| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Barry Porter (Wirral, South) : Good.
Mr. Nellist : The hon. Gentleman may say, "Good" ; but already 31 unemployed people, three people in receipt of invalidity benefit and 15 pensioners have been put away because they could not pay the poll tax. The council tax legislation will continue those enforcement procedures.
This Bill should be defeated tonight. The Government ought to have introduced 100 per cent. rebates immediately, and restored the level of rate support grant that existed in 1979, when the Conservative Government were first elected after a period of Labour rule. They ought to have reduced the level of local taxation, whatever version they chose to apply.
The Bill's immediate task, however, should be to halt the prosecution of millions of people--many of them pensioners, many receiving invalidity benefit and many with no income of any kind. I know that the Minister will
Column 237
refuse to do it, but an amnesty should have been declared. I warn the House that an amnesty will have to be declared. As somebody once said," 'twere well
It were done quickly."
9.39 pm
Mr. John Marshall (Hendon, South) : It is always interesting to speak after the hon. Member for Coventry, South-East (Mr. Nellist). The only trouble is that there will be few more opportunities to do so. When he calls for an amnesty for law breakers, it is a condemnation of what he and other hon. Members have done. It is wrong that law makers should ever become law breakers. The hon. Member for Coventry, South-East is part of a campaign that could be summarised as follows : can pay, won't pay. Both the hon. Gentleman and his friends could easily have paid the community charge. They chose not to do so. They chose to rob their local authorities of much- needed cash.
This has been an interesting debate. The hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould) claimed that he is a model of consistency. I remind him that in 1983 and 1987 the Labour party campaigned for one-sided nuclear disarmament. I remind him, too, that as late as 1989 the Labour leader of the European Parliament was an opponent of British membership of the Community. The Labour party never has been consistent and never will be.
Last night the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) spoke about the impact of the council tax upon Barnet. When he was asked what the impact of his proposals would be upon Barnet, he offered this memorable sentence :
"One simply cannot pluck figures out of the air."--[ Official Report, 16 December 1991 ; Vol. 33, c. 95.]
He was willing to shed crocodile tears but he was unwilling to tell the people of Barnet what his proposals would mean for them. The reason is that the Labour party has never cared a tinker's cuss for the ratepayers, council tax payers or community charge payers of Barnet. It regards the people of Barnet and of other London boroughs as people to be exploited by very high taxes and very high charges. The people about whom he spoke yesterday are those upon whom he would seek to impose a 59 per cent. tax in the first Labour Budget. My point regarding the impact of the council tax on London and Barnet is that 85 per cent. of future expenditure by local authorities will be financed by Government grant. It is essential that the level of Government grant should reflect the needs of London and London's commitments rather than the number of houses in London in the top two bands.
On Second Reading I asked the Minister for Local Government and Inner Cities to look at the London Regional Transport anomaly in so far as it affected the outer London boroughs. I told him that it would be a touchstone of his sincerity, in that it would show whether he was committed to the needs of Barnet and, indeed, of Enfield. My hon. Friend showed that he had dealt with that anomaly when he said that the rate support grant would cover 1992-93. He was fair to the people of Barnet. As my hon. Friend has stood by the people of outer London, it would be wrong of me if I did not stand by him tonight. He stood by us ; it would be churlish of us not to support him this evening.
A choice faces the people of Barnet and outer London. Do they support the Liberal party's scheme, whose figures
Column 238
are so suspect that the boffin behind it decided to resign? Do they support the Labour party's scheme, where the figures are so horrific that the hon. Member for Brightside said that he could not pluck them out of the air and publicise them? He knew that they were so horrible that they would lose the Labour party votes at the next election. Or should the people of Barnet and outer London support the scheme of my right hon. and hon. Friends? I do not claim that the council tax is perfect, but it is preferable to the alternatives that have been put forward by the Opposition parties.9.44 pm
Mr. Dick Douglas (Dunfermline, West) : I shall deal not with the comments of the hon. Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall), but with the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, South-East (Mr. Nellist) -- [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Coventry, South-East is an honourable friend. I have great respect for someone who has the courage of his convictions. The House owes him a debt for standing up for them.
I am a reluctant law breaker-- [Interruption.] Goldilocks on the Government Front Bench should listen ; it is not really pantomime time. The poindings and warrant sales in Scotland will continue, although we sought to remove that provision from the Bill. Three million warrants have been issued. It has been alleged that people in the Scottish National party and others precipitated a great wave of law breaking in Scotland, but the figures show that the momentum will continue as long as the poll tax legislation remains on the statute book.
I wish to tell the House what happens under poinding. My local authority had several options. It is all very well for the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) and others to suggest that local authorities do not have options. A local authority has various means available to it to get people to pay under diligence. My local authority tried to arrest bank accounts and to have poinding. Having lost cases in the sheriff courts, and because it had the resources to do so, it appealed. That probably cost £30,000, such was the tenacity of that Labour council.
I have pleaded here with Labour Members, and some honourable exceptions have stood up and been counted on this issue. Let us not kid ourselves that resentment about the poll tax does not continue, even though clause 100 abolishes it. If this situation continues, people will not respect the law.
It is all very well for the Prime Minister and others to say that if one is a law maker, one cannot be a law breaker, but what did the Prime Minister do at Maastricht? He opted out. The difference here is that these folk cannot opt out of the strictures of the poll tax. They cannot use the big battalion. They have to defend themselves from the actions of sheriff officers and so on. People in Scotland will continue to oppose the poll tax as long as the Government try, through local authorities, to raise local revenue by such an unfair means.
9.47 pm
Mr. Blunkett : I congratulate and thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould) and those of my hon. Friends who served night after night, on clause after clause, in Committee--not, like Banquo's ghost, viewing it from the gallery occasionally just after 10 o'clock, but every night looking at the detail of the Bill, understanding
Column 239
it in a way that we would have been delighted to explain to the hon. and learned Member for Perth and Kinross (Sir N. Fairbairn) had we had the opportunity.I apologise to the Disney Corporation for having called this tax a Mickey- Mouse valuation system. The difference between Mickey Mouse and this system is that Mickey Mouse brings pleasure to millions of children and great benefit to the world as a whole, whereas the Bill brings misery and unfairness to millions of people.
I apologise to the makers of KitKat for the comparison which I made in terms of the cheapest valuation. At least KitKats are nourishing and provide value for money--which 20p valuations on properties certainly do not.
We have a banding system which is nonsense. We have a valuation process which is cheap and nasty. We also have a regional banding disparity. The right hon. Member for Brent, North (Sir R. Boyson) would have done better to contribute to the debate on that matter last night than on Third Reading, when it is all past and gone. The hon. Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall) asked what our proposals would mean in the borough of Barnet. Instead of an average of £617--the Government's figure for properties in Barnet--our proposals would mean an average of £456. That would be a clear saving, even in a borough where nearly 50 per cent. of households will be in the highest bands.I hope that he will return to his borough and tell the people exactly what the Government's proposals will mean. They will not mean fairness for those in inner or outer London or for those living elsewhere in the south-east--they will mean deliberate discrimination and a refusal to protect people whose properties are falling in price although their property valuation will be based on the figures for last April. In other words, their properties will be in a higher band than the price of their property warrants 12 months after the given date for the valuation process.
The process is nonsense. It means valuations based on last April's figures, although property prices in London and the south-east are judged to have dropped by 10 per cent. this year alone. It is an absolute outrage and if Conservative hon. Members with constituencies in London and the south-east were representing their constituents properly, they would have said so. The people who cost us as a nation £14 billion in implementing the poll tax are also pushing through this legislation on a guillotine motion. They are the people who refused to listen to the argument about the unfairness of a discount which rewards a millionaire and which can reduce the amount that someone pays merely because he lives alone to an amount below that to be paid by a couple who happen to live in a much cheaper house and in the band below.
The system will cause disquiet and unfairness. People outside the House would learn that if the Conservatives were to win the general election, but they will not win because people will hear of the way in which their properties will be valued and learn about the in-flight valuation. They will see a hot air balloon floating over their gardens and taking photographs. They will ring the local police and ask, "Is this the new head of MI5, or am I being supervised by Big Brother?" The answer will be, "Of course you are. We are checking to see whether there is an extension on the back of your house. Please put the
Column 240
number of your house in big letters on your back lawn or on your roof so we can be sure we don't get the wrong house." There will be in-flight, Mickey-Mouse valuations and discounts which will cost £780 million to implement.Only one amendment was accepted in Committee and it attached to the allowance of councillors any tax due under the new council tax proposals. We proposed it and it will wipe out the whole of the Secretary of State's speeech at this year's party conference. His spech predicated that after 1993 councillors would not be able to vote unless they paid their tax. Our amendment ensures that they will have paid their tax and will have a right to vote, so we have wiped out his vitriolic nonsense--the great Tarzan speech which brought the conference to its feet and which was the restoration of the prodigal son. That was what it was all about. It was nonsense and we knew it, but the BBC dutifully reported it, although it has not reported the passage of the Bill.
The final throw is fairness. Is the tax fair? In one of his three contributions to the debate, the hon. and learned Member for Perth and Kinross summed it up yesterday when he recalled his childhood. He said :
"Nanny would say, Life is not fair, laddie.' "--[ Official Report, 16 December 1991 ; Vol. 201, c. 50.]
Some of us believed that we got rid of nanny last November, but no, here she is again. Nanny is watching us all and nanny said that the Britain of the 1990s would be unfair and the Secretary of State--whether he likes it or not--is carrying out nanny's wishes. The tax is unfair and unworkable and it will be rejected by the British people because it will never be implemented. It will be rejected as the Government will be rejected at the general election. Our fair rates proposals will bring equity and justice and will be implemented as soon as possible after the general election. 9.54 pm
Mr. Allan Stewart : The hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) was his usual good-humoured self, as he was throughout the Committee, although I thought that at one point he was in danger of being carried away by the heat of his own rhetoric, just like a hot air balloon.
We heard an excellent speech from my right hon. Friend the Member for Brent, North (Sir R. Boyson), who rightly condemned Labour's proposals for a rating system. I assure my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Perth and Kinross (Sir N. Fairbairn) that the council tax will not apply to farm land. I will study his other points with great care and interest.
My hon. Friend the Member for Romford (Sir M. Neubert) made some detailed points. I will try to get to them, but I hope that he will excuse me if I do not manage to reach them in the time available. My hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall), in a splendid speech, reminded the House that law makers cannot be law breakers.
I had heard before much of the speech of the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould), although not always in the same order. He was supported by the massed and serried ranks of the Labour party--[H on. Members :-- "Did you count them?"] Yes, I can count up to that number. I refer to two of them--the hon. Members for Derbyshire, North-East (Mr. Barnes) and for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe). I must record that the hon. Lady was a most assiduous member of the Committee. I do not wish to be
Column 241
churlish, but I read in the Scottish edition of The Sunday Times that she does not yet have an office. I am sure that that had nothing to do with her attendance and I hope that the Labour Whips have noted the point.The hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Bellotti) reminded us of the fundamental difference between the Government and the Opposition. He rightly referred to the whole question of the control of local authority expenditure. The hon. Member for Dagenham said in Committee :
"we propose to double the tax base under the control of local authorities by restoring to their control the setting of the business rate."--[ Official Report, Standing Committee A, 19 November 1991 ; c. 9.]
There has never been an announcement that means so much bad news for Scottish business rate payers and for Scottish companies. By the next financial year, the Government will have provided £330 million for Scottish business to move towards a level playing field on business rates. In one move, the Labour party will take away that advantage to Scottish business.
In Committee, the Labour party confirmed that it will have no controls over local authority expenditure. That is without precedent, at least in Scotland. No Government in Scotland since 1929 have taken that view. It was not the view taken by the Labour Government of 1945-50 or by the previous Labour Government.
The message that has come through is absolutely clear. It is the message that the policies of the Lambeths, the Liverpools and the Lothians of the land can be applied everywhere with no controls on behalf of the taxpayer, of the business rate payer or of the council tax payer. That was Labour's message throughout the Committee stage. Its message to local government is, "Spend comrades, spend comrades, spend comrades."
The Labour party proposes a "fair rates" system. The hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) said that the fair rates tax system would be introduced on 1 April 1993, and that in the first instance it would be
Mr. Maxton : Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Stewart : No, because I do not have time.
The hon. Gentleman said that the system would be the old rating system, but that it would be amended thereafter, and he also said that that was the only way in which the system could be introduced. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. There is no way in which the hon. Member for Dagenham can introduce the system south of the border.
Mr. Stewart : I will tell the hon. Gentleman why. His system will be on the basis of a revaluation in 1985. It cannot be done in England.
I commend the Bill to the House. It is a reasonable and practical Bill based on pragmatism and fairness. The Labour party wants to retreat to the rates. In its eagerness for an envy tax, it has abdicated its responsibility for responsible local government. Question put, That the Bill be now read the Third time : The House divided : Ayes 335, Noes 237.
Division No. 31] [10 pm
AYES
Adley, Robert
Aitken, Jonathan
Alexander, Richard
Alison, Rt Hon Michael
Column 242
Amery, Rt Hon JulianAmess, David
Amos, Alan
Arbuthnot, James
Arnold, Sir Thomas
Ashby, David
Aspinwall, Jack
Atkins, Robert
Atkinson, David
Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)
Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)
Baldry, Tony
Banks, Robert (Harrogate)
Batiste, Spencer
Beaumont-Dark, Anthony
Bellingham, Henry
Bendall, Vivian
Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)
Benyon, W.
Bevan, David Gilroy
Biffen, Rt Hon John
Blackburn, Dr John G.
Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter
Body, Sir Richard
Bonsor, Sir Nicholas
Boscawen, Hon Robert
Boswell, Tim
Bottomley, Peter
Bottomley, Mrs Virginia
Bowden, A. (Brighton K'pto'n)
Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)
Bowis, John
Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes
Brandon-Bravo, Martin
Brazier, Julian
Bright, Graham
Brooke, Rt Hon Peter
Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)
Bruce, Ian (Dorset South)
Buck, Sir Antony
Budgen, Nicholas
Burns, Simon
Burt, Alistair
Butterfill, John
Carlisle, John, (Luton N)
Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)
Carrington, Matthew
Cash, William
Chalker, Rt Hon Mrs Lynda
Channon, Rt Hon Paul
Chapman, Sydney
Chope, Christopher
Churchill, Mr
Clark, Rt Hon Alan (Plymouth)
Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)
Clark, Rt Hon Sir William
Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)
Colvin, Michael
Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)
Coombs, Simon (Swindon)
Cope, Rt Hon Sir John
Cormack, Patrick
Couchman, James
Cran, James
Currie, Mrs Edwina
Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)
Davis, David (Boothferry)
Day, Stephen
Devlin, Tim
Dickens, Geoffrey
Dicks, Terry
Dorrell, Stephen
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James
Dover, Den
Dunn, Bob
Durant, Sir Anthony
Dykes, Hugh
Eggar, Tim
Emery, Sir Peter
Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)
Evennett, David
Fairbairn, Sir Nicholas
Fallon, Michael
Farr, Sir John
Favell, Tony
Fenner, Dame Peggy
Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)
Finsberg, Sir Geoffrey
Fishburn, John Dudley
Fookes, Dame Janet
Forman, Nigel
Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)
Forth, Eric
Fowler, Rt Hon Sir Norman
Fox, Sir Marcus
Franks, Cecil
Freeman, Roger
French, Douglas
Fry, Peter
Gale, Roger
Gardiner, Sir George
Garel-Jones, Tristan
Gill, Christopher
Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian
Glyn, Dr Sir Alan
Goodhart, Sir Philip
Goodlad, Alastair
Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles
Gorman, Mrs Teresa
Gorst, John
Grant, Sir Anthony (CambsSW)
Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)
Greenway, John (Ryedale)
Gregory, Conal
Griffiths, Sir Eldon (Bury St E')
Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)
Grist, Ian
Ground, Patrick
Grylls, Michael
Hague, William
Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)
Hampson, Dr Keith
Hanley, Jeremy
Hannam, John
Hargreaves, A. (B'ham H'll Gr')
Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)
Harris, David
Haselhurst, Alan
Hawkins, Christopher
Hayes, Jerry
Hayward, Robert
Heathcoat-Amory, David
Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael
Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)
Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)
Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.
Hill, James
Hind, Kenneth
Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm)
Hordern, Sir Peter
Howard, Rt Hon Michael
Howarth, Alan (Strat'd-on-A)
Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd)
Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey
Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)
Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)
Hunt, Rt Hon David
Hunt, Sir John (Ravensbourne)
Irvine, Michael
Irving, Sir Charles
Jack, Michael
Jackson, Robert
Janman, Tim
Jessel, Toby
Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey
Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)
Jopling, Rt Hon Michael
Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine
Key, Robert
Kilfedder, James
| Next Section
| Home Page |