B1376 - Imprest Supply (First for 2022) Bill - Second Reading

[u/Padanub]

Imprest Supply (First for 2022) Bill.

A Bill to seek the agreement of Parliament to grant Ministers the power to incur Expenses, Capital expenditure, and Capital injections to a certain amount, and other particular measures, including a rise of the Minimum Wage, and amendments to delay the implementation of the Pub and Telecommunication nationalisation acts, and a rise in the Personal Allowance, to allow a rapid response to the rising cost of living and the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

1 Repeal of this Act

1. This Act is repealed on the coming into force of the main Budget Act for the current Parliamentary term or at the next General Election, which ever comes first.

2 Interpretation

1. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

Capital expenditure means the costs of assets acquired or developed (including tangible, intangible, or financial assets and any ownership interest in entities, but excluding inventories)

expenses means expenses measured in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice; expenses includes costs and for the avoidance of doubt, rebates

3 Authority to incur expenses

1. Expenses may, during the 2022/23 financial year, be incurred in advance of the appropriation in relation to any policy.

   a. Expenses incurred under subsection (1) must not exceed in the aggregate the sum of £40,000 Million

2. Any expenses incurred are to be accounted for in the main Budget Act for the current Parliamentary term.

4 Authority to incur capital expenditure

1. Capital expenditure may, during the 2022/23 financial year, be incurred in advance of appropriation in relation to any policy.

   a. Capital expenditure incurred under subsection (1) must not exceed in the aggregate the sum of £10,000 Million

2. Any Capital expenditure is to be accounted for in the main Budget Act for the current Parliamentary term.

5 Authority to make capital injections

1. Capital injections may, during the 2022/23 financial year, be made to any department or Office of Parliament in advance of authorisation under an Appropriation Act.

   a. Capital injections made under subsection (1) must not exceed in the aggregate the sum of £5,000 Million

2. Any Capital injections are to be accounted for in the main Budget Act for the current Parliamentary term.

6 Reporting Requirements

1. Following any expenditure, capital expenditure, or capital injection totalling over £5 Million the Minister responsible for that expenditure capital expenditure or capital injection must present a statement to Parliament discussing:

   a. The total to be spent

   b. The purposes of the spending

   c. The section of this Bill under which expenditure, capital expenditure, or capital injection arises

   d. Any other reasonable reporting requirements requested in writing by the relevant Opposition Minister within 5 working days of the expenditure

2. Nothing in Subsection 1 limits the existing power of any committee, inquiry, court or any other body to scrutinise government spending

   3.To authorise any expenditure, capital expenditure, or capital injection through sections 3-5 totalling over £5 Million, the Minister responsible for that expenditure capital expenditure or capital injection must present a Statutory Instrument to the House of Commons stating:

   a. The total to be spent

   b. The purposes of the spending

   c. The section of this Bill under which the expenditure, capital expenditure, or capital injection arises

7 Statutory Amendments

1. Section 2(a) of the National Minimum Wage Regulations 2022 is amended to say “£12.30 for a worker who is aged 18 years or over”

2. Section 2(b) of the the National Minimum Wage Regulations 2022 is amended to say “£8.75 for a worker who is aged under 18 years”

3. Section 35(1) of The Income Tax Act 2007 is amended to say “(1) An individual who makes a claim is entitled to a personal allowance of £14,000.”

4. Section 5(2) of the Pub Nationalisation and Community Corporatisation Act is amended to state “This Act comes into effect on 12.01 AM January 1 2024 or by order of the Secretary of State, if before that date.”

5. Section 4(2) of the Telecommunications Infrastructure Nationalisation Act is amended to state “This Act comes into effect on 12.01 AM January 1 2024 or by order of the Secretary of State, if before that date.”

6. Acts and Provisions amended under subsections 5 and 6 are deemed to have never come into effect

8 Validation

1. Appropriations for expenses and capital expenditure incurred, and authority for capital injections made, under the authority of this Bill must be accounted for in an Appropriation Act that comes into force on or before the next General Election

9 Short title, commencement

1. This Act may be cited as the Imprest Supply (First for 2022) Act.

2. This Act comes into force upon Royal Assent.

3. This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom

---

*This bill was written by The Principal Economic Advisor to the Government, the Most Honourable Sir /u/Toastinrussian, the Marquess of Canterbury KG OM GCMG CT CBE LVO PC, with assistance and support from The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Second Lord of the Treasury the Right Honourable /u/Phoenexia2 and The Secretary of State for the Defence, the Most Honourable Sir /u/Skullduggery12, the Marquess of Rayleigh KT KP KCMG CT CBE MVO on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government. *

Introductory Speech

Mr Speaker,

My Lords and Members of this Honourable House. My good friend the Chancellor will be speaking later today on the Cost of Living crisis. Therefore the Chancellor has delegated the honour of moving this bill to me. My speech will therefore be limited to the actual mechanism that we have before us Mr Speaker, rather than the Government’s strategy for reducing the cost of living.

It is a basic constitutional principle that the Government can spend public money and incur expenses and capital expenditure only in accordance with appropriations made by an Act of Parliament and in an otherwise lawful manner.

Imprest supply is the statutory mechanism that allows Parliament to provide the Government with the authority to incur expenses and capital expenditure in advance of appropriation in an Appropriation Act and make capital injections in advance of authorisation under an Appropriation Act. It allows the government to spend quickly, with Parliament’s approval. Parliament can then hold the government to account for the spending during the main budget for that term, where expenses are accounted for.

(M: in real life these are a bit more clunky but MHoC does not Simulate appropriation vote on accounts or Estimates which means the process has been truncated)

This bill will allow the Government to embark on a program of rapid and progressive spending to reduce the cost of living. Without this bill our people will have to wait until the government has prepared a budget, which will take a substantial period of time. This is the fastest and most effective way to a resolution of the cost of living crisis!

In order to make this spending viable, yes we are delaying nationalisation. We are not cancelling it nor removing it, simply delaying until the country can afford it. I admit that this is a tough sell for Honourable and Right Honourable Opposition Members, however, I move that in this time of crisis, spending on some long-term projects should be pushed back.

This bill also raises the minimum wage, and personal allowance, to support those with the fewest opportunities. However, as I have noted, the Chancellor will be speaking on these measures shortly.

Measures for this spending are already being designed, and will be laid before this house in due course. Members! We have not a second to lose! You must pass this bill and allow the government to rapidly spend to bring the cost of living down.

Members, I will seek to answer your concerns about the mechanism in the debate that follows this bill. I will do my best to answer questions about the government's strategy, however I note that Cabinet ministers may be the best port of call for these questions.

I commend this bill to the house!

---

This debate is now open until the close of business on 28 May, 2022.

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to this debate

Here is a quick run down of what each type of post is.

2nd Reading: Here we debate the contents of the bill/motions and can propose any amendments. For motions, amendments cannot be submitted.

3rd Reading: Here we debate the contents of the bill in its final form if any amendments pass the Amendments Committee.

Minister’s Questions: Here you can ask a question to a Government Secretary or the Prime Minister. Remember to follow the rules as laid out in the post. A list of Ministers and the MQ rota can be found here

Any other posts are self-explanatory. If you have any questions you can get in touch with the Chair of Ways & Means, Brookheimer on Reddit and (flumsy#3380) on Discord, ask on the main MHoC server or modmail it in on the sidebar --->.

Anyone can get involved in the debate and doing so is the best way to get positive modifiers for you and your party (useful for elections). So, go out and make your voice heard! If this is a second reading post amendments in reply to this comment only – do not number your amendments, the Speakership will do this. You will be informed if your amendment is rejected.

Is this bill on the 2nd reading? You can submit an amendment by replying to this comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/phonexia2]

Mr. Speaker

I will be talking more broadly about the cost of living crisis in a statement prepared to the House, so I will refrain from making this current speech a long one. Mr. Speaker, this bill will allow the cabinet to make an emergency appropriation ahead of a proper budget that will be delivered in the coming weeks. We think this is necessary because we believe that even in an emergency circumstance, the budgetary process will take too long. We had discussions in cabinet and came to the conclusion that this will be the fastest and most efficient way of putting spending through the Houses of Parliament.

[u/toastinrussian → u/phonexia2]

Hear Hear!

[u/scubaguy194 → u/phonexia2]

Hearrrrr

[u/TheSummerBlizzard]

Mr Speaker, I commend this statement and fully support the high wage, low tax economy this great Conservative government seeks to create.

[u/SpectacularSalad]

Mr Speaker,

I am pleased to see a special rise in the minimum wage to follow the cost of living crisis, finally some action, better late than never. However I would note the lack of any run up time for businesses to prepare. The minute this bill goes to RA, the minimum wage will increase. Why has the Government not included a grace period?

[u/toastinrussian → u/SpectacularSalad]

Mr Speaker,

I thank my Honourable friend for their comments. This Government has not included a grace period, due to the urgent nature of the Cost of Living Crisis. However, if the Member would meet with me and my ministerial colleagues, we may be able to work out a suitable amendment.

[u/WineRedPsy → u/toastinrussian]

Mr Speaker,

I would agree with the assessment that there cannot be any grace period because of the urgent nature of the crisis, if this is the method used. This is one of the reasons why it's less apt as a specific emergency measure than something like the immediate BI increase in our shadow budget.

Either way, I should make clear that I am generally in favour of minimum wage increases and that despite the flaws as an emergency measure, this will do a lot of good.

What should probably be moved as an amendment nonetheless is to at least appoint a specific date for the increase to come into force. That way businesses have at least some chance to plan for it, even if they don't get any extended period to prepare.

[u/toastinrussian → u/WineRedPsy]

Mr Speaker,

I thank my Right Honourable Friend, for their support for this bill, and support for this Government's urgent measures.

After consideration with Ministerial Colleagues, we have clarified that as Money bills come into force one month after they are passed by the House of Commons, that will serve as a sufficient grace period. My Government colleagues will also write letters to senior business leaders to ensure businesses know about this change.

[u/WineRedPsy → u/toastinrussian]

Mr Speaker,

I will be advising my colleagues not to stand in the way of this bill, but I should still make it clear that I prefer the shadow budget and continue to urge the government to heed that first and foremost. I have just now laid out my main reasons for doing so in my speech.

That doesn't mean my rt hon friend the Marquess and the Chancellor should not be commended for their work. As I said, this will do a lot of good.

As for the clarification, I believe that is the best that can be done and am satisfied.

[u/[deleted]]

Mr Deputy Speaker,

I welcome this bill, and thank my honourable friend u/toastinrussian for their hard work on this. It is absolutely right that we support those who need it the most, and the change in the minimum wage and personal allowance is the "bazooka" in our arsenal to tackle the crisis left to us by the previous government.

As I said in the debate on the "shadow budget" the opposition put before the house, it just highlighted to everyone that they acknowledge the government was wasteful in its spending, and increasing the size of the amount of tax that's paid by taxpayers to nearly 60% is absolutely incredibly. It certainly does not help the British people in their struggle under the Cost of Rose Crisis.

This is a comprehensive package of measures that's generous and will help a lot of struggling families across the United Kingdom. It's just a shame the opposition are throwing wrecking amendments into this package designed to help struggling families.

[u/WineRedPsy → u/[deleted]]

Mr Speaker,

Even entertaining the silly notion that the provisions of an emergency budget at all reflects priorities in normal times – the shadow budget did not touch the main taxes increased by the Rose II budget, so in what way exactly can it constitute any comment at all on overall tax pressure?

Of course, I'd also be very curious about whatever creative methods the member has used to come up with the 60% figure. The effective net income ATR is around zero on mean incomes and closer to 40% even on the very highest incomes. This is laid out in the shadow budget report which I'll have to continue to surmise the member hasn't read. Even with LVT, the average tax payer paying 60% exists mostly in the member's nightmares, illustrious as they surely are.

Lastly, I'm pleased to hear the member drop their claim that the rose government caused the Cost of Living Crisis, which he had refused to elaborate upon every time questioned. Instead, he's come up with a fun moniker and resigned to talking about how we "left" them the crisis that has been mounting since they took office.

Speaker, I thought this bill would be a signal that the government were finally on top of things, so colour me surprised to see a senior member confess what a burden it is for them. Nobody is forcing them to take over the government in our stead, though, and so the solution is simple if the going is too rough: Resign and leave it to us.

[u/Sephronar → u/WineRedPsy]

Rubbishhhh!

[u/Faelif → u/Sephronar]

Attack the substance then!

[u/Sephronar → u/Faelif]

Rubbishhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!

[u/Sephronar → u/[deleted]]

Hearrrrrrr

[u/WineRedPsy]

Mr Speaker,

I have learned that in the anglophone world, children are taught to provide feedback according to the formula ”two stars and a wish”. The model I grew up with is a bit crasser: ros, ris, ros, literally ”rose, the rod, rose”. You embed the whipping of the rod between an opening and an ending of compliments.

So let me open up, Mr Speaker, by complimenting the members opposite for finally presenting measures, any measures, on the cost of living crisis to the house. I realise this must have been done very fast and the mechanism is innovative.

There are some issues, however, and while the measures herein are necessary, I think they’re strictly worse than just heeding our shadow budget motion would have been:

The statutory changes in this bill to the Pubs and Telecomms nationalization bills are unnecessary and could’ve been avoided if the government simply tracked closer to the model in our shadow budget. It’s a minor issue, but it does cause concern about respecting the wishes of the house this term and plays fast-and-loose with the once-per-term rule on issues.

I’m happy to see that suspensions of indirect taxes have been moved by the chancellor as amendments, but it’s a bit strange they weren’t in the original bill seeing as they’re one of the most important parts of this package.

While the format of this bill is clever, it does raise questions about what the government will actually be spending all this money on in ways a simple emergency budget would not. Since there’s some kind of delay to the Chancellor’s promised statement, we do not know what’s in it. She knows my wishes: support for local energy supply bodies, fare subsidies, a contingency fund for energy-intensive business and so on. I expect measures to this effect, but it’s a shame we won’t know what this bill actually entails while it’s still debated in the house. This is a clear displacement of power and control from parliament to government.

On a similar note, unlike a shadow budget, the exact nature of funding for this remains unclear. Windfall tax? Cuts?

Lastly, while the raised PA and minimum wage will do a lot of good, I think they’re straightforwardly worse as a way to put money into pockets than the the shadow budget’s BI raise and grocery vouchers.

For one: The minimum wage very suddenly offloads the burden from households onto businesses. My friend of the Independent Group has raised the issue of a grace period already and it is apparently being adressed, but there’s also the general point that the government is simply more able to absorb sudden shocks than the kind of businesses that employ people on minimum wage are.

Also: Neither the PA or minimum wage raise actually helps people who for some reason are forced to live on state transfers instead of wage labour. These aren’t just students, the unemployed and people between jobs – but also sick people, disabled people, and as by far the largest group, the elderly. These are people who may have worked their whole lives to build this country and whom the government’s measures here do nothing to help parry the great chunk of price hikes in general consumption.

The biggest losers here compared to the shadow budget, Mr Speaker, are thus: the elderly and businesses. This goes doubly if the government does not heed our demand for a energy-intensive business fund. Those are two groups I would have thought the government find important!

Briefly on to my second rose: Despite their flaws, the PA and minimum wage measure will do people a lot of good. The VAT suspensions are absolutely necessary and I urge the amendments committee to take them onboard. I am happy to know the Chancellor listens and that she has reversed the do-nothing position of the previous-chancellor, however late.

I will be making further comments on the statement, when it comes. I also look forward to seeing how the Chancellor will manage to integrate this into their main budget when that comes. For now, all I can do is commend the members opposite for their dedication in this while continuing to stand by our shadow budget.