Taxation: Income Tax Threshold Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury
Wednesday 16th March 2016

(8 years, 2 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord O'Neill of Gatley Portrait Lord O'Neill of Gatley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I anticipated that a number of things might be asked at this session so shortly after the Budget had been announced, and I encourage many noble Lords, if they have the chance before next week’s debate, to read the Red Book. They will then be more aware of the real details of what has been announced, including, I think, something in this area.

Lord Newby Portrait Lord Newby (LD)
- Hansard - -

I thank the noble Baroness for reminding the House of an extremely successful Liberal Democrat policy. Given that the Chancellor has already broken two of his three fiscal targets, will the Minister now agree that they should be abandoned along with the cuts in spending and benefits, which particularly affect the poor and the disabled and which the Chancellor claimed were necessary just to meet those failed targets?

Lord O'Neill of Gatley Portrait Lord O'Neill of Gatley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, of course I am not going to rise to that bait, but I would like to point out—and it is another reason why I encourage people to study the Red Book in close detail—that, in contrast to the mood among many observers and certainly in the media, the target for this year’s nominal budget deficit has come in lower than forecast at the Autumn Statement. The only reason that it is at the same level as a share of GDP and that the overall current debt level to GDP is higher than desired is the evident other news that the level of nominal GDP was significantly lower than before. In terms of policy, and on the contrary to what was said in that question, the plan is very much in place and on target.