| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Brady: The House is being asked to agree to sweeping new powers, which can be changed almost at whim, and we have not even seen the draft regulations. Will the Minister guarantee that the House will have a chance to debate and vote on the regulations, once those are available?
Mr. Timms: I shall come to that question in a moment, because others have raised it as well. First, let me comment on the points made by the hon. Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope), who asked why we could not introduce the measure in next year's Finance Bill. The convention is that national insurance is outside the scope of Finance Bills, and must be dealt with in social security legislation. This is our opportunity to deal with the matter, which is why we are introducing it now.
Mr. Chope: If it is a social security matter, why is the Treasury in the lead on the regulations?
Mr. Timms: Because, as the hon. Gentleman knows, the responsibility for national insurance policy has been transferred to the Treasury through the Contributions Agency transfer legislation, which a number of us enjoyed debating not long ago. However, this is still a matter for social security legislation.
The hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon (Mr. Burnett) asked for assurance that the income tax and national insurance procedures around this change will be carefully aligned. They will, and he is absolutely right to say that subsection (9) allows us to achieve that. It is important that we achieve that, and that is how we shall proceed. The regulations that will put the measure into effect will be subject to the negative procedure, as is standard for national insurance measures. The House will then have the opportunity to debate them if it chooses to do so.
This important measure closes a significant loophole in the legislation, which loses the national insurance fund hundreds of millions of pounds--£216 million in the long term. That is less than some hon. Members have said, but it is a substantial sum. We cannot, as the hon. Member for Twickenham suggested, sit around and do nothing and take our time over this matter. We must move swiftly to deal with the problem. We must ensure that, from April next year, there is not the unlevel playing field that I have described, and that people are required to pay the national insurance that the House has determined is due from them.
Mr. Duncan Smith:
I have never heard such a lot of rubbish in my life. Labour Members are sitting there like a bunch of sheep. Half of them have not even bothered to read this new clause. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) correctly said, the new clause is breathtaking. I have never seen anything quite like it. It moves from being a Henry XIII clause to being a Louis XIV clause--absolute power to the absolute monarch--before any consultation.
The Minister quietly slipped out the fact that the regulations will subsequently be subject to the negative procedure of the House. There will not be even a limited
ability to debate them. As my right hon. Friend said, the most breathtaking part is new subsection 9, which states that
Late in the day, after we have been through Committee stage, the Government dump this massive element into a Bill, which allows for only a limited amount of debate and no real scrutiny. The Government have set the benchmark for scrutinising the Bill. Their document, "The Better Regulation Guide", comes from the Cabinet Office: I gather that the unit is chaired by Lord Haskins. One wonders when Lord Haskins will realise that the Government do not bother to find out what business wants, but perhaps that is in his interest.
In the foreword to the document, the Prime Minister says:
The Minister says, "Don't worry. At some point in the future, these assessments will be made", but all the regulations are in the new clause. He does not have to listen to the consultations. Why should he bother? He can dismiss them and tear up anything that he likes, because he has the power. It is outrageous.
This document sets out the process: formal consultation followed by the achievement of compliance, the enforcement regime, sanctions and the appeals procedure. Right at the end, it says:
What the Government have produced is an outrage. They have dumped this provision into the Bill at this late stage. As Opposition Members have said, many people in the oil, IT and building industries will suffer extra costs.
When will the Government realise that competition is not just here in the United Kingdom? When will this Government who believe in a greater Europe realise that
outside the United Kingdom is a competitive area, for whose purposes they will hamstring British business? They will have done untold damage, and we should vote against the new clause.
Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:
"the Treasury may with the concurrence of the Secretary of State"--
forget about that now; this lot are no longer in charge because the Government passed national insurance contributions to the Treasury--
"by order make such modifications of the preceding provisions of this section as the Treasury think appropriate for that purpose."
So there we have it. The Treasury can tear up the new clause any time it likes by order. They do not have to come back to the House. The whole thing is appalling.
"A fair, decent and safe society depends on good regulation."
This measure is clearly not that. The Prime Minister goes on:
"The intended benefits of regulation disappear, often to be replaced by less choice, higher prices and lower employment and investment. This can be particularly damaging to our small firms."
Having ignored the first part, he says:
"I have therefore decided that no regulatory proposal which has an impact on business, charities and voluntary bodies should be considered by the Government without a thorough assessment of the risks, costs and benefits, a clear analysis of who will be affected and an explanation of why non-regulatory action would be insufficient."
Those are the Prime Minister's own words. No doubt, the Chancellor does not think that the Prime Minister is in charge, and takes his own view.
"At this stage you will be ready to put specific recommendations to Ministers for them to make final decisions. You will need to present the responsible Minister with the Regulatory Impact Assessment for him or her to sign."
That should be done before we get to that stage, not after. The Minister tells us not to worry, because we should trust him. Trust the Government? The Government do not care. They have imposed £39 billion of extra cost on business since they came to office, and now this.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |