All 3 Debates between James Paice and Jonathan Edwards

Finance (No.2) Bill

Debate between James Paice and Jonathan Edwards
Tuesday 8th April 2014

(10 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jonathan Edwards Portrait Jonathan Edwards
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is a fair point. We are making the case for a review. Let us have the figures divulged further. As I say, they are projections.

James Paice Portrait Sir James Paice (South East Cambridgeshire) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Does the hon. Gentleman want a review or does he want a higher tax rate? What would he do if that review demonstrated that 45p, 47p or 48p—anything less than 50p—was the point at which the Laffer curve tipped over? Is he interested in maximum receipts to the Treasury or in some sort of moral argument about equalising the distribution of income?

Jonathan Edwards Portrait Jonathan Edwards
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is a very valid intervention. My political position would be to support a 50p rate, but let us have the evidence to make the decision. As I am outlining, the evidence suggests to me that 50p would be a better top rate than 45p, and certainly better than 40p.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between James Paice and Jonathan Edwards
Thursday 1st March 2012

(12 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jonathan Edwards Portrait Jonathan Edwards (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) (PC)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

15. What discussions she has had with the Welsh Government on the spread of the Schmallenberg virus.

James Paice Portrait The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr James Paice)
- Hansard - -

DEFRA officials have been in regular contact with officials from all the devolved Administrations—including those from the Welsh Government—to discuss the Schmallenberg virus. There have been meetings and regular reports on the situation, both national and international.

Jonathan Edwards Portrait Jonathan Edwards
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Diolch, Mr Speaker. Does not the sudden outbreak of the Schmallenberg virus prove the need to preserve Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency services in livestock-intensive areas such as Carmarthenshire?

James Paice Portrait Mr Paice
- Hansard - -

I hope—as, obviously, does the hon. Gentleman—that the virus does not spread as far as Wales. We believe that it has come, midge-borne, across the channel, and, as I said earlier, we hope that it will not continue to spread. However, we do not consider it necessary to revisit the issue of the two laboratories in Wales. As has been said repeatedly before Committees at which the hon. Gentleman has been present, we believe that the overall laboratory services will be sufficient, under the reorganisation, to continue the surveillance.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between James Paice and Jonathan Edwards
Thursday 13th October 2011

(12 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jonathan Edwards Portrait Jonathan Edwards (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) (PC)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

T2. The Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency has announced proposals to close eight of its labs, including both Welsh sites at Aberystwyth and Ceredigion. I am informed that closure of the Welsh sites will result in a 24-hour delay in diagnosing livestock diseases—an unacceptable period that could leave the communities I represent terribly exposed. Does the Minister agree that it is a disgrace that this decision was made without any consultation with the Welsh Government or the farming and workers trade unions?

James Paice Portrait The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr James Paice)
- Hansard - -

As I mentioned earlier, this was a decision by the agency, but I understand that it was discussed with the equivalent agency and the chief vet in Wales. No sites are being closed. As I said, this is purely about the laboratory aspect, not the post-mortem aspect. I agree that 24 hours extra delay may be unacceptable, but that is not what is expected; we expect timeliness to remain as it is.