The Secretary of State fails to recognise that the decrease for those companies is funded by increases for other companies. If the Government had looked at the impact assessment of whether those companies could afford the increase, he would be on stronger ground. The reality is that those getting the biggest rises far outweigh the number getting the biggest decreases. In eight out of nine English regions, more companies will see a 20 per cent.-plus rise than will see a 20 per cent. fall. The Secretary of State cannot claim that the Government are pursuing a strong policy when they have not even bothered to look at how the 40 per cent. of companies that face a rise will manage to pay it. If the Government's calculations are wrong—not that they particularly have any—business rate income could be destabilised.
It would be better to allow all companies to enjoy the minor reduction that they would all get from the inflationary decrease that would have resulted from the multiplier, had the revaluation not gone ahead. Instead of playing party politics, the Secretary of State should get out to the regions that will see the biggest losers and talk to companies about how they will afford to pay. Those increases alone could stifle the recovery before it gets going.
Local Government Finance
Proceeding contribution from
Justine Greening
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 3 February 2010.
It occurred during Legislative debate on Local Government Finance.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
505 c378 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-11 10:08:20 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_618572
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_618572
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_618572