Finance (No. 2) Bill

Yes, so did he. He seemed to be saying that unless the Government employ everybody in the country, no money will ever be spent. He said, ““You can't reduce the number of people in the public sector, because they're the people who have to go to the sandwich shop.”” Of course, people in the private sector do not eat or buy anything; they have a robotic existence. I wonder what happened before there was such a large public sector. The hon. Gentleman went on to give examples of private industry in his constituency that have benefited from loans from the regional development agencies. That is where I think the confusion lay. He was talking about Government investment, not Government spending on public sector jobs and so on. The hon. Gentleman talked about the regional development agencies, but there was provision for a regional growth fund in the Budget. The Government have also put measures in place in the Budget to reduce national insurance contributions for those setting up companies outside the south-east, and have reduced capital gains tax. As I pointed out in my intervention on the hon. Member for Wirral South (Alison McGovern), that helps investment from international business to come in. Yorkshire Forward, a regional development agency, says at the bottom of its e-mails, ““We have created more than 52,000 jobs.”” No, it has not. Private business creates the job. If Government money is used, the job is not ““created””; there was a subsidy that eventually has to be paid back. Government money is just private money that the Government have nicked and are trying to put back. It is not our money. We do not earn it. We take it from the wealth creators. If we are not creating that wealth in the first place, how can we go on and spend it? The deficit deniers do not understand or do not accept that every one of us would like to stand here and say, ““Do you know what? I'm going to replace every school in my constituency, and I want a first-class service.”” Every one of us wants a first-class service—that is why we went into politics—but we must be realistic. We must be pragmatic. We must understand that we cannot go on spending money as we have been doing. I take issue with the suggestion that the move to a 20% rate of VAT is permanent and that we have no intention of lowering it because ideologically we want to tax more. Ideologically we want to tax more? I have never heard such nonsense. We are the party of low taxation. We made it clear in every speech that at each Budget we would review and lower taxation if we could. It has never been said that VAT would remain at 20%. One would hope that we may be able to move to a lower taxation rate. In the short time that I have left, I shall move on to a specific topic. The Bill refers to closing tax loopholes. Everybody in the Chamber wants to achieve that because there is a great deal of revenue out there that the Government are not getting. Let us look at the way money circulates in the economy. Representations have been made to me that red diesel be used in emergency service vehicles. We can see the sense in that. Emergency vehicles are paid for through Government money, VAT is paid, and money is being circulated and coming back. That is a sensible argument and would impose no cost on the Exchequer. I make a plea to the Minister to consider something else. I am proud that we have an excellent Yorkshire air ambulance—indeed, we have two. They are on BBC 1 every day at 9.15 am, relating their exploits in rescuing people who have got into difficulties in areas such as the Yorkshire dales. That leads me to say what an excellent maiden speech my hon. Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon (Julian Smith) made, describing that countryside, where people like to go hiking. We know that accidents can happen, so we have the air ambulance. Yorkshire air ambulance costs £2.628 million a year to run and not one penny comes from Government. It is all raised through charitable giving. I therefore urge the Minister to consider, when the time is right, exempting from fuel duty Yorkshire air ambulance, the other air ambulances and the people who contribute to the emergency services? They would still raise their money through charitable giving, but that exemption on the 162,632 litres of fuel that the Yorkshire air ambulance used last year would help greatly to reduce overall costs. I close with a further plea. We have had several Finance Bill debates and all we hear, all the time, is cherry-picking: ““We don't want to do this bit. We don't want to do that bit. The Government are hitting the poorest here. They are not doing enough for the rich there.”” Can we please start to look at the Finance Bill holistically? We have raised tax thresholds. We are reducing national insurance. We have raised capital gains tax. We are reducing corporation tax to bring in more businesses and create more jobs. We are putting in place regional growth funds. Can we please stop the cherry-picking, have a sensible debate and look at the arguments sensibly, holistically and in a grown-up way, and can we please stop denying that the deficit exists?