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 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Grahame Morris – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

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

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent discussions she has had with animal welfare groups on the mandatory use of CCTV in slaughterhouses.

    George Eustice

    On 3/2/15, the Farm Animal Welfare Committee (FAWC) published a report entitled “Opinion on CCTV in slaughterhouses”. I have had discussions with a number of animal welfare groups on the topic.

  • 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, which companies have signed decommissioning relief deeds with his Department.

    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, how many clinical commissioning groups implement in full 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 of Health

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-01-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what timetable has been set for the introduction of NHS England’s new National Clinical Director for Cardiac Services after April 2016.

    George Freeman

    NHS England expect the National Clinical Director for Cardiac Services to take up their role from 1 April 2016.

  • 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 estimate he has made of the number of people requiring wheelchair accessible homes in (a) Easington, (b) the North East and (c) England.

    Brandon Lewis

    The Government has published data on the housing need of older and disabled people in England to support local authorities in assessing likely need in their local area. This can be found at link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/building-regulations-guide-to-available-disability-data

    It is for local authorities to determine specific needs in their local areas.

  • 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 women 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, whether the Government plans to introduce or pilot a system of automatic electoral registration.

    John Penrose

    I have considered a range of proposals from local authorities and civil society organisations that could change how registration is currently delivered. The Government is committed to further modernising and improving electoral registration, building on the successful transition to Individual Electoral Registration (IER).

    We are keen to explore further possibilities in this area but are concerned there may be tension between some forms of automatic registration and the principles underpinning IER, namely individual responsibility and ownership over registering to vote.

  • 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 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, if he will make an assessment of the potential effect of the time taken to conduct its Supported Accommodation Review on the number of beds available in the supported accommodation sector.

    Brandon Lewis

    We understand the importance of ensuring that those people living in supported accommodation, who are generally the most vulnerable members of our society, receive appropriate protections.

    The supported housing sector provides valuable support to some of our country’s most vulnerable people.

    We have commissioned an evidence review of the supported housing sector which we expect to report shortly. Building on this review, we will continue to work with and listen to providers as part of developing a long-term sustainable funding regime.

    In the meantime we have put in place a one-year exception for all supported accommodation from the social rent reduction measures and the Local Housing Allowance cap, so there will be no material change in this financial year.

  • Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Grahame Morris – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Grahame Morris on 2016-06-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what the reasons are for the difference in the figures quoted as payments to HM Treasury in respect of its guarantee for the Mineworkers Pension Scheme and the British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme in paragraph 1.21 of the National Audit Office report on Department of Trade and Industry: Sale of the mining operations of the British Coal Corporation, HC 360 1995-96, and the Answer of 8 March 2007 to Question 125573, HC Deb, Column 2124W.

    Andrea Leadsom

    Analysis by Binder Hamlyn in 2006 for the NAO had estimated the net present value of payments to the Government (net of any payments from the Government arising from its guarantee) at £2bn over 25 years. This reflects the value at the time of the expected future net payments.

    The parliamentary question 125573 answered on 8 March 2007 records that the Binder Hamlyn report found that the total gross payments to the Treasury would be £8bn. This would have been both gross of any payments from the Government and also in cash terms i.e. allowing for the returns achieved on the funds before payment.