Clause 64 - Extended ring fence expenditure supplement for onshore activities

Part of Finance (No. 2) Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 2:30 pm on 13 May 2014.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Catherine McKinnell Catherine McKinnell Shadow Minister (Treasury) 2:30, 13 May 2014

That is very much the purpose of the amendment. We need to look at exactly why the Government are giving a tax incentive when their own tax information and impact note states that its impact will be negligible. The Government need to answer that question. Our amendment asks for an estimated total of the tax revenue that is due to be lost over the next 10 years, and it asks about the impact on exploration, because there does not seem to be any assessment of what the impact on exploration will be and what impact it will have on field development over the next 10 years. We want a little more transparency from the Government in relation to the potential impacts.

I can see that Government Back Benchers are interested in the subject. I am sure they would support greater transparency from the Government as to what their intentions are and what their assessments are of the impact of the tax incentive that is being granted in the Bill.