HC Deb 05 April 1984 vol 57 cc1101-2
7. Mr. Winnick

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many letters he has received since introducing his Budget.

The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Ian Stewart)

More than 2,000 letters have been received.

Mr. Winnick

The authors were probably wasting their time. Is it not right that the Government do not expect any reduction in unemployment during the next financial year? Is the Minister aware that any Budget that does not lead to a reduction in the misery of mass unemployment must be considered a failure?

Mr. Stewart

The hon. Gentleman and the Labour party should regard themselves as miserable failures for having imposed a tax—the national insurance surcharge —on jobs. The removal of that tax by the Government will be the equivalent of benefiting industry and employers by £3,000 million a year. It is downright effrontery for the hon. Gentleman to criticise the Government for the effect of the Budget on jobs.

Mr. Andrew MacKay

Is my hon. Friend aware that many of us are very much in favour of the imposition of VAT on building extensions and alterations, but have great reservations about the introduction of the imposition by June as it will have an effect on existing contracts for which private individuals have already budgeted closely?

Mr. Stewart

I take my hon. Friend's point. It is always difficult to establish a cut-off date for such a change. However, there are various means open to those who will be affected. For example, they can pay for the work under contract before 1 June. If the work is completed before 1 June, it will be relieved of VAT. There will be apportionment of time for work that spans that date.

Mr. Robert Sheldon

What is the Minister doing for small unincorporated companies which do not pay corporation tax but benefit from capital allowances? Their investment will suffer as a result of the Budget.

Mr. Stewart

The right hon. Gentleman may have overlooked the fact that the Budget contains measures to reduce the burden of income tax for all. The removal of the national insurance surcharge will help unincorporated businesses as well as the incorporated.

Mr. Forman

Were there some letters among the correspondence received by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in which it was stated that the Budget would be good for employment? Were there letters in which it was stated that there was a need to do more for the long-term unemployed — specifically, the need to extend the long-term rate of supplementary benefit to the long-term unemployed?

Mr. Stewart

There were many letters among the total to which I referred which gave a strong welcome to the Budget, both for what it has done for the prospects for jobs and for economic recovery. Social security matters are normally dealt with by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services.

Mr. Terry Davies

How many letters drew attention to the fact that this Budget gives most to the people who already have most and does nothing for the people who have least? When Ministers reply to the letters do they explain this as being inevitable, accidental or a direct result of Government decision?

Mr. Stewart

It was a direct result of Government decision that we concentrated proportionately the greatest help on those who are lowest paid. It is something of which Conservative Members are proud.