Clause 10 - Further contributions by Inland Revenue
Child Trust Funds Bill
4:45 pm
Mr David Laws (Yeovil, Liberal Democrat)
I should have thought that the hon. Member for Tatton would not table such an amendment. It seems out of spirit with the traditions followed by the Conservative party such as simplicity and focusing public expenditure where it is most
needed. The amendment would be administratively complicated. There is no clarity that the public expenditure involved would have a significant gain, both in terms of its incentive effect and in comparison with other uses. Its worst aspect is that it is attempting to link a payment for something that is supposed to be voluntary work. I question what signal the hon. Gentleman is trying to send out about voluntary work. Presumably he believes it to be a good thing because people do not need to be paid for it and there is an element of voluntary choice. However, under the amendment, he is linking it to a payment that will be made to an account that would have the benefit of neither making the work truly voluntary nor even of giving a payment that would be a genuine incentive because, in many cases, people will not receive it for five or 10 years. The amendment is not helpful, and I hope that I have persuaded the Minister, if she were minded to go down such a route, to resist strongly.