Finance (No. 4) Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury

Finance (No. 4) Bill

Ian C. Lucas Excerpts
Monday 16th April 2012

(12 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Danny Alexander Portrait The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Danny Alexander)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

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

This year’s Finance Bill is the next step in delivering the coalition Government’s core aims of returning this country to sustainable, shared prosperity, dealing with the deficit, supporting the private sector, restoring economic growth and clearing up the mess that the Labour party made of the British economy.

Ian C. Lucas Portrait Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Will the Chief Secretary give way?

Danny Alexander Portrait Danny Alexander
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will take interventions, but I will make some progress first.

This Finance Bill sets out wide-ranging reforms to build a fairer, more efficient and simpler tax system that supports families, rewards hard work, promotes business and ensures that everyone pays their fair share.

Ian C. Lucas Portrait Ian Lucas
- Hansard - -

Will the Chief Secretary give way?

Danny Alexander Portrait Danny Alexander
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will give way now.

Ian C. Lucas Portrait Ian Lucas
- Hansard - -

On the question of fairness, why has the right hon. Gentleman allowed a VAT concession for skiers going to the piste but refused my repeated request for a VAT concession for disabled people in wheelchairs using taxi facilities run by charities such as Chariots, in my constituency?

Danny Alexander Portrait Danny Alexander
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am not aware of the particular issue that the hon. Gentleman mentions. He has not raised it directly with me before, but I am sure he has with my colleagues. I would be very happy to consider it. The issue of cable-powered transport systems has been raised many times by the industry, and a good case has been presented for the change.

The Bill builds on the strong foundations that we have secured in the past two years, safeguarding our economic stability, creating a fairer, more efficient and simpler tax system and driving through reforms to unleash the private sector enterprise and ambition that is critical to our recovery. We will not achieve that by returning to the model of unsustainable debt, irresponsible spending and over-reliance on one sector and one region.

We will not jeopardise the progress that we have made in tackling our debts. We will stick to our plans, because it is fair that we tackle those debts today so that we do not burden our children tomorrow.

--- Later in debate ---
David Gauke Portrait The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We have had a wide-ranging debate, and I thank the 20 Back Benchers who contributed. Many of the speeches touched on the three great challenges that we face in our economy: how to reduce the deficit, how to ensure that we do it fairly, and how to ensure that the UK can be competitive and grow strongly. However, the first point was tackled exclusively by Government Members. Labour Members still show no recognition of the previous Government’s disastrous legacy or the fact that it is not credible to advocate that the way to reduce borrowing is to borrow yet more. A structural deficit of the size we faced meant that difficult measures on spending cuts and tax rises were necessary, but Labour Members continue to oppose almost every effective measure to reduce the deficit. That is why the country continues not to trust the Labour party on the economy.

The Bill is consistent with our determination to return our public finances to a position of respectability.

Ian C. Lucas Portrait Ian Lucas
- Hansard - -

If the Government believe that it is not right to give tax concessions, why have they given skiers in Aviemore in the Chief Secretary’s constituency a discount on VAT, which the Exchequer Secretary says that the country can ill afford?