Finance Bill — Clause 78 — Report on Impact of Reform of Taxation on Fossil Fuels for Generating Electricity — 5 Jul 2011 at 20:45

Julian Huppert MP, Cambridge voted against requiring a report on the expected impact of changes before reforming the taxation of fossil fuels for generating electricity.

The majority of MPs voted against requiring a report on the expected impact of changes before removing the exemption from climate change levy (CCL) for fossil fuels used to generate electricity and introducing new taxes, to be known as carbon price support rates, to be charged on fossil fuels. The aim of the change was to encourage investment in low-carbon electricity[1].

MPs were considering the Finance Bill[2].

Clause 78[3] of the Finance Bill stated:

  • Schedule 20 contains provision for and in connection with the charging of climate change levy on supplies of commodities to be used in producing electricity.

The rejected amendment would have added the following additional subclauses to clause 78:

  • Amendment 12, page 45, line 5, at end insert—
  • ‘(2) The Schedule shall not come into force except as specified in subsection (3) below.
  • (3) The Chancellor of the Exchequer shall bring the Schedule into force by order within six months of the passing of this Act.
  • (4) A statutory instrument containing an order under subsection (3) shall be accompanied by a report which details—
  • (a) any effective subsidy provided to, or additional profits accruing to, operators of existing and new nuclear power stations as a result of the provisions in the Schedule;
  • (b) the immediate impact of the provisions in the Schedule on consumers and on fuel poverty;
  • (c) the immediate impact of the provisions in the Schedule on energy-using manufacturing industries and on employment in those industries;
  • (d) the expected effect of the provisions in the Schedule on investment in new renewable power generation and on investment in new nuclear power generation;
  • (e) the measures that the Chancellor intends to adopt in a future Finance Bill in order to recoup any effective subsidy to or additional profits accruing to the nuclear industry as a result of the Schedule; and
  • (f) how the monies raised by those measures will be used to mitigate the immediate impact of the Schedule on consumers and on manufacturing industries and to encourage green investment.’.

==

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con236 (+1 tell) 3078.4%
DUP0 5062.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Lab0 200 (+2 tell)078.3%
LDem40 (+1 tell) 0071.9%
PC0 1033.3%
SDLP0 1033.3%
SNP0 60100.0%
Total:276 217077.4%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
Zac GoldsmithRichmond ParkConaye
Andrew PercyBrigg and GooleConaye
Martin VickersCleethorpesConaye

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive