Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Leader of the House

Oral Answers to Questions

Gavin Shuker Excerpts
Thursday 3rd November 2011

(13 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Hugh Robertson Portrait Hugh Robertson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I wrote to the Treasury to take that issue up on behalf of a number of small five-a-side providers. The issue is not that the regulation has changed but simply that its interpretation has been clarified. Some providers were paying VAT, but others were not. That conversation is ongoing, but the point of the intervention by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs was to level the playing field.

Gavin Shuker Portrait Gavin Shuker (Luton South) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

I thank the Minister for his answer to the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake). I would like to raise the same issue: playfootball.net in Stopsley in my constituency is facing challenges to its finances as a result of the changes. Surely if the regulation has been applied in a certain way for the past 20 years, suddenly to change it now would be a silly idea.

Hugh Robertson Portrait Hugh Robertson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The issue is fairness in the tax system. If some providers are being taxed in a certain way and others are not, that provides a competitive advantage that many would argue is unfair. What is important is that the same rules apply, whatever they are. As I said, we are in discussions with the Treasury and we will continue those discussions. The important thing is that the rules are applied equitably to all providers.

--- Later in debate ---
David Heath Portrait Mr Heath
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We have already made it clear that, in the light of the extended first Session of Parliament, the intention is to provide extra days for the Backbench Business Committee, which is doing a very good job of reflecting interests outside. The threshold is one of eligibility—making a petition eligible for debate. It is then for a Member of the House to take that forward, and for the Backbench Business Committee to decide whether it is a matter that has not been debated in some other form.

Gavin Shuker Portrait Gavin Shuker (Luton South) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

The substantive point is that when people outside the House are asked to sign a petition they expect it to be debated on the Floor of the House.

David Heath Portrait Mr Heath
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

indicated dissent.

Gavin Shuker Portrait Gavin Shuker
- Hansard - -

The Deputy Leader of the House says no, but many of my constituents believe that to be the case. If that is so, and it is the Government’s intention, will they make available such business in Government time, rather than relying on my colleagues on the Backbench Business Committee?

David Heath Portrait Mr Heath
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That was never our intention for the petition site. It is a mechanism for allowing members of the public to express an interest in a matter, and it is for the Backbench Business Committee, which has the time available, to consider that. If we find that there is a huge oversubscription, of course we will have to look at it, and I think the Procedure Committee will want to do that in due course. It makes sense to do so. However, we must not lose the capacity for the House properly to consider legislative business as it should, or to consider matters raised by hon. Members, which is also important.