| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Environment
5. Norman Baker (Lewes) (LD): What further plans he has to encourage the adoption of good environmental practice through the use of economic instruments. [221070]
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (John Healey): We will continue to build on the success that we are achieving in the use of economic measures to protect the environment. As with other taxes, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will give a policy update in the Budget next week.
Norman Baker: Does the Economic Secretary agree with the conclusions of the report on fiscal incentives published last month by the Institute for Public Policy Research and the Green Alliance, which said that many people felt that
"the government was providing clear signals about the importance of climate change and the need to take action, but that there was no clear link between this overall message and individual policies."
In other words, the Government's use of economic instruments is not working. Will they, in particular, consider replacing the climate change levy with a carbon tax and stop trying to water down Britain's commitments under the EU emissions trading scheme?
John Healey:
I do not agree with that at all, and if the hon. Gentleman looks at the range of measures that we have introduced since 1997 he will realise that it is a difficult argument to sustain. I do not doubt the hon. Gentleman's commitment to the environment—he speaks on that subject for his party—but his problem is the Liberal Democrats' lack of credibility and consistency. They always say one thing and do another. I have to tell the hon. Gentleman that they have been rumbled, because the director of Greenpeace has said that they
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1670
"lecture other political parties on the environment and then fail to apply those principles in places which they actually control."
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow) (Lab): Will Ministers get together with Derek Simpson and his senior colleagues in the engineering section of Amicus? What could be a better economic instrument to help the environment than doing something to finance new nuclear stations at Sizewell, Hinckley and Hunterston?
John Healey: As it happens, I was with senior officials from the Amicus union, including the general secretary, only last Friday, but they did not raise that matter with me. If my hon. Friend would like to bring a delegation of officials from that union who have an interest in this, I would happily see him to discuss those issues.
Mr. Howard Flight (Arundel and South Downs) (Con): Do the Government believe in the implicit principle of their environmental taxes—that fiscal incentives and disincentives drive behaviour in this and other areas?
John Healey: The short and simple answer is yes. It is fundamental to the rationale of many of the polices that we have introduced. However, as the hon. Gentleman knows, because we have dealt with these matters in our discussions on Finance Bills, it is not simply a question of environmental taxes—other economic measures such as voluntary arrangements, trading agreements and public support measures are often equally important in tacking the challenges that we face in relation to climate change.
Lawrie Quinn (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab): My hon. Friend will know about the difficulty of disposing of plastics and the problems that it causes the environment. What can his Treasury colleagues do to encourage small firms that want to innovate through trying to find other sources and different ways of disposing of plastics? Econoplas, a firm in my constituency, converts and recycles plastics to create an effective drainage medium, which helps to benefit the environment through drainage schemes in rural areas. Would my hon. Friend be interested in hearing about that good innovation and bringing it to the attention of the regional development agencies?
John Healey: I am well aware of my hon. Friend's efforts to promote the interests of businesses and jobs in his constituency, and I pay tribute to him for that. I will write to him with details of new tax reliefs that we have recently put in place precisely to encourage the development of new, environmentally friendly technologies. If those special reliefs to try to help us to tackle some of the environmental problems that confront us are of interest to the company that he mentioned, I will happily meet him and the company.
Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde)
(Con): I am sure that the Economic Secretary acknowledges that carbon dioxide emissions from the transport sector have continued to increase in recent years. Why, therefore, has no United Kingdom bioethanol plant been built so far, to fulfil our European Union requirements to blend biofuels with
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1671
non-biofuels? Why has the European Union apparently rejected Britain's proposals for emissions trading in the air sector?
John Healey: In fact, transport-related emissions have fallen by 50 per cent. in the past decade. The right hon. Gentleman will know that the duty discounts—of which he was one of the strongest advocates, and I pay tribute to him for that—to support the development of the market in and UK production of bioethanol were introduced only in January. It is therefore a little early to tell.
G7 Presidency
6. Paddy Tipping (Sherwood) (Lab): What economic priorities he has set to be achieved during the presidency of the G7. [221071]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Gordon Brown): Our aims are: that all countries agree to play their part in maintaining global growth and stability; that structural economic reform is taken forward to increase growth; and that, with the reform of the international institutions, we ensure that the world's poorest can share in rising prosperity. Tomorrow, the Commission for Africa will publish its report and the G7 and G8 in Gleneagles will consider it.
Paddy Tipping: Will the Chancellor continue to give Africa a high priority? Ten million people there are co-infected with HIV and TB. Tuberculosis is growing at 4 per cent. and, in parts of the region, only one in three people complete a TB drug programme. Would not investment make a significant difference?
Mr. Brown: My hon. Friend is right and I praise him for his work. Tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and malaria are the diseases that are responsible for millions of people dying unnecessarily every year. The purpose of creating the global health fund was to ensure the capacity to treat them and the availability of immunisation and vaccinations. That is why it is especially appropriate today, when the scientists' report on malaria is published, that the British Government say that we are prepared not only to contribute towards vaccination for tuberculosis but to join other countries in purchasing and therefore financing an advance purchase mechanism for the new drug that may be a preventive vaccine for malaria. When similar work is done on HIV/AIDS, it will be necessary for the Governments of the richest countries to come together to support vaccination and the preventive work on that, too. That is the best contribution that we can make: not only helping in the short term with bed nets for malaria and vaccination for tuberculosis, but saying that, when those drugs are discovered, we will be behind the first advance purchase scheme in the world whereby the rich countries help the poor.
Mr. Oliver Letwin (West Dorset)
(Con): One of the priorities for the G7 is obviously a sustainable tax policy. Has the Chancellor had time, during his pre-election overseas sabbaticals, to consider how to respond to the fact that the tax burden in other
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1672
G7 countries has fallen by 2.5 per cent. of GDP since 1997? What has happened to our tax burden in the same period?
Mr. Brown: I hope that the right hon. Gentleman agrees that tax policy is a matter for national Governments, not international institutions. On the tax take in Britain, I am greatly influenced by his comments on taxation. He said:
Our policy on taxation has been: to reduce the basic rate of income tax; to introduce a 10p starting rate of income tax; to cut capital gains tax from 40p to 10p for long-term investment, and to cut corporation tax from 33p to 30p and small business tax from 23p to 19p. That is the record on which we are proud to stand. We are also proud that we have financed the health service by our decision to raise national insurance. I notice that abolishing that is not part of the Conservatives' manifesto now—they lost the argument on the health service.
Mr. Letwin: Unfortunately, the Chancellor does not seem to want to answer the question. It is perfectly clear why not: while the tax burden in other G7 countries has been falling, Britain's tax burden has been rising. As my hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Sir Peter Tapsell) pointed out a moment or two ago, the other G7 Governments will this week be reading the latest International Monetary Fund report, which shows clearly that the Chancellor, on his spending plans, would have to raise taxes further in the next cycle. As he is so reluctant to tell the people of this country, will he tell the IMF and the other G7 Governments which taxes he proposes to raise?
Mr. Brown: I have just explained to the right hon. Gentleman, who does not seem to be able to listen, that we have cut the basic rate of income tax, we have cut income tax through the 10p rate, we have cut capital gains tax, we have cut corporate tax and we have cut small business tax. When he stood in the 1997 election, he had to report that the Conservative party had raised taxes in many different areas. We will not take any lectures from the Conservative party on taxation. The leader of the Conservative party said to his conference on 5 October:
Mr. John McFall (Dumbarton) (Lab/Co-op): The Chancellor is aware that the Treasury Committee visited China last week in the wake of his successful visit. During his visit, did he detect a positive attitude by the Chinese authorities to engage with the G7, the IMF and the World Bank? During our presidency of the G7, has the Chancellor made any progress in ensuring the reform of those international forums, to take account of the current hugely significant impact of China on the global economy?
Mr. Brown:
As my right hon. Friend knows, as he is well versed in these matters, China has been present at the last two meetings of the G7 Finance Ministers for a discussion on its economy and the world economy.
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1673
China, India, South Africa and Brazil will be invited to a special meeting of the G8 summit at Gleneagles with the other G8 leaders. The level of engagement with China is therefore increasing every year. What I found in China was a willingness on the part of China to co-operate with the United Kingdom, a huge market for exports of British goods in the future, and a huge interest in working with this British Government to solve some of the global problems, including international debt and poverty in the poorest countries.
Ms Julia Drown (South Swindon) (Lab): Will one of the economic priorities include trade justice? Does the Chancellor think that he can use his position to consider agricultural subsidies, both from America and the common agricultural policy, so that we can get serious reform? At the moment, subsidised exports are being dumped on the poorest people in the world, and they cannot afford that to continue.
Mr. Brown: I understand the work that my hon. Friend has done in promoting both trade justice and debt relief over the past few years. We are all grateful for the work, which has brought significant results, with non-governmental organisations and others. Over the next few months, the pressure will grow on America and the European Union to enable an agreement on world trade to be possible in Hong Kong in December. Our proposal to end export subsidies is essential. It will also be necessary for us to offer to help countries in Africa, in particular, to have the capacity to enable them to trade. They will need investment in infrastructure, transport and communications so that they can trade fairly with the rest of the world. Part of the settlement at Hong Kong depends on our ability to provide additional overseas development aid to enable infrastructure to be built in those countries.
Mr. David Laws (Yeovil) (LD): Will the Chancellor make it one of his G7 priorities to get international agreement on rules on Government borrowing? Does he still stand by the statement that he made in a speech in 1995, before he was elected to Government, that there should be tough, independent, external scrutiny of whether the Government are meeting their fiscal rules?
Mr. Brown: The hon. Gentleman knows that every organisation in the world comments on fiscal figures in every country. There is not a lack of external scrutiny of our figures. Scrutiny of the Liberal Democrats' figures might be improved, however, because none of the sums add up.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |