All 1 Debates between Dominic Raab and Peter Dowd

Budget Resolutions

Debate between Dominic Raab and Peter Dowd
Thursday 9th March 2017

(7 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dominic Raab Portrait Mr Raab
- Hansard - -

Let me give the hon. Gentleman my three points; I will look forward to hearing his intervention after that.

There is also the whole concept of people’s quantitative easing—the idea that the Bank of England should print more money to spend on some of these ivory-tower, socialist-pipedream projects. That is the Mugabe school of economics; it is deeply irresponsible. Again, if we are talking about difficult decisions, that would be far worse for savers than any of the difficult decisions that have had to be made in this Budget.

Finally on the alternatives put forward by the Labour party, the leader of the Labour party is actually on record as being amused about the possibility of raising the basic rate of income tax by 5%—I have the quote here, but I will not embarrass Labour Members by reading it. Honestly, of all the tax rises in the world to contemplate, a rise in the basic rate is deeply irresponsible, not just economically but socially.

Peter Dowd Portrait Peter Dowd (Bootle) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Why do you not talk about your manifesto instead of our manifesto? Why do you not talk about the promises in your manifesto that you have broken?

Natascha Engel Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Natascha Engel)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The hon. Gentleman should remember that he is speaking through the Chair. It is not my manifesto—it is the manifesto of the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Mr Raab).

--- Later in debate ---
Dominic Raab Portrait Mr Raab
- Hansard - -

I will give way at a time of my choosing, not the Labour party Whip’s choosing.

If the shadow Minister would like to explain how it can possibly be right to hike the basic rate of income tax by 5%, I will give way.

Peter Dowd Portrait Peter Dowd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I beg your pardon, Madam Deputy Speaker.

The bottom line is that we should be talking about the broken promises from the Conservative party manifesto. However, the national infrastructure plan involves £500 billion of expenditure—some public expenditure and some private—so I would ask how the Government are going to fund that.

Dominic Raab Portrait Mr Raab
- Hansard - -

I am not sure that it is incumbent on me to fund the commitments that the Labour party may or may not be willing to make.

The truth is that we have a properly funded Budget in which difficult decisions have been made. Investment is being made in the right things, such as skills and social care, but—

Peter Dowd Portrait Peter Dowd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Dominic Raab Portrait Mr Raab
- Hansard - -

No, I will not. The hon. Gentleman has had plenty of opportunity. I have allowed him to intervene on me and I am looking forward to hearing his speech. However, the truth is that he is unable to answer the question of how it can possibly be right to raise the basic rate of income tax. I would just point out that, as a result of the extension of the personal allowance, the average taxpayer will receive £1,000 a year extra.

Peter Dowd Portrait Peter Dowd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is fantasy.

Dominic Raab Portrait Mr Raab
- Hansard - -

No, these figures have been properly costed. From the Institute for Fiscal Studies to the official figures, it is clear that, by raising the personal allowance, we are putting £1,000 back into the average taxpayer’s pocket. At the same time, the Labour party—[Interruption.] Not just the uber-rich—we are used to hearing about that predictable bugbear from the Labour party.

Peter Dowd Portrait Peter Dowd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

He’s frit.

Dominic Raab Portrait Mr Raab
- Hansard - -

Having taken two interventions from the hon. Gentleman, I have to say that the suggestion that I am frit is a bit silly.

The truth is that the Labour party will want to put up taxes on not just the super-rich, but low and middle-income families. Frankly, that is fantasyland.

Dominic Raab Portrait Mr Raab
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend hits the nail on the head. The key thing the Government can do is to create the conditions for record levels of employment, with real wages rising, and with inflation—yes, it needs to be looked at—stable and under careful control. Even on the worst-case scenarios that have been forecast, inflation would rise above 2%, but come back down shortly thereafter.

The reality of this Budget is that we have a Chancellor and a team of Ministers grappling with difficult decisions at a sensitive time, when there is a degree of uncertainty because of the referendum result, and coming up with a sensible, measured package. We have the Labour party talking about printing money and £500 billion of spending commitments when it has no idea where it can fund them from, and we have a Government who are committed not to tilting at socialist windmills, unlike the leader of the Labour party, but to building a better Britain—not only an enterprise economy but a meritocratic society for our children—and to making sure that the most vulnerable, and particularly the elderly, have the social care they need. [Interruption.] If the hon. Member for Bootle (Peter Dowd) would like to intervene on me rather than chuntering in frustration—more in frustration at his own party, I suspect, than at me—I will give way.

Peter Dowd Portrait Peter Dowd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman can make up as many false “facts” as he would like, but the fact of the matter is that he is making them up. He should concentrate on his own manifesto. He still has not answered the question about the £500 billion in the Government’s national infrastructure plan. Where are the Tories getting the money for that from?

Natascha Engel Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Natascha Engel)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. We are mulling over making up false facts. I think we are starting to get quite close to language that is not really acceptable in Parliament. We should just be aware of it.