Results 11921–11940 of 12036 for speaker:Philip Hammond

Orders of the Day — Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation (19 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: Does the hon. Gentleman accept that the confusion and uncertainty over the future of PEPs, TESSAs and ISAs has permanently damaged the saving ethic of the middle classes?

Orders of the Day — Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation (19 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: My right hon. and hon. Friends who have spoken in this debate, yesterday and on Tuesday have covered many of the vital areas of the Budget. They have identified our practical concerns about the operation of the working families tax credit—a laudable attempt to deal with a long-standing problem, but one which we believe is fraught with many difficulties. My right hon. and hon. Friends...

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: Does my hon. Friend agree that amendment No. 4 would allow the Minister to distinguish between technologies in the way that he is suggesting is necessary?

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: Does my hon. Friend agree that amendment No. 3 gives the Minister every power that he would have within the Bill as drafted, plus some additional powers to use subsection (3) in a more subtle way than is currently offered?

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: Does my hon. Friend agree that the levy has something of the nature of a hypothecated tax, which has the extraordinary characteristic of being self-collecting? The spending Department spends and it automatically collects the right amount through the mechanism of the levy.

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: I accept what the Minister says, but he misrepresents amendment No. 3, which simply seeks to give the Secretary of State the power, should she wish, to extend the levy sector by sector to other types of technology, rather than extend it to all forms of electricity. How could the Secretary of State object to being given more power to act more subtly if she wants to?

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: The amendment does not say what the Minister says it does. It says that, if the levy is to rise, the Secretary of State must come back to the House and get that rise approved by means of a statutory instrument, subject to the approval of the House of Commons. What is wrong with that?

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner)referred to this measure as a tin-pot fossil fuel levy. The whole point about the levy is that it is unlimited in its potential extent. At its height, when the levy was 11 per cent., I believe that it raised about £1 billion a year, which by anyone's standards—and whatever the purpose for which it is applied—would hardly be considered...

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: My hon. Friend anticipates the point that I was about to make. A future amendment of section 32 of the Electricity Act 1989 may enable the levy to be used in support of clean coal technology or any other new or existing technologies. It would be interesting in that context if the Minister could tell us the current status of the private Member's Bill introduced by Lord Ezra in another place. I...

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: My hon. Friend is right. Any measures that the Minister was minded to introduce to extend the use of the NOFFO arrangements to support clean coal technology would require an amendment to section 32 of the Electricity Act 1989. Lord Ezra, when the Bill was introduced in another place, sought to include such a provision, but was ruled out of order.

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: We will do our best. Perhaps our right hon. and hon. Friends have gone to the Tea Room for a short break, in anticipation of lengthy proceedings.

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: I will not be tempted down the route that my hon. Friend offers me. Amendment No. 2 offers the only means, within the limited scope of the Bill, of allowing the Minister to show his practical support for clean coal technology. It is a small start. How much excluding that technology from the scope of the levy would be worth would depend entirely on the level of the levy at the time. Clearly,...

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: Doing something positive for the mining industry includes immediately approving new gas-fired power stations, which the Government said they would not do. Gas is an indigenous energy source in the United Kingdom—at least at the moment—unlike some of our other energy sources. I do not suggest that we should pursue energy security at any cost. However, if security can be achieved...

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: The flexibility that I believe the amendments would give the Government could prove useful to the Minister. For the second night in a row, I find myself in the somewhat unusual position of urging the Government to give themselves more discretionary power. We can envisage the advantages that that would have. I turn now to amendment No. 4, which I think stands a little apart from the other...

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a considerable difference between a direct subsidy to a technology and giving it relief from a tax to encourage private sector investment by giving it a relative advantage against other technologies?

Opposition Day: Regulations and Orders Under Section 33M (10 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: Does my right hon. Friend agree that, although the focus over the past six or eight months has been on the pricing of coal contracts to generators, the long-term issue is not about price but about the Government's dilemma—the choice between their environmental targets and their commitment to the coal industry?

Orders of the Day — National Minimum Wage Bill: Operation of Agricultural Wages Orders (9 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: I am not a farmer, like my hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Mr. Boswell); nor do I represent a rural constituency, like my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Mr. Bruce). However, in my constituency there are a number of horticultural enterprises, and over the months, I have become aware of some of the problems facing the agricultural sector in general and the horticultural...

Orders of the Day — National Minimum Wage Bill: Operation of Agricultural Wages Orders (9 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: It is curious that we have not heard much about two thirds of male median earnings for a long time. In Committee, it became apparent that the Minister was not keen to talk about even half male median earnings. On my hon. Friend's question about whether I have made any assessment of where the minimum wage level might be set, I assure him that, throughout the Committee's deliberations, I and my...

Orders of the Day — National Minimum Wage Bill: Operation of Agricultural Wages Orders (9 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: My hon. Friend reminds me of the important contribution to economics made by the Minister in developing the upward-sloping demand curve for labour—the McCartney curve, as future generations of student will come to know it. That economic theory posits that, as the cost for labour rises, so will the demand for it. The logical conclusion of the theory is that a minimum wage set at an...

Orders of the Day — National Minimum Wage Bill: Company Directors (9 Mar 1998)

Philip Hammond: Does my hon. Friend agree that the greatest cause of concern is the lack of symmetry between the treatment of the self-employed and the directors of very small companies? To all practical intents, those two groups are in exactly the same position. Someone who is self-employed can pay himself as little or as much as he can afford, but someone who is a company director would be required by the...


Create an alert

Did you find what you were looking for?

Advanced search

Find this exact word or phrase

You can also do this from the main search box by putting exact words in quotes: like "cycling" or "hutton report"

By default, we show words related to your search term, like “cycle” and “cycles” in a search for cycling. Putting the word in quotes, like "cycling", will stop this.

Excluding these words

You can also do this from the main search box by putting a minus sign before words you don’t want: like hunting -fox

We also support a bunch of boolean search modifiers, like AND and NEAR, for precise searching.

Date range

to

You can give a start date, an end date, or both to restrict results to a particular date range. A missing end date implies the current date, and a missing start date implies the oldest date we have in the system. Dates can be entered in any format you wish, e.g. 3rd March 2007 or 17/10/1989

Person

Enter a name here to restrict results to contributions only by that person.

Section

Restrict results to a particular parliament or assembly that we cover (e.g. the Scottish Parliament), or a particular type of data within an institution, such as Commons Written Answers.

Column

If you know the actual Hansard column number of the information you are interested in (perhaps you’re looking up a paper reference), you can restrict results to that; you can also use column:123 in the main search box.