Last night on Question Time James Purnell, Work and Pensions Secretary*, made a claim which caused me to scurry onto BBC News to search through their archives:
"We were always clear [the 10p tax rate] was a short-term measure."
Verification of this claim found I none, so it’s good to know Channel 4’s FactCheck blog has come to the same conclusion - James Purnell was lying out of his smug, overambitious arse:
"In his 1998 budget speech, Brown promised to introduce the 10p starting rate when it was right for the economy. And it was right by the next budget, when he brought the tax rate in super-quick. "This 10p rate will not start in April 2000, like other income tax changes we are making today … it will be delivered a few weeks from today. People will see it in their pay packets in May."
"He also cut the basic rate to 22p; but again, no mention was made of either measure being temporary. …
"In fact, it’s only over the past few weeks that the "transitional defence" has been spelled out in public. The respected House of Commons library - at a request from a Conservative MP - also investigated whether the 10p rate was described as transitional before 2007. "No", was its conclusion, "it does not appear to have been described that way"."
Shame the claim doesn’t appear to have been made in the House of Commons - the Government could have been done for misleading the House.
* Possibly the strangest case of ironic job allocation in the Government. What will it be next - Hazel Blears, Minister for Tall People? Or Gordon Brown, Minister for Vision…







2 responses so far ↓
1 Will // May 9, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Andy Burnham at Culture.
2 Jock // May 9, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Of course all income taxes are temporary. And have been since, what, 1803 or something!
I must admit in the back of my mind I also thought the 10% rate was a temporary measure for some reason - I thought the aim was to get people, through minimum wage and so on, beyond the level of the 10p rate and render it effectively unnecessary. But that may have been just wishful thinking on my part, and I certainly would not have assumed that revoking it would be done so as to harm people!
Leave a Comment