Justine
Greening: We have a lot of sympathy for new clause 23 and
share the hon. Gentleman’s concerns about the impact of this
double taxation issue on bingo halls up and down the country. A
well-known report has pointed out that around 180 bingo halls might be
at risk as a result of a variety of economic pressures. If my memory
serves me correctly, about 108 of them have unfortunately already gone
out of business, so that is a real issue that needs to be understood
properly, and that is precisely what the new clause is trying to
achieve.
The bingo
industry has faced a number of changes in recent years, not least the
smoking ban, the implications of the Gambling Act 2005 and the rise of
internet gambling, all of which have had a dramatic impact on the
clientele and the business and competitive environment in which bingo
halls now operate. Despite that, we should not underestimate the fact
that the industry still provides thousands of jobs across the country
and millions of pounds in tax revenue. The new clause is needed to
understand the impact of those changing circumstances, taxation and the
economic environment in the industry on the future prosperity of bingo
clubs.
Although we
are talking about businesses, those of us who have bingo clubs in our
constituencies know that they are more than just businesses. In many
cases they are community centres. The hon. Gentleman did not mention
the second aspect of his new clause, which referred to the level of
social access to individuals aged over 65. The bingo halls that I have
come across in my part of London provide amazing social access for all
the community and I think there is nothing sadder than seeing a bingo
hall shut down. In the interests of time, I will end my comments there.
Suffice it to say, Sir. Nicholas, it has been a pleasure to serve under
your chairmanship.
Stephen
Pound (Ealing, North) (Lab):
House!
Angela
Eagle: My hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North shouted
“House.” I was thinking that there is an empty House, but
a full
Committee. As
hon. Members have noticed, we have made no change to the taxation of
bingo in the Budget. We looked carefully at the evidence that the Bingo
Association provided on the state of the industry, including the data
relating to revenues and club closures as the industry adapts to
current challenges. Our assessment remains that tax is not at the root
of the bingo industry’s problems, and we do not believe that
there is a tax solution. Bingo benefited from a generous reduction in
its effective tax rate in 2003. The average effect of the tax rate on
bingo, which is measured using the combined impact of VAT and duty on a
comparable basis, is in line with that on casinos, gaming machines and
the lottery. We agree that the bingo industry needs to adjust to the
smoke-free legislation, which to its great credit it supports, but we
do not think that a tax cut is the way to do it.
The bingo
industry’s problems are the product of a combination of factors,
including greater competition in the leisure sector and changing tastes
in leisure activities. The Gambling Act introduced measures that have
benefited the industry. The membership requirement and the 24-hour rule
for the period between joining and playing have been removed, clubs are
no longer required to return all stakes as prizes in the same game and
roll-overs are now allowed, creating the potential for much higher
prizes. Removing VAT from bingo participation fees would not be revenue
neutral, as the industry suggests, and would in fact cost tens of
millions of pounds. Our estimate is made in line with the general
approach to all costings outlined in the Budget book and looks at not
only the amount of tax paid by the industry, but the overall impact on
Exchequer revenues.
The new clause
would require the Government to produce a report of our tax policy on
the bingo industry. As with all tax policy decisions, we will monitor
the full impact of the tax regime and continue to engage with the
industry as it adapts to the changes it faces. To that extent, the new
clause is superfluous. Our evidence was released on 28 May to the Bingo
Association at its request, so it is out there for the hon. Member for
South-East Cornwall to look
at.
Mr.
Breed: I thank the Exchequer Secretary for that response.
I have not seen the report, so I may not agree with the assessment, but
if she confirms that the report that has been released to the Bingo
Association is the one on which her assessment and that of her
Department has been made, we can get that report and will not need to
resort to freedom of information measures and suchlike. On that basis
there would be no need for the new clause, so I beg to ask leave to
withdraw the
motion. Motion
and clause, by leave,
withdrawn. Clause
159 ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Clause
160 ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Question
proposed, That the Chairman do report the Bill (except
clauses 3, 5, 6, 15, 21, 49, 90 and 117 and new clauses amending
section 74 of the Finance Act 2003), as amended, to the
House.
Jane
Kennedy: On a point of order, Sir Nicholas. Before we come
to the end of our consideration of the Bill, I put on record my thanks
to you, and your co-Chairmen, Mr. Cook and Mr.
Hood, for your assistance during these seven weeks. You have guided us
through some complicated debates, and your leadership has shed more
light than some light fittings have on certain occasions. I also thank
the Clerks, the Hansard Reporters, the Doorkeepers and the
police officers for their assistance in ensuring that the business of
the Committee ran smoothly, not least when there was a sudden illness.
I also thank Revenue and Customs and the Treasury, and the
representative bodies that have worked with us during the Bill’s
passage. Their assistance has been helpful. I offer my thanks to the
officials in the Treasury, Revenue and Customs and other Departments
who have helped us so much. I also thank parliamentary counsel, who
constantly work hard behind the scenes and without their essential work
we would not make such progress.
I thank
Opposition Members for their contribution to the debate and for their
hard work in ensuring that the Bill received an excellent level of
scrutiny, up until this afternoon. I express my thanks to my stoic
friends on the Back Benches who have offered sterling support to my
hon. Friends on the Front Bench. I particularly thank my friends, the
Economic Secretary and the Exchequer Secretary, and my hon. Friend the
Member for Waveney for his assistance working through the usual
channels. We
look forward to further deliberations on another occasion. Of course,
the Bill does not now go to the Lords, but it has already had scrutiny.
[Interruption.] Indeed, Middlesex and Sussex will
be at Lord’s this evening. They may have already pulled up
stumps, and I hope that we will do the
same.
Mr.
Hammond: Further to that point of order, Sir Nicholas. I
add my thanks on behalf of the Opposition to you and your fellow
Chairmen for your excellent and diligent chairmanship. The right hon.
lady talked about the stoicism of members of the Committee. Speaking as
someone with the campaign medal from the Standing Committee on the
National Minimum Wage Bill, sitting until 9 o’clock does not fit
into the category of stoicism by the standards of that great marathon.
I understand that Government Members feel frustration at the need
occasionally to prolong consideration of Government measures, but I ask
them to remember that Members of the Opposition, too, feel frustration
on the many occasions when consideration of important matters is
timetabled. The Finance Bill is one of the rare occasions when
timetabling is not imposed. At one time or another, frustration is
shared in equal measure on both sides of the Committee.
I also offer
my thanks to the Clerks, in particular. Opposition Members, who do not
benefit from the official support that Ministers receive, are
particularly dependant on the advice from the Public Bill Office and
the Table Office, and we are grateful for that advice. I also thank the
Hansard writers, the police and the Doorkeepers. I join
the Minister in thanking the representative bodies. We have tried to
represent their concerns, and if Ministers have not picked them up, we
have tried to do so during the Committee’s
proceedings. Finally,
I thank the Financial Secretary, the Economic Secretary and the
Exchequer Secretary for their hard work in Committee and for their
generally good-natured responses to our many inquiries, some of which
were designed to try to develop a better understanding of what the
Government are about and where they are going. It would be fair to
say—you and I had a conversation about it during the break, Sir
Nicholas—that all of them have impressed us with their grasp of
the detail of their brief and with their readiness to engage fully in
the debate and to respond to the questions that were
raised.
Mr.
Breed: May I add my brief thanks to all of those who have
assisted Liberal Democrat Members in many ways? With the paltry
resources that we have at our disposal, we rely significantly on a lot
of professional help. While, at times this evening, some points made
about the new clauses were somewhat tedious and lengthy, I believe that
they were in fact important and might have had greater force if they
had been more succinct.
Information
made available to us and to the general public is a key part of
providing the right sort of opposition and legislation. The Government,
having introduced freedom of information measures and everything else,
still seem to be reluctant to provide basic information to allow
Opposition parties, professionals and so on to assist Government, and
us, to introduce taxation legislation, which is important to
individuals, to the economy of the country and everything else. While
several of the new clauses were withdrawn, I nevertheless agreed with
their thrust in the sense of trying to get the right sort of
information out.
I thank you
personally, Sir Nicholas. Your delightful beginnings and endings to
most of our sittings were extremely humorous. All I have to say now is
that I have yet to work out how much I am going to charge my hon.
Friend the Member for Taunton for my volunteering to be here tonight,
and letting him go.
The
Chairman: The Chairman has the final word. It has been a
good Committee to chair—enjoyable and constructive. There have
perhaps been the odd down and the odd incident, but on the whole it has
been an excellent Committee. I pick up what the hon. Member for
Runnymede and Weybridge said: I am hugely impressed by the way in which
the Ministers, shadow Ministers and party spokesmen have dealt with an
extremely
complicated Bill. They had a good grasp of everything that we debated.
From the Chair, I congratulate them on their
contribution. Back
Benchers, who perhaps have not participated in any major way, have
shown patience. In the main you have shown interest, and you have
certainly shown forbearance. That has been appreciated by the Chair.
Like the party spokesmen, I am particularly grateful to the Clerks, who
are very helpful to Chairmen. Hansard, again, is essential, so
that what we say here can be transmitted accurately, not only
throughout the country, but throughout the world. The police and the
Doorkeepers ensure that we have an orderly Committee and an orderly
debate. I am grateful to them for their
contribution. I
am grateful for what the Committee has said about my co-Chairmen, Frank
Cook and Jimmy Hood. I will certainly pass on thanks and good wishes to
them. Thank you for being a good Committee. Thank you for what you have
done in scrutinising important legislation. Therefore, without further
ado, I shall put the Question
. Question
put and agreed
to. Bill
(except clauses 3,5,6,15,21,49,90 and 117 and new Clauses amending
section 74 of the Finance Act 2003), as amended, to be
reported. Committee
rose at sixteen minutes past Nine
o’clock.
| 
