of course, for the judge, but we are consulting on these proposals.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Secretary of State is providing much exercise for the knee muscles of Opposition Members. It is an important fact of public interest that I think thus far he has not noticed, but of which he may wish to take account.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that question. There has obviously been a recent case on this. We need to look very carefully at this to ensure we get the balance right between protecting the public and ensuring that those who have committed a crime in the past are given a second chance and have the ability to turn their lives around. I am keen to look further at this in the light of the recent judgment.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I call Bob Neill—one sentence.

Robert Neill Portrait Robert Neill (Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Does the Secretary of State agree that it is vital to ensure continuity of contractual obligations and enforceability of judgments once we leave the EU, which would be prevented by a no-deal outcome?

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Yes.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Splendid.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 5th June 2018

(5 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising that point, which we will look at very closely. I take this opportunity to say, in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr Hollobone), that 41,000 foreign national offenders have indeed been deported since 2010.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is a pity that the hon. Member for Kettering is not here, but I am sure that he will get to hear of it very soon. We are extremely grateful to the Secretary of State.

Worboys Case and the Parole Board

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Wednesday 28th March 2018

(6 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. Can I just gently say, before the Secretary of State responds, that this is an extremely important matter about which we have just heard in the most learned terms from one of our most learned authorities? However, there are a further 16 hon. and right hon. Members seeking to catch the eye of the Chair. The Chair likes to accommodate interest. I gently point out that there is some danger of us reaching a position where everything will have been said but not yet by everybody.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Thank you for your guidance, Mr Speaker.

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for his remarks. He makes an important point: had I taken a judicial review, it may have brought into question the standing of the victims, as Sir Brian Leveson points out. In terms of the workload, to be fair, the Parole Board had been making progress with the backlog of imprisonment for public protection cases, but it remains significant—there are still something like 3,000 prisoners on an IPP sentence in prison, and they need to be properly assessed.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 6th March 2018

(6 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Certainly, the prospect of a cup of tea with the hon. Gentleman does concentrate the mind, and I would be delighted to accept his invitation. We are trying to ensure that we have a prison system that encourages people to progress by having opportunities to gain experience of work, and I am keen to do that in this post.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman’s offer is an interesting one. It might also be thought by some to be a divisible proposition.

Robert Neill Portrait Robert Neill (Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Secretary of State’s speech this morning and his emphasis on more use of release on temporary licence is extremely welcome and constructive. Will he bear in mind, though, that the Through the Gate programme currently involves careers and employment advice being given only towards the very end of a prisoner’s sentence, whereas all the evidence suggests that that should happen much earlier?

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend raises a good question. We recognise that this is an important right to protect UK nationals, so that they can continue with their chosen line of work. It has already been agreed that those who have received a recognition decision or applied for one before the withdrawal date will be able to have their qualifications recognised after exit, including lawyers. Talks on many key issues, including the mutual recognition of professional qualifications, will continue into the next phase of negotiations. We will seek to reach an agreement with the EU on parts of MRPQ that are not seen as in scope of the withdrawal negotiations, such as home title practice. The Prime Minister has been clear that she wants EU nationals in the UK and UK nationals in the EU to be able to continue their lives broadly as now.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey (Drew Hendry) has a not wholly dissimilar inquiry at Question 19, and he is welcome to come in on this question if he is so inclined, because we are not likely to reach Question 19.

Drew Hendry Portrait Drew Hendry (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

19. I would be delighted to do so. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.As the Prime Minister has made a number of concessions with regard to the European Court of Justice after Brexit and given that the Scottish Government’s legal continuity Bill provides that, when exercising devolved jurisdiction, Scottish courts may have regard to the decisions of the ECJ, is it not time to amend clause 6 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill to the same effect?

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

For prisons to be effective, we must get the basics right. This means creating prisons that are safe, secure and decent. It also means tackling the ringleaders of serious organised crime, so that they cannot continue to profit from their crimes and ruin people’s lives through drugs, deaths and violence from behind bars. I can announce that we are investing an extra £14 million to tackle serious organised crime. This includes creating new intelligence and serious organised crime teams to support work with the National Crime Agency, and enhancing our intelligence and information-gathering capacity across the country. I will also look at how we categorise prisoners to make sure that we are using our most secure prisons to tackle ongoing criminality behind bars. At the same time, we will reset the system of incentives in our prisons, so that they work much more in the favour of prisoners who play by the rules and want to turn their lives around, while coming down harder on those who show no intention of doing so.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. Too long.

Priti Patel Portrait Priti Patel
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The number of foreign national offenders from EU countries in our prisons remains at around 4,000. As part of the negotiations on leaving the EU, is my right hon. Friend liaising with other Government Departments, including the Home Office and the Department for Exiting the European Union, to ensure that we can deport more of the thousands of EU nationals who are in our prisons and remove these dangerous people from Britain?

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

We have seen an increased use of suspended sentences, but the hon. Lady is right that we must do more. We want to work closely with community rehabilitation companies and the National Probation Service, because the judiciary must have confidence in non-custodial sentences as well as custodial sentences.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Foreign Secretary is scribbling away with great determination and no little emotion, and we are grateful for that, but I have an appetite to hear a couple more questions—[Interruption.] Yes, I want to hear a couple more questions to the Justice Secretary while the Foreign Secretary is recovering his breath.

Parole Board: Transparency and Victim Support

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Friday 19th January 2018

(6 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

The most important thing is not my position, but the position of victims. We clearly need to ensure that victims have a system in which they have faith. When there are large numbers of victims in particular, it can sometimes be a difficult challenge to make sure that their voices are properly heard. Victims are entitled to have their voices heard and we need to ensure that we have a system that works for them.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am most grateful to the Secretary of State and colleagues for the statement and the exchanges on it.

Parole Board and Victim Support

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 9th January 2018

(6 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I am not in a position to provide details of the case. Those details are given to the Parole Board, and I am afraid I cannot say more than that.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have to say that the succinctness of the right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) is medal-winning. May I exhort him to circulate his text book on pithy questions?

Christian Matheson Portrait Christian Matheson (City of Chester) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My question will not be quite as pithy, I am afraid.

Much as I support the idea of redemption and rehabilitation, my own view is that a sentence of nine years in prison for 19 rapes is simply derisory, especially given that, as was pointed out by the right hon. Member for Broxtowe (Anna Soubry), this was a predatory attacker. The Secretary of State said that IPP sentences were no longer in use. Is he satisfied that the current sentencing guidelines meet the need for decent sentences in shocking cases such as this?

Universal Credit Project Assessment Reviews

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 5th December 2017

(6 years, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Well, certainly this Christmas. I certainly was not thinking of 2018. There is probably a default presumption that it means this Christmas—[Interruption] —but it is always better to be explicit. I grant that to the right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Frank Field), who is chuntering from a sedentary position in evident dissatisfaction at the inadequate clarification thus far provided, but help may be at hand, because the Secretary of State is perched like a panther—[Laughter]—if you can perch like a panther. He is poised like a panther, ready to pounce.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

You have done my job for me, Mr Speaker. It is correct that, as I said in my opening remarks, we will provide this information before the House rises for Christmas 2017. On the question raised by the right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Frank Field), we will of course want to go through the documentation to take out, for example, the names of junior officials and any commercially sensitive information. As I say, we will provide that information before the House rises this Christmas.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am inclined to leave it there for now. If the right hon. Member for Birkenhead has further points that he wishes to raise, he can, but I am not sure it will greatly profit him to do so now.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Monday 13th November 2017

(6 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Karen Lee Portrait Ms Lee
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The manager of a food bank in Lincoln has said that there is evidence of a clear correlation locally between the introduction of universal credit—in Lincoln, we have only had it partially so far; we are getting full roll-out in March—and an increase in the use of food banks. I ask for your comments on that, and do Government Members, including yourself, think it is acceptable that people in Lincoln and across this country are starving but for food banks because of waiting for universal credit payments.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I would not presume to say what is acceptable for the people of Lincoln—that is way above my pay grade—but the Secretary of State might wish to proffer an opinion on the matter, and we look forward to it with interest and anticipation.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

This is why I repeatedly make the point that nobody needs to wait a long period of time for cash support under the universal credit system, and to suggest otherwise is causing unnecessary anxiety for those who are not on universal credit—and I think we should all discuss this in a slightly more responsible manner.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I am happy to convey my hon. Friend’s concerns.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I call James Frith. Not here—where is the feller? I call Gavin Newlands.

Gavin Newlands Portrait Gavin Newlands (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

T5. I will take the hon. Gentleman’s place, Mr Speaker.My local authority in Renfrewshire is having to set aside nearly £1 million to mitigate the devastating impact on families of the roll-out of universal credit. It is hiring extra staff to deal with rent arrears, which it expects to increase by 5%. With all levels of government in Scotland forced to pick up this Government’s slack, what further evidence does the Secretary of State need to see the huge systemic problems in UC and to understand that he must pause the roll-out now?

Universal Credit Roll-out

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Wednesday 18th October 2017

(6 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I give way to my right hon. Friend—[Interruption.]

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Member for St Albans (Mrs Main) has just been promoted. The Secretary of State needs to gesticulate whom he means with greater clarity.

Anne Main Portrait Mrs Main
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the Secretary of State for that promotion. I look forward to receiving it in the post.

Is the Secretary of State any more aware than I am of the topic of this debate? Yesterday, the Opposition wanted to fix universal credit. Today, the word “fix” has been dropped. It seems that the Opposition want to pause but not fix. Has he any greater awareness of this matter?

--- Later in debate ---
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order! I am sorry to have to shout, but the hon. Gentleman, though he speaks with great force and eloquence, took too long. We must have shorter interventions, as it is not fair on others.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Let me turn to the important point of claimant commitment.

Jobcentre Plus: Closures

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Thursday 6th July 2017

(6 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

The reality is that services will improve. I strongly believe that universal credit, in particular, will result in an improved welfare system, and we are increasing the number of work coaches. Every region and nation in the United Kingdom will see an increase in the number of frontline staff providing services, and Scotland is no exception. I have visited jobcentres to see the sort of work that is now happening, and I am encouraged by the improved services and the collaborative and effective way in which jobcentre staff are working with claimants to help them get jobs and improve their circumstances.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No one could accuse the Secretary of State of excluding from his answers any matter that might be judged by him to be in any way, or at any time, material. “Comprehensive” would be a polite way of describing it.

Stephen Twigg Portrait Stephen Twigg (Liverpool, West Derby) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Norris Green jobcentre serves some of the most deprived neighbourhoods of Liverpool. Will the Secretary of State meet my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Walton (Dan Carden) and me to discuss the plans to close the jobcentre and explore alternatives, including co-location with local authority services?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 28th February 2017

(7 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is quite a naughty idea, not because of its merits or demerits but because it has nothing to do with the Department of Health budget, as the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr Bone) is perfectly well aware. However, the Minister is a dextrous fellow and I am sure he can answer in an orderly way.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Although, as you say, Mr Speaker, there may perhaps have been a slightly tenuous link with the question, it was still a predictable question from my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Sir Gerald Howarth). We are delivering on the 2%-plus expenditure commitment on defence, and we are increasing defence spending in real terms. Again, it is important that we have a strong economy so that we can properly fund our defence.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

If the Labour party’s policy could move beyond the level of placard design, that might help. Let me be clear: we are putting more money into the NHS and it is providing more support and help to people than ever before. I have listed some of the achievements since 2010. This Government remain committed to the NHS, which is why it has been a priority in our public spending plans for the past seven years.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We do need to speed up in terms both of questions and of answers.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 17th January 2017

(7 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I can confirm to my hon. Friend that Treasury Ministers have regular discussions with ministerial colleagues about how the Government can boost growth and productivity across Wales and the UK. At autumn statement 2016, the Government confirmed that the door was still open for a growth deal with north Wales, and we are committed to negotiating a city deal for the Swansea Bay city region in south Wales. I look forward to receiving proposals from partners in the north Wales region over the coming months.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The right hon. Gentleman is always very well briefed for these topical questions—reading out the screed! Very good.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 19th July 2016

(7 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

As I said earlier, we recognise the need to bring any uncertainty to an end as soon as we possibly can. In the circumstances, it is right that we take a moment before making any guarantees, but let me be absolutely clear that as a Government we remain committed to doing everything we can to strengthen the northern powerhouse and to ensure that the north of England fulfils its full potential, which includes transport infrastructure. On the specific point, we will make an announcement in the not-too-distant future.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Despite his sudden shyness, the man in the cream suit has an identical question, and I want to give him his opportunity. Mr Alec Shelbrooke.

--- Later in debate ---
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Splendid.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

This is one of those rare occasions when the Chief Secretary can be like the man from Del Monte and say yes.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 7th June 2016

(7 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. Let me gently mention that we have already heard from the hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick)—I remember very well his question, and I rather hope he does. It is one per session—[Interruption.] He can try again at topicals, but not in substantives.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Thank you, Mr Speaker. What I say to my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Nigel Mills) is that, some years ago, HMRC brought in an assurance procedure to ensure that all such settlements are properly scrutinised. HMRC is very confident that it has reached a fair and proper settlement with Google. It is worth pointing out that, in recent years, we have seen increases in revenue collected by HMRC and increases in yield from its compliance activities including from large businesses.

Budget Changes

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Monday 21st March 2016

(8 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

First, may I thank the shadow Chancellor for promoting me to Chief Secretary to the Treasury? Secondly, may I just make this point about disability benefits? There is no question of this Government cutting disability benefits to the level we inherited in 2010. Spending on disability benefits has gone up by £3 billion in real terms. Thirdly, does the shadow Chancellor really want to talk about fiscal black holes? Does he really want to do that? [Interruption.]

Last week the Chancellor of the Exchequer reported on an economy set to grow faster than any other major advanced economy in the world. With wages up, the deficit cut by almost two thirds and 1,000 more people in work every single day, our economic plan is delivering for Britain. It is a Budget that continues this economic recovery, a Budget that takes us into surplus by the end of this Parliament, a Budget that backs British businesses, protecting jobs in difficult economic times, a Budget that helps more people buy their first home or save for their retirement, a Budget that builds our young people’s skills and invests in educating the next generation, and a Budget that helps to close the gaps between rich and poor and between north and south, because we believe in helping people to succeed wherever they come from. Since 2010, inequality is down, child poverty is down, pensioner poverty is down, the gender pay gap is smaller than ever, while the richest—[Interruption.]

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. When the Minister is addressing the House, he is entitled to be heard. I know the Minister is raising his voice, but there should be no requirement to do so. Experience shows that all sides of the argument will be heard. Members need have no worry on that score. In the first instance, the Minister must be heard.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

The richest 1% are paying a greater proportion of income tax revenue than in any single year of the Labour Government. This is the Government that introduced the national living wage, the Government that increased the personal allowance—in a year’s time, a typical basic rate taxpayer will pay over £1,000 less in tax than they paid in 2010—and the Government that are helping to generate record numbers of jobs, helping young people get on the property ladder, increasing spending on health and education, and disability benefits too, and protecting pensions and helping people achieve their aspirations at every stage of their lives. Delivering for Britain, creating economic security, jobs and growth—that is the record of this Government and the record of this Chancellor, and it is a record to be proud of.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 1st March 2016

(8 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

As I said in my answer, it depends on the nature of the dispute, but if the hon. Gentleman wishes to write to me, I will look at it and get back to him.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Thank you.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Overall, the Government are clear that HMRC’s target is to reduce the burden on businesses by £400 million by the end of this Parliament. Moving towards a digital taxation system is something that can help businesses to reduce their costs. We are consulting on the details, but let me make it absolutely clear that there will be no quarterly tax returns, as it has been wrongly reported that there will be in some cases.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I call Stella Creasy. Not here.

Jack Lopresti Portrait Jack Lopresti (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

13. What fiscal steps he is taking to help people keep more of their earnings.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Wednesday 6th January 2016

(8 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

The best way to help working households in this country is to ensure that we have a job-creating economy; that wages go up; that we introduce a national living wage that will help millions of people; and that we have a secure and stable economy. That is what this Government are delivering. [Interruption.]

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. Household incomes in Scotland will be of intense interest, not least to people living in Scotland. We must hear the questions and the answers.

Margaret Ferrier Portrait Margaret Ferrier (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

In a recent written parliamentary question to the Secretary of State, I asked:

“what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on the introduction of the Work and Health Programme in Scotland.”

His response was a masterful example of how not to answer, which is what we have seen again today. Will he now take the opportunity to tell the House whether he has bothered to discuss with the Department for Work and Pensions how this new programme will affect my constituents?

HMRC Office Closures

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 24th November 2015

(8 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

If I may, I will make a bit of progress. I am conscious that I am being generous to the people who wish to intervene, but I should also be generous to those who wish to take part in the debate.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Of whom—I know that the Minister will find this helpful—there are no fewer than 19. I point out very gently, because the Minister has been generous in taking interventions, that his speech, probably as a result of that, is significantly longer than that of the person who led the debate. I am sure he would not want that to be the case.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I certainly would not, Mr Speaker.

HMRC has done this the right way and told staff first. It has kept people fully abreast of its proposals for a number of months, and it has held events up and down the country to ensure that it works with staff. As I said earlier, this is a locations announcement, not a workforce announcement, and the Department’s policy is to keep redundancies to an absolute minimum.

Finance Bill

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Monday 26th October 2015

(8 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Government new clauses 5, 6 and 8.

Amendment 91, page 57, in clause 42, leave out lines 26 and 27.

Amendment 92, page 57, leave out lines 30 to 41.

Amendment 93, page 58, leave out from beginning of line 1 to end of line 37 on page 60 and insert—

“Graduated rates of duty payable on first vehicle licence

For the purpose of determining the rate at which vehicle excise duty is to be paid on each of the first three years of vehicle licence for a vehicle to which this Part of this Schedule applies, the annual rate of duty applicable to the vehicle shall be determined in accordance with the following table by reference to the applicable CO2 emissions figure.

Table

Carbon Dioxide emissions

Rate

(1)

Exceeding g/km

(2)

Not exceeding g/km

(3)

First full year (£)

(4)

Second full year (£)

(5)

Third full year

0

0

0

0

0

0

50

10

10

10

50

75

25

25

25

75

90

100

100

100

90

100

120

120

120

100

110

140

140

140

110

130

160

160

160

130

150

200

200

200

150

170

500

500

500

170

190

800

800

800

190

225

1,200

1,200

1,200

225

255

1,700

1,700

1,700

255

-

2,000

2,000

2,000



Rates of duty payable on any other vehicle licence

1GD For the purpose of determining the rate at which vehicle excise duty is to be paid on any other vehicle licence for a vehicle to which this Part of this Schedule applies, the annual rate of vehicle excise applicable to the vehicle shall be determined in accordance with the following table by reference to the applicable CO2 emissions figure.

Table

Carbon Dioxide emissions

Rate

(1)

Exceeding g/km

(2)

Not exceeding g/km

(3)

Standard rate (£)

0

0

20

0

50

40

50

75

60

75

90

80

90

100

100

100

110

120

110

130

140

130

150

160

150

170

180

170

190

200

190

225

220

225

255

240

255

-

260”



New clause 3—Tax treatment of private equity fund managers’ pay

‘(1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer shall, within six months of the passing of this Act, publish and lay before the House of Commons a report setting out proposals for amending the law to ensure that no element of the remuneration paid to an investment fund manager may be treated as a capital gain, and that such remuneration shall be treated for tax purposes wholly as income.

(2) For the purposes of this section, an “investment fund manager” is a person who performs investment management services directly or indirectly.”

Government amendments 71 to 88 and 31 to 70.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I would like to open the debate by discussing amendments 31 to 70. As announced in the Public Bill Committee, the Government are introducing amendments to clauses 25 and 26 and schedules 5 and 6 to ensure that the Bill works as intended and that the new rules work correctly with the existing provisions.

I remind the House that the original clauses and schedules make changes to the rules for the enterprise investment scheme and venture capital trusts to bring them into line with new state aid rules. This will secure the future of the schemes and ensure they continue to be well targeted towards companies that need investment to develop and grow. The enterprise investment and venture capital schemes have been supporting small companies to access finance for more than 20 years and provide generous tax incentives to encourage private individuals to invest in high-risk small and growing companies that would otherwise struggle to access finance from the market. The original clauses and subsequent amendments ensure the long-term future of these important schemes.

Alongside the amendments, the Government are also introducing new clause 4, which makes changes to exclude companies from qualifying for the seed enterprise and investment scheme, the enterprise investment scheme and the venture capital trust, if their activities involve making available reserve electricity generating capacity—for example, under the capacity market agreement or the short-term operating reserve contract. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in tax-advantaged investment in energy companies benefiting from other guaranteed income streams. These activities are also generally asset-backed. The new clause will ensure that the Government remain consistent in their approach by keeping the venture capital schemes targeted at high-risk companies. We will also introduce secondary legislation to exclude subsidised renewable energy generation by community energy organisations.

--- Later in debate ---
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to the shadow Chancellor for his point of order. Those on the Treasury Bench will have heard what he has said. It is open to a Minister to do that tomorrow. Given that a Treasury Minister is present on the Treasury Bench, he is welcome to rise to his feet if he wishes.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

indicated dissent.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

So be it; the House will understand. It is not a matter for the Chair; I am simply playing fair. It is a matter for the Government, and the Minister could speak now if he wished, but he is not under any obligation to do so. The point of order has been heard. The hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) will be in his place tomorrow—and so will the Chancellor be—and we will await the development of events.

National Insurance Contributions Bill

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 3rd February 2015

(9 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

In that case, we shall come later to the hon. Gentleman. I am saving him up. It would be a shame to squander him too early.

Clause 2

Consequential etc power

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I beg to move, That this House agrees with Lords amendment 2.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

With this it will be convenient to consider Lords amendments 3 to 5.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

This group comprises four minor technical amendments to clause 2 and schedule 1, which deal with simplifying the collection of class 2 national insurance contributions payable by the self-employed.

It might help the House if I briefly outline the four amendments. Amendments 2 and 3 are the Government’s response to the report, published on 27 November, by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee on the delegated powers contained in the Bill. The report drew to the House’s attention the power in clause 2 to amend primary and secondary legislation as a consequence of the reform of class 2 NICs. This power is currently subject to the negative procedure. The Committee said that the justification in HMRC’s “Delegated Powers Memorandum” was not sufficient for the negative procedure to apply where the power allows for the amendment or repeal of primary legislation, and the Committee recommended that in this instance the power be subject to the affirmative procedure. The Government have considered and acted on the Committee’s report. Lords amendment 2 provides that regulations made under clause 2 that amend or repeal primary legislation be subject to the affirmative procedure. Lords amendment 3 provides that the negative procedure will continue to apply to any use of the power set out in clause 2 where a statutory instrument does not contain any regulations amending or repealing primary legislation.

Lords amendments 4 and 5 are minor technical amendments dealing with the simplification of the collection of class 2 NICs payable by the self-employed. This is a matter that I have previously debated, if not at great length, with the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood). Amendment 4 amends schedule 1, which inserts new section 11A into the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992. It will ensure that the relevant self-assessment penalties apply to class 2 contributions collected through SA by adding a missing reference to the SA under-declaration penalty contained in schedule 24 to the Finance Act 2007. It was always the Government’s intention to align penalties for class 2 contributions more closely with those for SA as part of the reform of class 2 so that the self-employed are not subject to two different regimes, but this penalty was unintentionally omitted. Lords amendment 5 makes a corresponding amendment to the Social Security Contributions and Benefits (Northern Ireland) Act 1992.

With that explanation, which I know the House was keen to hear, I hope it will agree with the Lords amendments.

Lords amendment 2 agreed to.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I call the Minister to move the remaining Lords amendments.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Formally.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is always a joy to hear the Minister develop the argument, but he is exercising a self-denying ordinance. I must say that the way he has addressed matters thus far—comprehensively and courteously, in his usual manner—has been accompanied by a slight increase in the number of Members present for the next business. It is not for me to suggest that those two phenomena are causally related, but some people might think they are. I suppose if one is in a tight corner and hoping that the Minister will develop the arguments fully, one can always best depend (a) on a Treasury Minister and (b) on a lawyer, and he is both.

Lords amendments 3 to 5.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 9th December 2014

(9 years, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

My right hon. Friend is correct in that assessment. That proportion is higher than occurred in any year under the previous Labour Government or, indeed, when the 50p rate was in place.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I call Pat Glass. Not here.

Charlie Elphicke Portrait Charlie Elphicke (Dover) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

5. What estimate he has made of corporation tax receipts in each year since 2010; and if he will make a statement.

Charlie Elphicke Portrait Charlie Elphicke
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Is my hon. Friend aware that non-oil corporation tax receipts have risen 16% over the course of this Parliament so far, compared with a rise of just 8% over the entirety of the previous 13 years? Does that not show that if you cut the rate, you up the take? [Interruption.] How will the diverted profits tax work?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The question was simply too long. The hon. Gentleman should have cut it off when he was winning, instead of going on for too long, which is what he then continued to do.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

It is right that we have reduced the corporation tax rate. Next year, it will give us the lowest rate in the G20. That is resulting in greater investment in the UK. It would certainly be a mistake to reverse that policy, as the Labour party intends. In terms of the diverted profits tax, I would point out that it will help to deal with aggressive tax avoidance. We will publish the draft legislation on that tomorrow, setting out the full details of how it will operate.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 4th November 2014

(9 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

First, I congratulate my hon. Friend on the ingenuity of his question. Secondly, let me repeat what the Prime Minister said: we will not be paying £1.7 billion on 1 December.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It was indeed an extremely ingenious question, as HMRC would not be the tax collector, but, understandably, that did not trouble the hon. Member for Kettering (Mr Hollobone) in any way.

Iain McKenzie Portrait Mr Iain McKenzie (Inverclyde) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

20. One in four children across the UK lives in poverty while this Government allow £34 billion in unpaid tax to go astray. Does the Minister not see an urgency in collecting that tax so that he can eliminate that disgraceful statistic?

Finance Bill

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Wednesday 2nd July 2014

(9 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

New clause 9—Pension flexibility: Treasury analysis

‘(1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer shall, within six months of this Act receiving Royal Assent, publish and lay before the House of Commons any analysis prepared by the Treasury prior to the publication of Budget 2014 relating to the impact of changes made by sections 39 to 43 of this Act to schedules 28 and 29 to the Finance Act 2004.

(2) The information published under subsection (1) must include—

(a) any assessment made of the impact of the provision for independent face to face guidance on the 2004 Act;

(b) the distributional impact, by income decile of the population, of changes made by sections 39 to 43 of this Act;

(c) a behavioural analysis; and

(d) the financial risk assessment.”

Government new schedule 5—Pension flexibility: further amendments.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

New clause 13 and new schedule 5 make provision to ensure that individuals who wish to make use of the new pension flexibilities announced by the Government do not face detrimental tax consequences if they take their tax-free lump sum and then defer a decision on how to access the remainder of their pension savings.

On Budget day, the Government announced radical reforms that will enable people with defined contribution pension savings to have more choice and control over their pension wealth from next April. The greater choice and flexibility that these reforms will give pension savers have been widely welcomed. There has been broad consensus that individuals who have been responsible and saved for their future should be trusted to access their pension savings in the way that most suits them.

We announced a consultation on the detail of these longer-term proposals, which has now closed. We will publish a response in the near future, and legislation will be brought forward later this year to implement the necessary changes, but the Government wanted to make sure that people who are approaching retirement now would not miss out. As a first step, we introduced clauses 39 and 40 to ensure that individuals nearing retirement this year can benefit from a wider range of options before next April. We expect that this will enable around an extra 85,000 people to access their pension wealth as a lump sum this tax year. In addition, 400,000 people will have the option of receiving significantly greater withdrawals from their pension savings, but we did not want to stop there.

Usually people lose the advantages of a tax-free lump sum if they do not decide what to do with the rest of their pension savings within six months of taking the lump sum. On 27 March, the Government announced that those who had already taken a tax-free lump sum from their defined contribution pension savings, but had not yet secured their pension, would be given more time to decide what they wished to do with the rest of their retirement savings. We also did not think it would be fair to prevent people from taking their tax-free lump sum now simply because they wished to wait to access their pension savings more flexibly from next April, so the Government promised to introduce new provisions in the Bill to ensure that people do not lose their right to a tax-free lump sum if they would rather use the new flexibility this year or next.

The provisions are technically quite detailed, but their purpose is not. Full pension flexibility for defined contribution savings will be introduced in April 2015, and until that happens we want people to be able to take their tax-free lump sum and to have until October 2015 to make their pension choices without tax consequences. The changes made in new clause 13 and new schedule 5 will enable people to take a tax-free lump sum and to wait until April 2015 to decide how they want to access their pension savings: by transferring the rest of their pension savings to another pension provider to enable them to access them more flexibly; by repaying the lump sum when the scheme that paid it will accept it in order to access the whole of their savings more flexibly; or by receiving the rest of the pension savings as a lump sum under the higher limits that clause 40 provides. Those changes also ensure that people who have the right to receive a tax-free lump sum at an earlier age, or of a larger amount than is normally allowed, can use the new flexibility and keep those rights.

New clause 13 and new schedule 5 help people who have worked hard to save into a pension, enabling them to take some of those savings tax-free now, and to take advantage of the new flexibilities for the rest of their pension savings.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 24th June 2014

(9 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Nadhim Zahawi Portrait Nadhim Zahawi (Stratford-on-Avon) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The construction industry has benefited from the business-friendly policies of this Government. Does my hon. Friend agree with my constituent, the former Trade Minister, Lord Digby Jones, when he says that the Leader of the Opposition is the “least business-friendly” leader of any political party in years?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On the subject of private sector investment in the construction industry, rather than the characteristics of an individual, a brief reply, Minister Gauke. We are grateful.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

If we want to see private sector investment in the infrastructure industry, or anywhere else, we must maintain business confidence. Anti-business policies do not help that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 10th September 2013

(10 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

The Government continue to make strong progress on tackling tax avoidance. Following on from our announcement at Budget 2013, we have introduced the UK’s first general anti-abuse rule, which will act as a significant deterrent to abusive avoidance. We have completed our consultations on avoidance using partnership rules and the use of offshore intermediaries, and we have just launched a consultation on new information requirements and penalties for the promoters of tax avoidance schemes.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I would like to wish the hon. Member for Amber Valley (Nigel Mills) good luck for his forthcoming wedding. I trust all will go as smoothly as his question.

Nigel Mills Portrait Nigel Mills
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

I welcome the measures that the Minister has announced. My constituents want to see everyone paying the tax they owe on their income. Does the Minister think that any measures are required to make sure that trade unions do that as well?

Henry Thorley and HMRC

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Thursday 18th July 2013

(10 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
William Cash Portrait Mr Cash
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Whether or not it was malicious, the question is whether an apology is due, given the fact that—of this there is no doubt—there was a prosecution, my constituent spent time in jail, the conviction was quashed and then he was released. I am simply asking for an apology. There is an element of farce about the situation. I do not want to be told that I should go off to the Ombudsman; I am talking to the Minister, who is accountable to the House. He has responsibility for HMRC and for the conduct of Customs and Excise before it, in one form or another. All I am asking for—it sounds as though I am not going to get it, even this afternoon—is an apology on the Floor of the House from the Minister in relation to this. It is no good just reading out all the bits of paper that have been supplied—

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The hon. Gentleman’s intervention is a little on the long side. He has expressed some frustration that he does not think that he will get what he wants this afternoon but, on the strength of his 29 years of service in the House and the indefatigability with which he has pursued a variety of causes over those years, he will be well aware that it is open to him to pursue the matter again, and again, and again.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for setting out that prospect.

What I am seeking to say to my hon. Friend is that his constituent clearly feels wronged. He was, as my hon. Friend says, convicted on a case brought by HM Customs and Excise, and that conviction was subsequently quashed. I understand my hon. Friend’s position, which is, in essence, that in any circumstances when someone has been wrongly convicted, the prosecuting authority should apologise to that person. I fully respect that position. However, it must also be said that the fact that an individual is found not guilty after a criminal trial or their conviction being quashed by a higher court on appeal does not necessarily mean that it was inappropriate for the case to have been investigated, or even prosecuted, in the first place. I am sure that my hon. Friend, as a distinguished lawyer, can appreciate that point.

It may well be that in this investigation over 30 years ago HM Customs and Excise behaved wrongly and inappropriately. If that is the case, then his constituent would deserve an apology in those circumstances—let me clear about that—and I would be very happy to give that apology on behalf of HMRC. However, before HMRC is in a position to give a full apology, it needs to see the facts more fully. As I say, the mere evidence that a conviction has been quashed does not necessarily mean that HM Customs and Excise behaved in an unacceptable way. That is why I believe that it is essential that my hon. Friend’s constituent provide all the available paperwork that he and his advisers hold to enable HMRC fully to assess the reasons for the quashing of the conviction.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 12th March 2013

(11 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend makes an excellent point and I am sure that the House is delighted to have heard him do so. I know that he has done some superb work with the biotech industry. I met representatives of the BioIndustry Association a few weeks ago and they recognised that the steps we have taken on the patent box and research and development tax credits have put in place a very favourable environment for that industry.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Unfortunately, we certainly do not have time for Question 20 from the hon. Member for North East Somerset (Jacob Rees-Mogg) on article 153(5) of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union, but you never know what topical questions might bring.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 29th January 2013

(11 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

A moment or so ago we heard lots of shouting about the 50p rate, yet the Labour party is the first to defend the idea that those very people should continue to receive benefits. Ensuring that child benefit is targeted best meant either looking at this on a household basis—which would have meant putting 8 million households into the tax credit system—or adopting the approach that we have chosen, but the Labour party is always there, ready to spend taxpayers’ money where—

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. We are obliged to the Minister, but we will move on to one more question.

Finance Bill

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 3rd July 2012

(11 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

New clause 3—Sixth form colleges (exemption from VAT)

‘In Schedule 9 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (Exemptions), in Group 6 (Education), the following shall be added at the end of Note (1) (description of eligible body)—

“(g) a sixth form college”.’.

New clause 10—VAT: review

‘No new Order shall be made under section 30(4) or 31(2) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 unless the Chancellor of the Exchequer has fully reviewed the impact of any such Order on jobs, living standards and businesses, making reference to the HMRC Consultation “VAT: Addressing Borderline Anomalies”, and placed a copy of the review in the Library of the House of Commons.’.

New clause 12—Rate of VAT—

‘(1) In section 2(1) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (Rate of VAT) for “20 per cent.” substitute “17.5 per cent.”.

(2) Subsection (1) shall have effect from Royal Assent and shall expire at such time as the Government presents to Parliament a report stating that the UK economy has returned to strong growth.’.

Government amendment 17.

Government new schedule 1—‘Categorisation of supplies.

Government amendments 18 to 20.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Clearly there is a substantial difference between 20% VAT and 5% VAT. We set out our estimates in relation to the 20% rate, and some of the concerns that people took from what HMRC set out were, I think, somewhat greater than the reality warranted, because the impact set out and the assumption regarding the reduction in demand related solely to that element to which the change from zero-rated to standard-rated applied. On many caravans that are sold, the VAT is recovered—VAT already applies to an element of the price of a static caravan: that of the fixtures and fittings.

We do not think the impact of the 5% rate is likely to be substantial. In the usual course of business there are tax changes—national insurance contributions and rates are the subject of regular fluctuations—and in many cases the VAT change may well be absorbed. In addition, we have given industry much more time by deciding not to implement the change until April next year. Caravan manufacturers will have the opportunity to sell more caravans in advance of next year’s summer season—the information we have is that spring tends to be the busiest period. The overall impact on the industry is therefore unlikely to be significant.

Before discussing each of the anomalies and saying more about static caravans, I would like to give the House a little bit of history about the VAT system. As I am sure all hon. Members know, the VAT system was introduced in 1973 and amendments and adjustments were being made as early as 1974. The then Labour Government added confectionary, soft drinks, ice cream, potato crisps and certain other savoury snacks—

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. My ears pricked up when the Minister suggested he might furnish the House with what he gently described as “a little bit” of information about VAT. In offering to the House—in a public-spirited fashion, I am sure—a potted history of the value added tax system, I am sure that he will have regard to the new clause that he is presenting.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I certainly will, Mr Speaker. I did say I would give a little history and, following your guidance, I will focus on the little.

I hope it helps the House if I explain that, in the almost 40 years in which we have had VAT, there have been changes from time to time. There were changes in the VAT on building alterations in 1982 and 1984, on hot takeaway food in 1984 and on newspaper and magazine advertising in 1985—I could go on, Mr Speaker, but let me move on.

Changes to the Budget

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Monday 11th June 2012

(11 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The Ministers who appear are chosen by the Government, and it is not for me to explain that choice. Members ask, “Where’s the Chancellor?” The Chancellor is appearing before the Leveson inquiry, as Members know perfectly well. We welcome Minister Gauke.

David Gauke Portrait The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

The Budget supports working families and re-establishes the UK’s reputation as a leading place to do business. It continues to deal with the record peacetime deficit that we inherited, so that the state no longer borrows £1 in £4 it spends, as it did when we came to office.

The Budget contained 282 measures. Having said that we would consult on some of its measures, we have made changes to three. On VAT for hot food, it is right to end anomalies and ensure that VAT is applied fairly between businesses. Where fish and chip shops had to charge VAT, supermarkets selling the same products did not. Having consulted, we have revised the relevant tests to ensure that, for example, bakers cooking hot savoury food that is left to cool are not caught in the changes.

On VAT for static holiday caravans, we have listened to hon. Members, who argued that static caravans should be treated more akin to second homes and not like touring caravans. Given that static holiday vans fall in a grey area between residential properties and temporary holiday accommodation, and given the relevant tax regimes that apply to them, a 5% rate of VAT is a fair compromise.

On tax reliefs, we continue to think that the system we inherited—which allows the wealthiest to pay the least tax, meaning that cleaners can pay a higher rate than their bosses—is unfair. We will therefore move to cap reliefs to ensure that this is addressed. However, having engaged with the sector, we will exclude reliefs relating to charitable giving from the cap.

These changes are small in the context of a Budget that lowered tax by £170 for 24 million people. The amounts concerned are tiny compared with the total tax changes announced in the Budget—in monetary terms, less than 2% of the Budget changes and 0.0002% of total receipts. The Budget continues to have a neutral impact on the public finances, and we remain on track to tackle the unprecedented debt and deficit we inherited. This is a Budget that improves the country’s competitiveness by cutting the top rate of tax, reduces corporation tax to give the UK the most competitive rate in the G20, and rewards and supports hard-working families by helping to take 2 million people out of income tax altogether.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

This Government are determined to focus on the big issues we face. As a Government, we are showing determination to ensure that the UK remains in a safe place.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful for the Minister’s diplomacy, but let me say gently to the hon. Lady that the question was not quite as wide as the channel—but it was not far short of it!

Seema Malhotra Portrait Seema Malhotra (Feltham and Heston) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the Minister confirm what extra information came to light during the recess that led to the U-turn on the charity tax?

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

rose—

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. I am sorry if I did not explain the position sufficiently clearly—although I must say I thought I did. Some Members are making speculative bids for extending the U-turns. They may wish to do so, but the terms of the urgent question relate specifically to the announced changes. I am sure that understanding that point will not be beyond the ingenuity of the hon. Member for Wansbeck (Ian Lavery).

E-Tabling of Written Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Monday 26th March 2012

(12 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Gauke Portrait The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I note that the shadow Chancellor said:

“There will be a vote next week, and we will vote against the 50p change.”—[Official Report, 22 March 2012; Vol. 542, c. 960.]

What guidance can you provide, Mr Speaker, to right hon. and hon. Members to look at the Budget resolutions, where they will see clearly that resolution 72 referred to an additional rate of 45p, which was obviously a change from 50p?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think the hon. Gentleman is seeking to offer that guidance, but he is a constituency neighbour of mine, so I know that what he would not seek to do, for it would be unworthy—and he would not be unworthy—is continue the debate that we have spent the past few days having. So we will leave it there for tonight. He looks contented, as he is smiling at me beatifically and that is a boon to the House.

Budget Leak Inquiry

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Thursday 22nd March 2012

(12 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Earlier this morning, the hon. Gentleman denied it. [Interruption.] He is shaking his head now, so he is clearly denying that that is the case. Presumably, it is reasonably easy to work out what time a Twitter post was made and to know what time the urgent question was announced. But it is not for me to lecture the Opposition; I am sure that they would be very concerned if there had been such a leak and they would be cracking down on it straight away.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is not really a matter for the Minister. These matters are dealt with in a very specific and orderly fashion—the submission of a request, the consideration of the matter at the appropriate time of the day by my colleagues and me, and the disclosure of the result of the request to the interested parties. All was done—I know the hon. Member for Kingswood (Chris Skidmore) will be satisfied that it was—in an absolutely orderly way on this occasion as it is on every other.

Duncan Hames Portrait Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Has the Minister discussed this matter with his colleague the Chief Secretary to the Treasury? I have found the earliest published source of information on the Budget. It was written by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary—on the front page of the Liberal Democrat election manifesto nearly two years ago.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 1st November 2011

(12 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jesse Norman Portrait Jesse Norman
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my hon. Friend for that response. This country continues to bear a huge burden of private finance initiative debt. The Government have made important progress in improving the cost and operation of PFI over the past 18 months. Does he share my view, and that of many of my colleagues, that more can be done to secure a fair deal on PFI, while securing investment in our infrastructure?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It would help if the Chair could actually hear the question being asked.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend has campaigned tirelessly on this matter. As he knows, the Government have improved the assurance and approval arrangements for PFI, and the transparency. We are seeking to obtain £1.5 billion of savings on existing stock of PFI contracts, and we will of course continue to work hard to improve the situation.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 21st June 2011

(12 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Nadhim Zahawi Portrait Nadhim Zahawi (Stratford-on-Avon) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are already spending £120 million a day on debt interest. What figure does the Minister think would be reached if we had not increased VAT?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. We should be focusing on inflation. I call the Minister to answer, very briefly.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I shall try to focus on inflation, Mr Speaker, but I think that it is important to the economy all round, in terms of inflation and of other factors, for us to maintain credibility. That is something that the Government have and the Opposition, I am afraid, do not.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 10th May 2011

(12 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Claire Perry Portrait Claire Perry (Devizes) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

May I return to the topic of VAT on fuel? I have just come from a business session in my constituency of Devizes, where I know that despite the decrease, high fuel prices continue to be a real drag on growth for small businesses across the economy. I have a letter from the EU commissioner saying that the recent motion we debated—that a derogation should be made specifically for motoring fuel—is almost certainly illegal and definitely unworkable under EU legislation. May I ask Ministers what proposals we can suggest to help motorists in the real world now that the Labour party’s suggestion has been revealed as yet another—

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are grateful to the hon. Lady.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

It is striking that the first line of Labour’s blank sheet of paper on the economy is a proposal that we now know does not work, is illegal, would not help and would leave tax on fuel just as high as it was—whereas we are cutting fuel duty.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 22nd March 2011

(13 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have to say that that was not much better, but the Minister may have a go.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

To be fair, if we wanted to reduce tax on fuel through the VAT rate that is exactly what we would have to do, so perhaps that is not the best way of doing it.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 21st December 2010

(13 years, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Charlie Elphicke Portrait Charlie Elphicke (Dover) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Does the Minister agree with me, and my constituents in Dover and Deal, that the council tax freeze is very welcome, and stands in sharp contrast to the massive rises that have hit the poor, elderly and vulnerable in recent years?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The question is about the comprehensive spending review.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

With reference to the comprehensive spending review, the council tax freeze and the other measures that we have announced demonstrate that we are making every effort to ensure that the difficult decisions that we have to make because of the deficit are reached in a way that is fair.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 16th November 2010

(13 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Andrea Leadsom Portrait Andrea Leadsom (South Northamptonshire) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Recent press reports have suggested that there are many so-called zombie households in the United Kingdom, in which families have got themselves into so much debt that they rely on interest rates remaining low to stay afloat. Does my hon. Friend agree that our policies to keep interest rates low, and to enable the Bank of England and the Monetary Policy Committee to keep them low, are key as we go through a critical period in our recession?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

A sentence from the Minister in reply will suffice, as the question is about tax inquiry services. We are grateful to him.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

Let me put it this way: we would have a lot more inquiries if taxes were going up, which is the policy the Opposition advocate.

--- Later in debate ---
Richard Graham Portrait Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Does the Minister agree that the logic of the policy outlined by Opposition Members is that any child from Prince William and Catherine Middleton would benefit from child tax benefit, whereas the poorest of my constituents would not?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Members really should not refer to members of the royal family in questions. That is strongly to be deprecated, and it certainly should not happen again. I ask the Minister to give a very brief reply.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend is perhaps getting a little ahead of himself. I think all we should say is that should that happy eventuality occur, I am sure he or she will get by without child benefit.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 12th October 2010

(13 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Kerry McCarthy Portrait Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am afraid that the answers that the Minister is giving are simply not good enough. Can he explain the logic behind the child benefit proposal, if there is any? Why is the assessment not being made on household income rather than just on the highest earner’s income? Will it apply to a cohabiting high earner or just to married couples, and why will there be a phenomenally high marginal deduction rate? Is it not true that this is just another “back of a fag packet” policy that the Government have not thought through at all?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

There were four questions there, but one answer will do.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I congratulate the hon. Lady on her appointment to her shadow ministerial position, but I point out what her former colleague Alan Milburn has said:

“In times of plenty, giving child benefit to high earners is a luxury the country can afford; in times of want I don’t think it is. We would be wrong to oppose it. I can’t see it having an adverse impact on social mobility.”

I know Alan Milburn belongs to the centre ground, but the Opposition really should not abandon it.

PAYE Contributions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Wednesday 8th September 2010

(13 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. I should be grateful if hon. and right hon. Members who are leaving the Chamber would do so quickly and quietly so that the Minister, Mr. David Gauke, can respond to the urgent question.

David Gauke Portrait The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - -

I am grateful for the opportunity to make a statement to the House about the action that HMRC is taking to rectify overpayments and underpayments in the PAYE system.

The PAYE reconciliation process occurs every year to reflect the changes in people’s earnings and employment status that happen over the course of a tax year. In previous years, HMRC employed a system of manually joining up separate pieces of information through PAYE. Each case of potential overpayment or underpayment had to be reviewed individually before reconciliation could be finalised. That was inefficient and clerically intensive work, and it resulted in a backlog of open cases. HMRC now employs a new computer system that matches records automatically to ensure that the correct amount of tax is paid.

The coalition Government have already started to look at how to reform PAYE further and make it more efficient. As part of the Government’s strategy to create the most competitive tax system in the G20, we are consulting on options to improve PAYE. The PAYE system was introduced at a time when people had one job—perhaps the same job for their whole career—and one source of income in retirement. However, that world has now gone and it is common for people to have earnings from multiple sources. That is well known, but it is something that the previous Government failed to address.

No reconciliation process was undertaken last year, so this year HMRC had to complete the reconciliation for two years instead of one. The preliminary assessment of this year’s reconciliation was first brought to my attention earlier in the summer, and while the majority of PAYE records are correct, we are acting promptly to put right the situation that we inherited, which has contributed to the number of individuals required to make payments and the size of payments owed. About 4.3 million taxpayers will receive repayments between now and Christmas, while 1.4 million will be sent letters specifying how any underpayment has been calculated and how such payments can be reviewed.

To begin the process of reconciliation, HMRC has sent out the first set of taxpayer notifications to individuals throughout the UK. Those individuals who have overpaid will receive a full refund. Those who have underpaid will make additional payments through the PAYE system, provided that the payment due is less than £2,000. If the payment due is more than £2,000, HMRC will contact the individual to discuss the issue. All payments will begin next year and no immediate one-off payment will be required. HMRC will review the responses to the first set of notifications and make any changes needed to operational plans before going ahead with the rest. Staggering the process between now and Christmas will help to ensure that HMRC can deal with all queries efficiently.

The Exchequer is owed a total of approximately £2 billion. The fact that we were left with the worst deficit in peacetime history means that we simply cannot afford to write off all the underpayments. To ensure that the tax system is fair for everyone and that everyone pays their fair share, we are taking action to recoup the funds as painlessly as possible. In cases of genuine hardship, HMRC will allow payments to be spread across a period of three years. As was already the case, it will not pursue cases when the amount owed is less than £300—that is an increase from the previous threshold of £50—which applies to 40% of all underpayments. Of course, in specific circumstances, HMRC will consider writing off underpayments where it can be shown that HMRC was provided with all the information necessary—although I have to tell the House, from historical experience, that that is unlikely to apply to many cases. We do not want to build up people’s hopes unrealistically.

This Government understand that there is an urgent need to reform our PAYE system. In opposition and from day one in government, we have sought ways to improve it. The system is outdated, inefficient and burdensome to the Exchequer and taxpayer alike. We need PAYE to reflect the employment issues that the 21st century presents, and that will be a focus of reforms that we take forward as part of our wider strategy for reform.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I think we now know why Labour Members did not table an urgent question on this matter.

The right hon. Gentleman asked many questions—although there was not a word of apology for a tax system that is clearly encountering some difficulties—and I will endeavour to answer them all. First, there has been no change of plan. We have pursued the same proposal all along, namely to write to 45,000 to 50,000 taxpayers. We will use the information and the lessons learned from this relatively small sample to guide how correspondence will be undertaken with the remaining taxpayers affected. Let me reassure him that his fears about that are wrong. He also expressed concern about the public not being informed about the exercise, but we made great efforts to inform them over the weekend immediately after the decision was taken to proceed with writing those first letters to affected taxpayers.

The right hon. Gentleman referred to a concession that may be available, and he may recall that the A19 concession is available in circumstances where all the information has been provided to HMRC and it has had the opportunity to address it. We have looked into this. The A19 concession, which is well established—he will remember it from his time in the Treasury—does not apply that often in practice, and I do not want people to build up their hopes that it will offer some kind of panacea; that would be unfair on taxpayers.

The right hon. Gentleman questioned whether employers have made mistakes. In some circumstances, employers will have made the mistake that caused the overpayment or underpayment, but the principle remains the same—we have to collect the right amount of tax.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about means-tested benefits. In some cases, because net income was higher in a previous year, certain means-tested benefits would not have been available in that year, so sums are now having to be paid back. In those particular cases where tax underpayments are being recovered through the tax coding system, the corresponding fall in the net income for the taxpayer will increase the availability of means-tested benefits in that relevant year.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about the extension of tax credit renewals’ deadline, and I can confirm that it has been extended to provide additional time for claims. I have to point out to him, however, that the idea that call centres are under strain and that it is difficult to get through to HMRC is not entirely a new phenomenon: it is a long-standing problem. Let me take this opportunity to say to taxpayers who are understandably concerned about their position that they should wait until they receive a letter before contacting HMRC, as only then will it be able to deal effectively and efficiently with their concerns. Nevertheless, he raises a legitimate issue about call centres. We are providing additional staff—there is additional capacity now and there will be after the tax credit renewal process has been completed. We are taking steps to ensure that HMRC is able to deal effectively with those calling in with concerns.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. I understand that the Minister is trying to help the House with informative replies, but I am afraid they are rather prolix and they need to get shorter.

Nadhim Zahawi Portrait Nadhim Zahawi (Stratford-on-Avon) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Does my hon. Friend agree that the previous Government ignored not only the crippling budget deficit but the serious problem with PAYE? That is evidence as to why the coalition’s setting up of the Office of Tax Simplification is so important.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

My blood ran slightly cold for a moment when I thought that the TaxPayers Alliance had managed to get in here, but I know that my hon. Friend is a good representative for taxpayers. As for last year, it is fair to say that the introduction of the computer system was a relevant issue, but none the less the lack of a reconciliation has exacerbated the problem. The fact that nothing was done last year prior to the election has left us with a bigger problem this year. He can draw his own conclusions.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I apologise to the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Matthew Hancock); he is unmistakable.

Mark Durkan Portrait Mark Durkan (Foyle) (SDLP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

May I ask the Minister whether these circumstances have given the Government any further thought about plans to cut the future capacity of the Revenue and Customs? If he is giving positive consideration to the very good suggestion that there be a helpline for MPs, may I suggest, since many of the people affected will not have accountants to hand or be able to go to them, that it be available also to citizens advice bureaux, which will get an awful lot of inquiries?

Office of Tax Simplification

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 20th July 2010

(13 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. I know that the Minister will relate his answer to attempts to simplify the tax system.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I am grateful for your guidance, Mr. Speaker. All I would say is that if my hon. Friend is speaking, I am sure that the Chamber will be packed.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Gauke and John Bercow
Tuesday 8th June 2010

(13 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Gareth Thomas Portrait Mr Gareth Thomas (Harrow West) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his elevation to his post. I also take the opportunity to thank the Chancellor of the Exchequer for taking time out during the general election to come and support my re-election in Harrow West. The Opposition recognise that the new politics is not designed to help Labour Members, but I am grateful for the little bit of Tory love that came my way.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell the House who in the Government will have the final say on whether and which regional development agencies will survive? Will it be the Business Secretary—once a supporter of RDAs—or will it be the Chancellor? No one expects it to be the Chief Secretary. Is not the real truth that RDAs such as One NorthEast are playing, and could continue to play, a key role in helping to deliver new jobs in new industries crucial to Britain’s economic future, such as renewable energy and advanced engineering?

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

One answer will do.

David Gauke Portrait Mr Gauke
- Hansard - -

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind words. I should congratulate him on being re-elected on this occasion, but I also note that my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) is here, which is a bit of a triumph for us. On the hon. Gentleman’s specific points, the decision will be made collectively. The Government will work in a cohesive manner in making those decisions.