Finance Bill

Lord Bates Excerpts

Monday 15th July 2013 Lords Chamber

[Lord Bates]

My Lords, I, too, pay tribute to the Select Committee on Economic Affairs for its excellent report. I did not serve on that committee, and I speak in the debate not because I want to speak about the report but to clarify Her Majesty’s Government’s position on another matter, which relates to hard-working families and specifically has to do with the position of the married couple’s tax allowance.

Page 41 of the Conservative Party manifesto, way back in 2010, states a desire to,

“make Britain the most family-friendly country in Europe”—

and specifically said that it would,

“end the couple penalty in the tax credit system”,

which it has largely done through the introduction of universal credit. Next, it said that it would,

“recognise marriage and civil partnerships in the tax system”.

This is a day when we have been celebrating marriage and its role in society. I welcome the Bill that has passed today for keeping marriage relevant and updated by reflecting the way in which some tax-paying citizens choose to live their lives in this country. That is a good thing. When my noble friend Lady Stowell introduced this important Bill at Second Reading, she set out clearly Her Majesty’s Government’s position, when she said:

“Marriage remains, as it has for centuries, the way in which most people choose to declare their commitment publicly and permanently to the person they love. When we hear two people exchange their marriage vows, whether in a place of worship or at a registry office, we know that we are witnessing a couple commit to the kind of values that we associate with the special enterprise of shared endeavour—loyalty, trust, honesty and forgiveness. We know that through marriage existing families are extended, as is their commitment and support to new family members. We think that it is a good thing”.—[Official Report, 3/6/13; col. 938.]

The tax system is a very useful tool for Governments to recognise things which they regard as a good thing. Twelve million people, or perhaps more, as a result of today’s legislation are part of that good thing—giving strength to their families, their communities and society.

Where are we vis-à-vis that commitment made in the manifesto? We had an unexpected turn last week. Following what was described as a lunch,

“with political reporters at Westminster”,

a report appeared on 11 July in the Daily Telegraph. It reported the Chancellor as saying:

“I have always been committed to introducing a married couples’ tax break ... David Cameron campaigned to be leader on that promise and I was his campaign manager”.

It went on to report the Chancellor as saying:

“I am absolutely committed to introducing it … and I think you can expect to see it in the Autumn Statement”.

That is all very encouraging. Some of us who have experienced the way politics works will perhaps be forgiven if we seek further general reassurance from the Minister, as it is possible that many a word of truth has slipped between the dining table of Westminster and the front-page splash of a national newspaper.

Can my noble friend clarify the position of Her Majesty’s Government in relation to the proposed married couples’ tax allowance in the Autumn Statement later this year? I particularly want clarification because we know that this was in the Conservative Party manifesto. We know that it did not make it through the negotiations with our Liberal Democrat coalition partners into the coalition agreement. In the same report of 11 July in the Daily Telegraph, there was a quote in response to this conversation at lunch from the Deputy Prime Minister, who ridiculed the proposals as,

“patronising drivel that belong in the Edwardian age”.

Later on in the report, clarification was sought from Downing Street—a great exercise in journalistic reporting; there was triangulation going on at a great level. The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said that the Prime Minister is a “big believer in marriage” and,

“That is why he thinks it is important to recognise the family—

and marriage—“in the tax system”.

There is a clear position there, perhaps a shift. I would very much appreciate if the Minister could help clarify and enlighten us.