Oral Answers to Questions

John Bercow Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd March 2011 Commons Chamber

[Justine Greening]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. In fact, the previous Government introduced 12 duty rises during their time in office. As he pointed out, they also legislated for a further six rises, bringing in the fuel duty escalator, and these would have been on top of inflation rises. It was absolutely amazing to see the Labour party table a motion last week bemoaning the amount of tax that motorists are paying, when they legislated for all—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am grateful to the Minister, but we must concentrate on the policy of the Government.

[Stephen Williams (Bristol West) (LD)]

I am sure that the Chancellor will respond to the concerns of the motorist tomorrow in a fiscally responsible and environmentally sustainable way, but does the Minister agree that road fuel duty is a blunt instrument for taxing motoring, and that what we need in the long run is a more flexible, market-oriented mechanism for taxing road use?

--- Later in debate ---

[Danny Alexander]

I have seen that letter and, as a fellow highland MP, I am fully aware of the impact that high fuel prices have on families and individuals. We have already taken steps to deliver a 5p duty discount to island communities, and I hope that we will be able to do what we can tomorrow, but that will be a matter for the Chancellor to announce in the Budget statement.

[Mr Speaker]

Eric Joyce is not here. I call Andrew Stephenson.

[Andrew Stephenson (Pendle) (Con)]

7. What fiscal measures he has taken to support economic growth in the manufacturing sector.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Phillips]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that answer. The shadow Chancellor was reported as saying in Saturday’s The Daily Telegraph:

“The idea that Labour profligacy caused the crisis is utter tosh.”

Does my hon. Friend agree that the only tosh to be seen in that statement is the suggestion that Labour had not created the mess we are in? Is it not the case, as the CBI has said, that the previous Government’s target of balancing the budget by 2018 was set too far off to—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We are asking about current policy, and some of these questions are simply—[Interruption.] Order. We have got the gist.

[Mr Hoban]

My hon. and learned Friend is absolutely right, and a number of organisations, both at home and abroad, have criticised the lack of ambition of the previous Chancellor’s plans. That is why the Obama Administration, the International Monetary Fund, the OECD, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the CBI, the Governor of the Bank of England, 35 leaders of British businesses, the European Commission, the World Bank, three major credit rating agencies and the world’s biggest bond trader have been backing our plans—the only person the shadow Chancellor can find to back his is The Guardian.

--- Later in debate ---

[Claire Perry (Devizes) (Con)]

Is the Minister aware of my freedom of information request from last September which found that the previous Government never carried out an equalities impact assessment—not in the March Budget, the December pre-Budget report or the March 2010 Budget? They never did it either.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am sorry but I must repeat, and I hope that the message will be heeded, that questions must be about the policy of the current Government.

[Mary Macleod (Brentford and Isleworth) (Con)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that raising the income tax threshold, protecting spending on the NHS and increasing spending on social care will definitely benefit women?

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

In terms of the value for money of decisions taken by the Treasury, whether on road fuel tax or other things, does the Minister agree that one of the best value creations of this Government has been the increase in apprenticeships, which is widely appreciated around the country? Does he agree that apprenticeships are critical both to our growth strategy and to the reduction of youth—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am sorry, but that question suffers from the disadvantage that it bears absolutely no relation whatever to the question on the Order Paper.

[Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)]

May I suggest a much quicker way of changing the VAT rate without that being illegal—by pulling out of the European Union?

[Mr Speaker]

I have to say that that was not much better, but the Minister may have a go.

[Mr Gauke]

To be fair, if we wanted to reduce tax on fuel through the VAT rate that is exactly what we would have to do, so perhaps that is not the best way of doing it.

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. As usual, demand has exceeded supply, but I am afraid we must move on.