Tag: Grahame Morris

  • Grahame Morris – 2023 Speech on the Budget

    Grahame Morris – 2023 Speech on the Budget

    The speech made by Grahame Morris, the Labour MP for Easington, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    It is a great honour to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi) and his excellent speech. In the time that I have, I wonder if I might focus on one specific issue —council tax and its failings. I was very interested in the contribution of my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Clive Efford), when he spoke about the advantages of a wealth tax for those with more than £10 million in assets. It should not be discounted—I think there is a lot of merit in it. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds East (Richard Burgon) has also advocated such a policy.

    We heard a lot from the Chancellor yesterday. There were a lot of Es flying around— [Interruption.] I was paying attention, Madam Deputy Speaker. There are a couple of Es in levelling up, but unfortunately Easington did not get any levelling-up money. That is meant to be the Government’s priority.

    It would be worthwhile for the Government to address the fundamental unfairness of council tax. I want to explore why replacing council tax with a proportional property tax should command the support of those on the Opposition and Government Benches. It is advocated by the Fairer Share campaign, which I recommend the Minister and other Members have a look at. Fair taxation is the foundation on which Labour can build a better Britain and help to secure the missions recently set out by the Leader of the Opposition. For the Conservatives, abolishing council tax in favour of a proportional property tax would demonstrate a long-term and systematic commitment to levelling up. It would help to alleviate and mitigate the cost of living crisis and deliver a tax cut—a council tax cut—to more than 75% of households in the country, and 100% of households in Easington.

    The problem with council tax is very simple. In the days ahead, the majority of people will receive a council tax bill. At Prime Minister’s questions, a lot of political capital was made about Conservative councils being better than Labour councils, but the truth is that almost all councils, irrespective of their political colour, are facing huge pressures. Most people will face a council tax increase of about 5%. The County Councils Network reported in February that three in four councils will increase council tax by the maximum amount permitted. This is an issue that cuts across all parties. My county council, Durham County Council, is led by a Conservative-led coalition. It faces a £10.2 million deficit, despite raising council tax by the maximum—5%—and proposing cuts of £12.4 million.

    The truth is that the system is broken. It is the poorest households that pay more and get less, while councils remain unable to fund vital services. Currently, households are taxed based not on their ability to pay, but on the 1991 valuation of their home and the area in which they live. That means that local authorities must impose tax levels on their residents to cover the costs of essential statutory services such as caring for looked-after children and adult social care regardless of the wealth, or lack of it, in those communities. For that reason, an £8 million townhouse in Westminster bizarrely, or perversely, ends up paying less council tax each year than somebody living in a £150,000 home in my constituency. The most affluent areas have other advantages, with Westminster City Council better placed to raise revenues through business rates, fees and charges such as car parking charges compared to poorer local authorities like mine.

    This is the opposite of levelling up. It is widening the economic gap between London and the regions, as well as between the richest and poorest in society. The theme of the Budget yesterday was boosting employment, and the key to that aim is strengthening regional economies to sustain additional employment. A proportional property tax strengthens local economies and supports employment by cutting taxes in the regions by £6.5 billion. A huge annual economic stimulus of £6.5 billion would empower people to participate in their local economy. For the poorest communities such as mine, the average household saving could be as high as £900 a year.

    The Government’s refusal to invest in our poorest communities will hold back regeneration, growth and employment. Rather than the Government’s tax and spend investment policy, a proportional property tax is much more efficient at allowing the poorest communities to keep more of their own money to spend and invest in their own local economy as they see fit. That might be a philosophy that the Conservatives could agree with.

    The success of the levelling-up fund should be judged on the extent to which it narrows the economic divisions in our country. In fact, those divisions are widening and inequality is growing. The north-east region as a whole received just £108.5 million, compared with £210.5 million and £151.3 million allocated to the south-east and London respectively.

    I am disappointed that the Chancellor said nothing in the Budget about the regressive council tax. I am proud that the Durham County Council Labour group is the first in the country to call for the introduction of a proportional property tax to replace the iniquitous council tax. It is a simple and fair tax applied equally, no matter whether someone lives in Peterlee, Pimlico, Belgravia, Blackhall, Horden, Hartlepool or Hounslow. The Government can deliver a tax cut to more than 18 million households, support regional economies and help levelling up. A proportional property tax is a levelling- up tax. I hope that both the Government and the Opposition will support it.

  • Grahame Morris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Grahame Morris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2015-10-27.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, for what reasons the Ministry of Justice no longer has responsibility for Government policy on freedom of information and data protection.

    Matthew Hancock

    I refer the hon. Member to the Written Ministerial Statements of the 17 July [HLWS134] and 17 September [HCWS209]. As set out in the Ministerial Code, the Prime Minister is responsible for the overall organisation of the executive.

  • Grahame Morris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Grahame Morris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2015-11-10.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many decommissioning relief deeds relating to decommissioning activity in the UK Continental Shelf have been signed to date; and what the total value of such deeds is to the (a) public purse and (b) decommissioning industry.

    Damian Hinds

    At Budget 2013, the government announced it would begin signing decommissioning relief deeds. These deeds represent a new contractual approach to provide oil and gas companies with certainty on the level of tax relief they will receive on future decommissioning costs.

    Since October 2013, the government has entered into 72 decommissioning relief deeds. Oil & Gas UK estimates that these deeds have so far unlocked more than £3.5bn of capital, which can now be invested elsewhere.

    The government committed to report to Parliament every year on progress with the deeds. The report for financial year 2014-15 can be found at:

    http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2015-07-21/HCWS162/.

    The government does not publish the names of companies with which it has entered into decommissioning relief deeds as this information is commercially sensitive.

  • Grahame Morris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Grahame Morris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2015-11-16.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to implement the Infertility Network UK recommendations on access to IVF treatment.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department funded Infertility Network UK (INUK) to develop advice to NHS Commissioners on standardising eligibility criteria for in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment. The Department has consistently encouraged NHS Commissioners to have regard to this advice. The INUK advice is listed as a resource for clinical commissioning groups (CCG) in the NHS England “Commissioning Fertility Services Factsheet”.

    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommend that eligible couples should receive three full cycles of IVF treatment. The Government has made clear that blanket restrictions on treatment are unacceptable and all decisions on treatment should be made by doctors based on a patient’s individual clinical needs and in line with NICE Guidelines.

    While we have not made an assessment of access to IVF treatment, we are aware of the annual survey by Fertility Fairness. I have written to stakeholders, including Fertility Fairness, and invited them to discuss what could be done to improve the provision of IVF services along with representatives of NHS England and Monitor.

  • Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-01-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what changes she plans to make to advice on her Department’s website relating to (a) goods for which an origin is indicated on their labelling, (b) goods from Golan and (c) other goods in response to the European Commission’s Interpretative Notice on indication of origin of goods from the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967, published on 11 November 2015.

    George Eustice

    The Commission’s Notice recommends that goods imported into the EU which originate from Israeli settlements in the occupied territories should bear an indication which makes that provenance clear. That recommendation is already included in the current technical advice to UK retailers and importers concerning the labelling of agricultural produce from the West Bank which was issued by Defra in 2009. There is therefore no need for changes at this stage.

  • Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-02-23.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what steps he is taking to increase the supply of wheelchair accessible homes in the social and affordable housing sector.

    Brandon Lewis

    The Government provides direct funding for specialised housing for older and disabled people through the Care and Support Specialised Housing Fund and the Affordable Homes Programme, making available up to £800 million for specialised housing for older, disabled, and vulnerable people over the next five years, which will deliver over 15,000 specialised homes.

    The Government is also putting more money into the Disabled Facilities Grant to enable older and disabled people to live independently and safely in their own homes for longer. On top of the £1 billion the Government has invested in the grant since 2010, the grant will increase year on year for the next five years rising to over £500 million by 2020. In 2016-17 the Disabled Facilities Grant will grow to £394 million, a 79% increase on the current year.

  • Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-03-04.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate his Department has made of the number of tax credit claimants with a disability in Easington constituency who will be affected by the reduction of the income rise disregard for tax credits to £2,500.

    Damian Hinds

    This information is not held and statistically reliable projections at constituency level could only be provided at disproportionate cost. From April 2016, the income rise disregard – the amount by which a tax credit claimant’s income can increase within a year before their tax credit award is adjusted – will be reduced from £5,000 to £2,500.

    The only people who will be affected by this will be those who see an increase in their in-year income by more than £2,500. There will be no net cash losers because their income will have increased.

    In the subsequent tax year, a claimant’s tax credits award will be calculated in the usual way, using their full annual income for the previous year to determine their tax credit entitlement. This means that after the change in the tax year, whether the claimant’s increase in income was above or below the disregard level, their tax credit award for the following year will be adjusted to what it would have been had no disregard existed

  • Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how much funding was (a) allocated and (b) spent by his Department’s Democratic Engagement Team in each of the last six years; and what assessment has been made of the efficiency and effectiveness of that team.

    John Penrose

    The Democratic Engagement Team, which was created in 2013, has enabled a number of civil society organisations to make an important contribution during the transition to Individual Electoral Registration. Overall, this support has contributed to over 15 million applications to register to vote since June 2014. An overview of the maximising registration funding by year can be found below:

    2012/2013 – £56,545

    2013/2014 – £4.2m

    2014/2015 – £9.8m

  • Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate he has made of the number of people who have received demands to pay underpaid tax as a result of his Department not notifying HM Revenue and Customs when an employment and support allowance claimant is moved from the work-related activity group into the support group in each of the last three years.

    Priti Patel

    The information requested is not held.

  • Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-05-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what reports he has received on local Jobcentre Plus offices developing their own claimant communications rather than using those produced by his Department.

    Priti Patel

    The Department doesn’t produce any reports on local jobcentres developing their own claimant communications. The Department has guidelines on the intranet for all Jobcentre Plus offices about the use of locally-developed claimant communications. These guidelines make it clear what can and cannot be produced locally.