-
Asked if constituents can expect to pay double for energy bills this year compared to last year. Concerned about the impact on cost of living.
-
Questioned the strategy of attracting high-worth individuals for economic growth in Wales, citing mixed results over decades. Raised concerns about lack of consultation with Welsh Government on matters affecting social care.
-
Asked the Minister to press the Health Secretary to bring forward a tobacco control plan, highlighting the £1.2 billion spent annually by local authorities on smoking-related social care needs.
-
Welcomed the support for constituents but inquired about funding for the cap on care costs, which was a significant promise by previous Governments. Concerned about how to fund it now that the levy is being repealed.
-
Further questioned the Minister on consultation with Welsh Government regarding policy affecting social care in Wales and highlighted the lack of say by the Welsh Government.
-
Acknowledged the narrative of growth but expressed concerns about market confidence during the interval between assertions today and the medium-term fiscal strategy announcement on 31 October. Highlighted the impact of inflation and interest rate changes.
-
Asked about the impact of repealing the levy on NHS waiting lists, particularly in his local hospital's catch-up programme. Concerned about economic inactivity and labour shortages.
-
Asked for clarification from the Minister on advice received from DHSC regarding what will not be done now that funding has been reduced.
-
Asked the Minister to explain the £17 billion revenue from the levy intended for social care and NHS funding, questioning the fiscal stability of removing such a large amount without additional taxation or borrowing.
-
Echoed James Cartlidge's concern about £17 billion revenue removal and its impact on NHS and social care funding, pressing the need for clarity on fiscal stability. Also requested approval for a new hospital in Stockton.
-
Mr. Murray emphasised that Labour welcomed the U-turn on national insurance rise and criticised the wider economic strategy which he stated has caused chaos, lacks a growth plan, and relies heavily on borrowing. He highlighted that Labour’s approach is to use fairer taxation methods like ending non-dom tax status to fund NHS investment.
-
Mr. James Cartlidge interjected, asking Mr. Murray how he would fund social care and address the backlog if Labour supported the repeal.
-
Mr. Alex Cunningham agreed with his colleague's support for the U-turn but questioned where the funding will come from, suggesting a lack of clear alternatives.
-
Mr. Chris Philp interjected to question the viability and sufficiency of Labour's funding proposals, pointing out discrepancies in the amount raised compared to the cost.
-
He expresses reservations about removing the health and social care levy, emphasising fiscal responsibility and the long-term impact on future generations. He highlights OBR predictions showing an increase in healthcare expenditure from 10.3% to 17.5% of GDP over 50 years, contributing significantly to national debt. Cartlidge supports a transparent, hypothecated health and social care levy, arguing it provides the discipline needed for health spending but laments its removal. He proposes increasing private healthcare use as a solution, citing higher demand and demographic pressures.
-
Questions the mandate of the new Prime Minister to change policies related to the health and social care levy, noting that no recent general election has provided such a mandate.
-
The amendment repeals the National Insurance levy introduced to fund health and social care reforms. Richard Thomson argues that this represents a significant U-turn from the Conservative party's manifesto pledge not to raise taxes, likening it to an 'antisocial driver doing donuts.' He highlights concerns over the lack of clarity on how funds would be used and criticises the government for abandoning the levy in favour of increased borrowing during economic instability. Thomson emphasises the need for a fairer tax system that balances income and inheritance taxes equitably across the UK, contrasting this with what he sees as an 'incoherent approach' by the current government.
-
[INTERVENTION] Hywel Williams questions the existence and criteria for joining the so-called ‘anti-growth coalition’ mentioned by the government, suggesting a satirical perspective on the term.
-
Welcomes the reversal of the health and social care levy as part of the Government’s growth plan. Acknowledges that many businesses and working people will be pleased with the removal of the levy, allowing them to keep more of what they earn. Emphasises the need for an independent OBR forecast to understand the impact on public finances and borrowing levels. Highlights concerns about financial market reactions but supports innovative measures like investment zones.
-
Supports the repeal of the health and social care levy, arguing it was disproportionately impacting lower earners at a time when they were struggling. Notes that businesses have paid about £3.8 billion over six months and employees £2.5 billion, causing disruptions to employment planning. Calls for more funding through windfall taxes on oil and gas firms instead of increasing national insurance. Urges the Government to address health and social care backlogs urgently.
-
Ms Johnson opposes the repeal of the national insurance hike, arguing that it is regressive and would disproportionately affect those least able to pay. She calls for progressive taxation and funding from those who can afford it to address social care issues. She raises concerns about local government cuts due to austerity measures and points out Liverpool's loss of £465 million in budget since 2010, resulting in staff shortages and zero-hours contracts for workers.
-
Mr. Grant argues that national insurance is a jobs tax targeting working people, not an actual insurance scheme. He cites the Scottish Government's free personal care for social care recipients as an example of adequate funding through general taxation. Mr. Grant stresses the need for increased healthcare and social care budgets to keep pace with inflation and to address unmet demand, noting that poverty-induced health issues exacerbate NHS pressure.
-
The speaker argues that recent government policies have led to severe economic instability, including a rise in inflation and mortgage payments, and an increase in food bank usage. She emphasises the need for significant action beyond small U-turns and criticises the Government's disregard for expert advice and market reactions.
-
[Intervention] The speaker clarifies that his previous statement was about the impact of the pandemic on borrowing, which he supported. He questions whether Labour will acknowledge the necessity of these actions due to the pandemic and its subsequent economic impacts.
-
Closed the debate on behalf of the Government, thanked hon. Members for their contributions and welcomed support from various parties. Highlighted fiscal responsibility as an important aspect of conservatism. Rebutted arguments against the plan by mentioning that the growth plan aims to improve lives over time through lower taxes, improved infrastructure, and removing barriers to investment. Warned about Labour’s central planning approach and its potential impact on broad shoulders versus general taxpayers.
-
Welcomed the measure but criticised it for not going far enough in addressing economic issues. Mentioned concerns about fiscal responsibility and the need for a Labour approach to growth.
-
Welcomed the measure but raised concerns about hospital discharges impacting social care. Suggested that further investigation was needed into the impact of changes on employment and unemployment.
-
Welcomed the measure, mentioned costs paid by people and businesses (£2.5 billion and £3.8 billion), raised concerns about disruption caused by the change in national insurance contributions for businesses.
-
Asked whether changes to the levy would alter previously announced funding. Raised concerns about potential impact on job creation due to changes in national insurance contributions.