.png)
.png)
Indecent haste?
Never let it be said that tax legislation is given a thorough scrutiny before it reaches the statute books. Never let it be said, because it just does not happen and this year's excuse for a debate (barely four hours) is derisory.
Paul Boateng began the debate, describing the Finance (No 2) Bill as a 'somewhat shortened version of the FB' containing 106 clauses compared to the original 172. George Tatton drew attention to the fact that when the last Conservative Government called an election immediately after a Budget, it had presented a FB of only 11 clauses to cover the essential and uncontroversial revenue-raising clauses required for each year. However, explaining why the opposition had been relatively amenable to the instant Bill, he said that, as well as containing the necessary revenue-raising clauses, it included 'more complex provisions that, although they deserve fuller scrutiny, are broadly welcome: they have been consulted on'.
The subsequent debate consisted largely of opposition members fruitlessly discussing the Bill, with the odd interspersion from Paul Boateng and Stephen Timms for the Government. There were no Labour backbenchers present and the Bill was ultimately passed without amendment.
This is another sorry episode in recent years of Finance Bills, with measures becoming law after too little discussion or examination. It might be harsh to say that parliamentary processes are being ridden over slipshod, but this increasingly seems to be happening.
