Commons Chamber

Wednesday 19th March 2025

(began 7 months, 2 weeks ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:34
None Portrait None
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

We We start We start with We start with questions We start with questions to We start with questions to the Minister for Women and Equalities.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Question one Mr Speaker. We have set out yesterday afternoon governments plan to fix afternoon governments plan to fix the broken system. Proper employment supports to help hundreds of thousands out of work or disabled thousands out of work or disabled people who want to be in a job. Dealing with the work and disincentive created over the last disincentive created over the last 15 years and making PIP personally

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sustainable. In recently weeks I have been inundated with constituents getting inundated with constituents getting in touch worried sick about changes to the disability benefit system. Yesterday's announcement goes further than the Conservatives managed all dead. We know disabled people are facing systemic barriers society from accessing health, transport, and housing. Inadequate financial support means some of the most honourable have to access fee banks. This will exacerbate their pain and fuel hunger and debt. What assessment has the department made

**** Possible New Speaker ****

about the cuts and the impact on finances? The proposal made by the previous

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The proposal made by the previous government to convert PIP from cash into vouchers caused a huge amount into vouchers caused a huge amount of anxiety. We made it clear in the announcement yesterday that we won't do that. But we are going to make
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:38
11:38
None Portrait Q2. What steps she is taking to help end discrimination against ethnic minority people. (903264)
-

12 week consultation period on the Green Paper proposals, and we will be listening carefully to what is said in response.
11:38
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:46
None Portrait Q3. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help tackle violence against women and girls. (903265)
-

Minister.
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:54
11:55
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:02
12:03
12:03
12:04
12:04
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:06
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:12
12:13
12:14
12:15
12:15
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:19
12:19
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:22
12:23
12:24
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:26
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:31
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:37
12:39
12:39
12:40
12:40
None Portrait Ten Minute Rule Motion: Food Products (Market Regulation and Public Procurement)
-

is on the record and that people will reflect on that. We come to the Ten Minute Rule Motion.
12:40
Alistair Carmichael Portrait Rt Hon Alistair Carmichael MP (Orkney and Shetland, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I beg to move that leave be given to bring a bill to make provision about the Groceries Code Adjudicator to require coordination between the Groceries Code Adjudicator and the agricultural supply chain adjudicator will stop to make provision about public procurement about British food products, to make provision about the labelling of food products and for connected purposes. I remind out of my entry in the register. In March 1917, at the height of the First World War, the Prime Minister David Lloyd George sent a letter to an ordinary farmer, Charles Patterson.

He wrote, " In the nation's interest, I urge you, as whatever personal sacrifice, to overcome all obstacles to throw your fullest energies into the work and to influence those who can assist you so that every possible Acre shall be sown. " That time there was no question at the heart of government about the vital importance of farmers in the aisles and across the country. The century since, farmers have continued to play their part in supplying the nations table but their incomes have stagnated.

The market for agricultural produce in the UK has agricultural produce in the UK has not been a market since the end of the Second World War. Successive governments have intervened with public subsidies initially in the name of food security and more recently in the name of cheap food for consumers. Over the years, this has distorted the market and allowed a range of unfair practices to be hardwired into the system. As a consequence, the market today has a handful of retailers, the supermarkets at the top, hundreds of thousands of farmers at the bottom, and a variety of processes, just repeaters and others in the middle.

Everyone takes their cut and then at the end of it all the farmers get whatever is left. The power imbalance between the supermarkets at the top and farmers at the bottom is more pronounced than any other market that I can think of. And it is well documented that those at the top who have the power wielded to their own advantage. The extensive debate that we have had in this house in recent months has laid bare the shocking truth about the lack of profitability in farming.

Just last week a new report from the food farming and countryside commission found that real incomes for farmers have stood still for the past 50 years. Shortly after the Autumn Budget, a group of young farmers in my constituency came to see me and brought with them their farm accounts. They were despondent and pointing out to me that the businesses owned a net profit of 0.7% on their capital. There are not much tiered when I said they were doing better than many contemporaries, and DEFRA figures so the average is as low as 0.5%.

One of those farmers was the great- grandson of Charles Patterson. 1/7 generation farmer who works the same land as his great-grandfather. You could not ask for a better illustration of the shift in priorities of our governments over the past 100 years. This cannot go on. Farmers are seeing a rapid withdrawal of funding support in England, the accelerated withdrawal of basic payments followed by the closure without notice last week of the Sustainable Farming Incentive's, and has left many farmers desperate worried about the viability of the businesses.

Elsewhere in the UK, the removal of the ring fence of money even to devolved Administration's for agricultural payment leaves farmers feeling they are vulnerable to adverse change. That is why this market now needs direct and meaningful intervention. Without it we risk losing mastic food production and any notion of food security. If, as the prime minister seeks, food security as national security, and his government should act urgently to allow our farmers to get a fair price for the food that they produce.

I was in government when the Groceries Code Adjudicator was set up. I don't think anyone was set up. I don't think anyone believed that the GCA would be the last word in regulation for the food supply chain but we all took the view was better to have something than nothing. 12 years on from its creation, the limitations of the adjudicator are apparent for all to see. The office has fewer than 10 staff, all seconded from other public bodies and funded by a levy on supermarkets.

To expect and operation of that size to take on some of the largest retail businesses in the country is laughable. It is hardly surprising that businesses supplying supermarkets are reluctant to make complaints especially when the complaints especially when the office itself has not received an entire fine during its existence will stop such cases that are pursued and that the settlement and Non-Disclosure Agreements Bill stop since publicising my bill I have spoken to a number of producers who told me about their experience at the hands of supermarkets.

Just yesterday, I spoke to a businessman who had been a supplier of Brussel sprouts to a large supermarket. His company had, on the basis of undertakings made by the retailer, invested significantly in the business, borrowing £400,000 to build a state-of-the-art package facility. In the year 2022/23, this one supermarket accounted for 47% of their business. In February 2023, they were told by the supermarket that their supply was no longer wanted for that season. For that business the news was a hammer blow.

Despite it being a prima facie breach of the Groceries Supply Code of Practice, the GCA initially declined to intervene. I would love to say that this was an isolated incident. But the GCA annual survey conducted by YouGov suggests it isn't. 40% of suppliers would not raise issues because they believed that the retailer would find out and there would be consequences. The expenses that they describe include delisting without reasonable notice, undisputed invoices not been paid according to agreed terms.

Retrospective changes to supply agreements. Running a promotional activity, and at the supplier's expense and not the retailers. And much more. Practice among supermarkets shows a wide variety of behaviours. Seven of the retailers were judged to have improved or at least stay the same. Sainsburys came out on top with a net improvement score of 10.34%. Unfortunately seven others including Asda, Tesco, Ocado, Iceland, Morrisons and Amazon were scored as having worsened by varying degrees with Amazon's performance being judged to have worsened by a Amazon was also scored as having complied with the code consistently are mostly only 46.9% of the time.

are mostly only 46.9% of the time. Was planning a price war. It is a chilling prospect for farmers. If supermarkets are about to race to the bottom, we can be sure it will be farmers, not company executives or shareholders, who will be expected to take the head. It is not for us in Parliament to pick the winner in a fight between supermarkets but they should know that we are watching and any supermarket that thinks it can rebuild the balance sheet on the back of Britain's farmers might find themselves in front of the Environment, Food, and Real Estate Select Committee and had better have some good answers when they get here.

My bill has support across all parties are sponsored by members from the Liberal Democrats, Labour, Conservatives, Plaid Cymru, and Democratic Unionist Party. It has support across Cornwall and the four nations that make up the UK. I'm grateful for the support I have received from the farming unions, Scottish Land and Estates, the Farmers Association, the Countryside Alliance. This is remarkable coalition of people who all understand that if we fail to act now than before too long there may be no industry left to protect.

In Orkney, one farmer's family are still working the same land to this day and if we want to keep farming communities alive for generations to come, we must act now to make it happen. That is why this bill is necessary and why I seek the leave of the House today to introduce it.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The right honourable member is happy to bring the bill. The question is that the right question is that the right honourable member bring in the bill. As many of that opinion say, "Aye." As many of that opinion say, "Aye." To the contrary, say, "No.". I think the ayes have it. Who will bring in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the bill? Charlie Dewhirst, Sara Tait, Ann Davies, Seamus Logan, Jim Shannon, Davies, Seamus Logan, Jim Shannon, obviously, David Chadwick, Tim obviously, David Chadwick, Tim There is no punch without duty.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Food Food Products, Food Products, Market Food Products, Market Procurement

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Food Products, Market Procurement and Regulation Bill. Friday, June

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and Regulation Bill. Friday, June Let us move to the motion to be
12:50
None Portrait Legislation: National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill: Consideration of Lords Amendments
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Let us move to the motion to be moved formally. The question is as moved formally. The question is as on the order paper. The ayes have it. The clerk will now proceed to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

read the orders of the day. National Insurance Contributions
12:51
12:53
James Murray Portrait James Murray MP, The Exchequer Secretary (Ealing North, Labour )
-
-
giving it to this place. 21 amendments were made and we will seek to address 20 of them today. Before I address these directly, let Before I address these directly, let me remind both houses of the context for the bill. When we entered government, we inherited a fiscal situation which was completely unsustainable. We have had to take difficult and necessary decisions to difficult and necessary decisions to the and of repairing public services. The measures in the bill represent some of the toughest decisions we have had to take to restore fiscal responsibility and get public services back on their feet.

Many of the amendments from the other place put at risk the funding of this bill seeks to raise. Let me be clear, to support these amendments is to support higher borrowing, lower spending, further tax rises. With that in mind I turn to the first group of amendments. I will give way. The mission of talking about growth and last week we found out the economy actually shrank. Has he done any work to see how much that has cost the government because it will have a huge impact when we discussed tax implications.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

As I have set out for the honourable gentleman in a number of honourable gentleman in a number of debates in recent weeks, the reason why we as government have had to take difficult but necessary decisions as to restore fiscal decisions as to restore fiscal sustainability after the situation we inherited from the party opposite

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and that fiscal responsibility is essential for greater investment in the economy which is the bedrock for the growth we are determined to pursue. I wonder if he could outline how

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I wonder if he could outline how many billions the government will spend this year and what percentage £22 billion would be of that and, an additional question, if I may be so greedy, how much the flight layering of the economy has cost the government compared to the £22 billion. I put it to the Minister the impact of the NIC rise has been greater than the mythical £22

**** Possible New Speaker ****

billion alleged by the government. I am not clear from the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am not clear from the intervention put at the honourable gentleman finally accepts the £22 gentleman finally accepts the £22 billion black hole we inherited when we took government. The facts are we took government. The facts are there that we inherited a completely unsustainable fiscal situation with unsustainable fiscal situation with pressures and a £22 billion black hole and we had to take difficult decisions to remedy that. It is decisions to remedy that. It is important to do that because without the basic fiscal responsibility government should deliver, growth

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will not happen. I thank the right honourable Minister for giving way. He spoke Minister for giving way. He spoke about facts. When the Labour Party about facts. When the Labour Party won the election was it not the fact the economy was growing and it is now fallen?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now fallen? I'm well aware of the fact we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm well aware of the fact we inherited a fiscal situation that was an unsustainable mess and it is was an unsustainable mess and it is the duty of the government to address that. No responsible government could have let things carry on with the fiscal situation the way that it was when we inherited it. No responsible government could have let that carry on and that is why we are taking this action. That is why we had to take those decisions, to put the responsibility back at the heart of government and return economic stability to public finances and have the basis for the investment on which we can draw the economy and put more money in people's pockets.

I turned to the first set of amendments which we will discuss together, namely one, four, five, together, namely one, four, five, nine, 13, relating to the NHS. These will maintain National Insurance rates at the current level for GPs, dentists, social care providers, pharmacies, as well as those providing hospice care. As honourable members in both cases will know, as a result of the measures in this bill, the NHS will receive an extra £22.6 billion over two years, helping deliver an extra 40,000 elective appointments if you want.

Primary care providers such as dental practice, pharmacy, IKEA, are important and we are providing £20 billion of NHS services and every year we consult with the pharmacy year we consult with the pharmacy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sector. -- eye care. One of the questions that come from my constituents as involving GP surgeries. The National Insurance contributions will affect them immensely. They have told me the choice is between reducing staff and cutting back appointments. Ever mindful the Minister has said £22 billion extra for the NHS but if the billion extra for the NHS but if the impact upon GP surgeries leads to reducing staff, reducing the capability of being able to deliver capability of being able to deliver the health service, is this not a step down in what is offered on the ground in my constituency and all the constituencies? Will be Minister reconsider that in relation to GP surgeries?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable gentleman for raising the question of GPs and for raising the question of GPs and funding and support the government funding and support the government is providing to there because the government is putting an additional £889 billion which brings the total £889 billion which brings the total up in 2025-26, the biggest increase in over a decade, and the changes to the contract will improve services for patients and help progress for patients and help progress towards the government's health mission with analogue to digital, sickness to prevention, hospitals to community care I saw the support for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

GPs as a central part of what the government is saying will be delivered. In my constituency of Horsham, I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In my constituency of Horsham, I have been told the rise will cost them millions of pounds a year. The them millions of pounds a year. The Minister agree it is possible to improve the public sector by taxing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

improve the public sector by taxing the public sector? We inherited public services that needed urgent support. We inherited needed urgent support. We inherited public services that were on their knees. Part of the reason we took was difficult but necessary decisions at the Budget last October was to restore fiscal responsibility and also get public services back on their feet. This is not just about public services, services that people across the UK enjoy, but making sure we have that stability for economic growth because we do not have health service, we do not have a healthy population, and we do not have the transport system in place and so people cannot get to work and the investment to get them back on their feet after 14 years of the party opposite control was not only essential for what people in the UK experience but also to make sure we have economic growth and can put more money in people's pockets.

I have spoken. I will make a little progress. I have spoken about GPs and alongside GPs, the Department Of Health And Social Care has also entered into conversation regarding the 2024, 2025, and 2026 community pharmacy contractual framework and it will be announced in the usual

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The National farmers Association announced they were planning action by reducing services because of the by reducing services because of the invocations of the budget. One of the requests is the release of an the requests is the release of an independent report commissioned by NHS England on the future funding of pharmacies. Now that the government pharmacies. Now that the government is in charge of NHS England, will he speak to his health colleagues to speak to his health colleagues to release that report so that for the consultation is finished, so that actually the public and the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

actually the public and the pharmacies can see exactly what the financial situation of that independent report will be? I thank the honourable gentleman for his intervention. Reports which are in relation to the Department for Health is a subject for ministers in that department. But in terms of the funding that I'm speaking to today, and the final funding settlement will be announced in the normal way following the consultation which is underway. Moving on to dentistry, on dentistry the NHS in England invest around £3 the NHS in England invest around £3 billion each year.

NHS pharmaceutical make dental allocations for 2025/26 have been published alongside NHS planning and guidance. In relation to social care the government has provided a cash increase for core local governments many power of 6.8% in 2025/26 including £880 million of new grant funding provided to social care. Funding that can be used to address a range of pressures faced by the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sector. The figures that he had presented along the answer he gave to my honourable friend, similar to the Prime Minister, money is going in Prime Minister, money is going in that will not mitigate the National Insurance rise. Will he actually confirm that sectors like hospices, social care, GPs, pharmacists, will social care, GPs, pharmacists, will have some support and not tell us about money that is not going to help them with regards to this jobs help them with regards to this jobs

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tax that is coming in? The various organisations or services that I am talking about, services that I am talking about, whether it is GPs or pharmacies or organisations providing social care obviously receive money from obviously receive money from government. The way that these discussions take place is to consider pressures on the providers consider pressures on the providers of those services in the round. That is how the negotiations take place. is how the negotiations take place. In terms of direct support, it is much the same as the previous government approached it under the social care levy.

In terms of social care and GPs, pressures which they face are considered in the round in terms of their funding settlement. In terms of social care, the £880 million of new grant funding is funding that can be used to address a range of pressures faced by adult social.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He makes a interesting point but

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He makes a interesting point but if we look at Children's Hospital, Children's Hospital are going to be Children's Hospital are going to be down by £4.9 million. Most of the funding for children's hospices does not come from the government, it comes from communities, comes from comes from communities, comes from people supporting. Can the minister assure those Children's Hospital such as Acorns in the West Midlands, such as Acorns in the West Midlands, they will not be down by that money that they will be losing through extra NI contributions, and the £4.9 million will be replaced for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Children's Hospital? I thank him for raising the issue

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for raising the issue of hospices. The government's position in relation to hospices as they were referred to in some of the amendments we are considering today. The government recognises the vital role that they play in supporting role that they play in supporting people at the end of life and their families. It also recognises the range of cost pressures hospice sector has been facing over a number of years. We are supporting the of years. We are supporting the hospice sector with £100 million increase in adult and Children's Hospital is to ensure we have the best physical environment for care stop and £26 million of revenue to support children's and young people hospices.

The £100 million will go towards helping hospices to improve the buildings, equipment, and accommodation to ensure patients continue to receive the best possible care.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the point that we are trying to emphasise from this side trying to emphasise from this side of the house is that the government appears to be giving with one hand but taking away with the other. The but taking away with the other. The hospice sector is one example of many sectors that had been adversely

**** Possible New Speaker ****

many sectors that had been adversely affected by the cruel tax the government is placing on them. As I said a few moments ago, the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As I said a few moments ago, the way in which the government supports central government, local central government, local government, and public corporations, and departments and other public sector employers, it is the same way the previous government responded to the Health and Social Care Levy. It is the standard way that the government offers support in terms of employer National Insurance costs. I will make some progress. Because the government wants to shift healthcare out of hospitals and into the community to ensure

**** Possible New Speaker ****

patients neck unity receive personalised care in the most appropriate setting. I thank the honourable Member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable Member for giving way. And I thank him for giving way. And I thank him for doing that. A hospice is located outside my constituency, have to outside my constituency, have to raise £3.6 million each year. They are not government funded, as has are not government funded, as has been alluded. What reassurances can you give to those in the southern you give to those in the southern areas who are currently using their services for end-of-life care that this government will do the right thing and will support our hospices by not including them in this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

National Insurance contributions? I thank a member for her

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank a member for her intervention. I have explained how the government is approaching employer National Insurance contributions and the support the government offers for central government and local government and government and local government and public corporations. This is an established way of responding to National Insurance contribution changes which the last government changes which the last government did. The honourable gentleman has been so persistent he must have an

**** Possible New Speaker ****

been so persistent he must have an amazing point to make. I wait with bated breath. It is amazing what hopefully will get it. It is quite clear from PMQs that the Prime Minister did not get it. Let's tell the real truth, the money that is being given by the government, taxpayers money, to hospices, Children's Hospital is, like Shooting Star and captain Elsa House is for buildings. The National Insurance increase is sitting directly the people that do the work upon which very sick children

**** Possible New Speaker ****

made? The £100 million which the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The £100 million which the honourable member alluded to is important funding to help hospices improve their buildings, their improve their buildings, their equipment, the accommodation to ensure patients receive the best ensure patients receive the best care possible. As I mentioned, there will be £26 million of revenue to support children and people support children and people hospices. More widely, with hospices being charities, hospices provide support for charities through the tax regime which is amongst the most generous in. Includes tax relief for charities and donors worth over £6 million for this tax year.

And finally charities including hospices set up as charities can benefit from the Employment Allowance which this bill doubles from £5000 up to £10,000. This applies to charities of all sizes and particularly the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

smallest. The Minister knows that this is funding for one year. Mainly for funding for one year. Mainly for buildings, as he has admitted. This is going to be a cost on hospices is going to be a cost on hospices every single year going forward. So it will be something that is it will be something that is punitive. It means they have to ask communities for more and more just to give that basic health. Is he to give that basic health.

Is he going to commit to fund Children's Hospital by £4.9 million they are Hospital by £4.9 million they are taking off them every single year or

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not? Yes or no? The points that I was making just before I gave way are recurrent before I gave way are recurrent features of a tax system that features of a tax system that supports charities and donors, it is a recurrent system and a feature of the system which happens every year. the system which happens every year. The increase in the Employment The increase in the Employment Allowance from £5000-£10,500 is a permanent change. We are doing this permanent change.

We are doing this to increase the Employment Allowance. I will make some progress.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madame Deputy Speaker. As is evidenced many members of this House, the Minister for the first time has found itself not able to answer some very straightforward questions members on this side of the house which is the difference the house which is the difference between the allocation of which is between the allocation of which is for capital, and the allocation of money which is for current expenditures. And the impact that difference will have on our hospices difference will have on our hospices and our Children's Hospital, and on GPs and others affected by Labour's GPs and others affected by Labour's jobs tax.

I'm sure members of the House of Lords will notice he has not been able to answer these questions. Prior to this coming back to the House of Lords, the Minister agree to speak to the Chancellor or Chief Secretary, to get a clear answer to the questions raised today about what money is available for capital and what money is available

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to offset the National Insurance charge increase? I'm sorry to hear the right honourable gentleman, Honourable honourable gentleman, Honourable sorry, I'm promoting you, I'm sorry to hear your judgement felt I was being unclear. I think I was being being unclear. I think I was being perfectly clear. He may not agree with the position as he is entitled with the position as he is entitled to not do so in this chamber but I think I was being very clear. The think I was being very clear.

The way in which support works in direct response to the employer National Insurance contribution changes is Insurance contribution changes is the government provide support directly to central government, local government and other corporations, and other public sector employers. As was the case under his government, in relation to discussion around the health and social care levy, this does not apply to GPs, dentists, hospices and other organisations we have been discussing today. The important point I was making that I hope was clear to him and his colleagues on the other side of the house is about the wider support that the government is providing to hospices, the funding we are providing to GPs, the discussions we are having with other primary care providers.

That is the context in which it still has to be seen. The reason why we are able to take decisions around funding for public services is because of those difficult decisions we took at the budget last year. This bill implement one of those decisions. It was noticeable at Prime Minister's Questions that when the Prime Minister asked the leader of the opposition whether she would reverse the National Insurance rise that we are bringing in through this bill, she refused to commit to that.

So I'm unclear exactly what the opposition's position is. I hear one of the honourable gentleman saying that he will update me in his speech later. Or I may have misheard him. I think I heard him say he will confirm later whether the opposition will reverse this. I look forward to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that update. To explain to the house how it is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To explain to the house how it is right that the government covers the right that the government covers the extra National Insurance and the public sector, for example in hospital provision, but it is not hospital provision, but it is not right to at end-of-life care and right to at end-of-life care and hospice. How can that circle be square? If you cover the National Insurance for those who have been treated in hospital but she won't cover it for the hospices which are seeing end-of-life care?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. In answer to the question, the fundamental principle question, the fundamental principle here is about what organisations the government will support in response to the changes in National Insurance to the changes in National Insurance contributions. And the approach the government is taking which is in line with what the previous line with what the previous government did, in relation to the government did, in relation to the health and social care levy. The government provide support for departments and other public sector employees or additional employer employees or additional employer National Insurance and stop as I said to the honourable gentleman, that means central government, public corporations and local government.

Primary care providers and independent contractors would therefore not be exempt from these changes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister makes the point that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister makes the point that this is secondary for primary care providers. But what he doesn't acknowledges that those primary care providers that I hear from, dentists providers that I hear from, dentists and community pharmacies and social and community pharmacies and social care providers still don't know how they would be compensated by government. We are very close to the start of the tax year. These are start of the tax year. These are small businesses which are providing critical primary care services into our communities.

How can I operate where the Minister obfuscate and set where the Minister obfuscate and set other people might talk to them at a later stage about the money that they might receive? Would it not be easier for the Minister to accept the liberal Democrats amendment from the House of Lords and clear this up today?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For clarity, the response in regards other primary care providers regards other primary care providers who are independent contractors is not for direct support in the way not for direct support in the way the government provides it for departments and the public sector departments and the public sector employees. Those pressures which it will face are considered in the round alongside other pressures which they face. It is taken into which they face. It is taken into consideration in the funding which is provided to them.

So it is a different way of the solution being arrived at that he suggested in his arrived at that he suggested in his question. Looking across the debate that we are having today, as I set out earlier, the revenue raised by the decisions in this bill will help to fund public services including the NHS and other social care providers. The proposals and these amendments would put much of that funding at risk. To support these amendments is also to support higher borrowing, overspending, or other borrowing, overspending, or other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

What advice can you give to the hospices in Maidenhead who are hospices in Maidenhead who are looking at an increase of £10,000 and £50,000 in bills respectively? Is he saying we should cut services Is he saying we should cut services or is he expecting to raise more money for the hospices and then give

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it directly back to the Chancellor? I do not know the situation and that particular hospice will not give advice about managing their give advice about managing their operations. I have set out the government approach to providing direct support for departments and public sector employers. It depends on how hospice care is provided because in many cases integrated care boards are responsible for palliative and end-of-life services. When hospices are commissioned by the NHS for work, contractual arrangements should be discussed with the Integrated Care Board at the local level.

I will give way one

**** Possible New Speaker ****

more time. He has got the capital budget, revenue budgets, this is a small revenue budgets, this is a small amount of money, so would he take away from this debate today and look away from this debate today and look at whether switching 4 pounds-5 million to the revenue budget and million to the revenue budget and trying to open up the opportunity is something that would have made it and help these vulnerable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and help these vulnerable I have set out the government

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have set out the government approach to supporting departments and other public sector employers with changes to National Insurance contributions. As I have said earlier, this is the same approach earlier, this is the same approach that his government took with that his government took with relation to the Health and Social Care Levy and were talking about the wider pressures for other organisations, be that GPs or other organisations, and what they face, organisations, and what they face, and how we can support them with the and how we can support them with the pressure on the run.

I have made quite a considerable number of points in relation to these amendments 14, 15, 19, and I would urge the House to disagree with the amendments. I turn to other amendments relating to charities and local governments including special education needs transport. Amendments two, seven, 12, 16, seeks to exempt charities from changes to National Insurance rates and contributions in the bill. The government recognises the crucial role charities play in society and recognises the need to protect smaller charities which is why we've more than doubled the employment elements to £10,500, meaning half of businesses including charities will see no change this year.

As I have previously noted, it's important to recognise all charities can benefit from the employment allowance and as I previously noted the government provides wider support with the tax regime and this is worth just over £6 billion for the tax year up until April 2024. The proposals in these amendments and much of the funding the bill seeks to raise for public services at risk and sought to support the amendments is to support higher borrowing, lower spending, other tax rises. I will turn to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

amendments three, six, 16... I thank him for giving way. After yesterday's arrangements of changes yesterday's arrangements of changes to benefit cuts, the government has said it wants more people going into work. A lot of this is delivered by work. A lot of this is delivered by charities and so we expect more need for charities. How are they likely to cope if they are being further to cope if they are being further taxed with NICs? There will be a gap in the market.

How will the Government bridge the gap?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Government bridge the gap? I thank the honourable gentleman for drawing attention to the very important reforms my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions set out in the House yesterday. A crucial part of getting people back into work. Further details will be set out on interventions to help people back into work. I recognise in some cases charities may provide that support and that is why many of the supports for charities remain generous with £6 million for tax relief for charities and donors for
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page