← Back to House of Commons Debates
Health and Social Care Levy Repeal Bill - Clause 1 - Repealing the Health and Social Care Levy Act 2021
11 October 2022
Lead MP
Chris Philp
Debate Type
Bill Debate
Tags
EconomyTaxation
Other Contributors: 29
At a Glance
Chris Philp raised concerns about health and social care levy repeal bill - clause 1 - repealing the health and social care levy act 2021 in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
The Minister moved to repeal the health and social care levy, arguing that it would encourage economic growth through lower taxation and incentivize companies and high-potential individuals to choose the UK over other locations. He emphasised the importance of reducing cost-of-living pressures on constituents by alleviating tax burdens immediately. The plan aims to deliver 2.5% annual growth for at least five years, which would generate approximately £47 billion in additional tax revenue by year five.
Peter Grant
SNP
Glenrothes
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.
Ynys Môn
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.
Alex Cunningham
Lab
Stockton North
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.
James Cartlidge
Con
South Suffolk
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 Concerned about how to fund it now that the levy is being repealed.
Ynys Môn
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.
John Glen
Con
Salisbury
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.
Steve Brine
Con
Winchester
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.
Karin Smyth
Lab
Bristol South
Asked for clarification from the Minister on advice received from DHSC regarding what will not be done now that funding has been reduced.
James Cartlidge
Con
South Suffolk
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.
Alex Cunningham
Lab
Unspecified Constituency
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.
James Murray
Lab Co-op
Ealing North
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.
James Cartlidge
Con
South Suffolk
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.
Chris Philp
Con
Croydon South
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.
James Cartlidge
Con
South Suffolk
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.
Peter Grant
N/A
N/A
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.
Richard Thomson
SNP
Paisley and Renfrewshire North
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.
Arfon
[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.
David Rutley
Con
Macclesfield
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.
Sarah Olney
Lib Dem
Richmond Park
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.
Kim Johnson
Lab
Liverpool Riverside
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.
Peter Grant
Lab
Greenwich and Woolwich
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.
Alison McGovern
Lab
Birkenhead
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.
James Cartlidge
Con
South Suffolk
[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.
Richard Fuller
Con
North Bedfordshire
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.
James Murray
Lab
Ealing North
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.
Richard Thomson
SNP
Gordon
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.
Sarah Olney
Lib Dem
Richmond Park
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.
Kim Johnson
Lab
Liverpool, Riverside
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.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.