Don't hit small businesses with new taxes, urges Wrekin MP Mark Pritchard

Mr Pritchard said it was right and proper that the Government had provided financial support to protect jobs since the outbreak. But he said that eventually these schemes would need to be paid for, and it could prove damaging if small businesses were forced to bear the brunt of this.

He said that while the furlough scheme had done an important job in protecting jobs, he was concerned that the Government could be paying the wage bills of companies which would make staff redundant once the scheme was over.

Mr Pritchard also feared that the new quarantine measures on people arriving at UK airports could affect Shropshire's tourism industry, and asked for them to be subject to a fortnightly review.

More Covid-19 coverage:

• See the latest coronavirus stories from Shropshire and beyond

• Coronavirus: Latest number of deaths and confirmed cases in Shropshire, Telford and Mid Wales

• Star Neighbours - how you can give and get help locally

He told a debate in the House of Commons: "I welcome the Government’s support for businesses in Shropshire, Telford and The Wrekin, and commend secretaries of state from different departments for their speed and flexibility in getting many schemes off the ground.

"I am also conscious that, of course, at some point in the future all of this will need to be paid for.

"In that regard, I ask ministers that they do not tax the surviving businesses that I believe will actually help economic recovery in this country."

Mr Pritchard said borrowing should play a role in reducing the impact of any recession, but ultimately it would be incentive and reward through bespoke tax cuts that would revive the economy and reduce national debt once the virus had passed.

"In my view, increasing taxes on sole traders and small businesses, if the Government were so tempted, would be self-defeating and counter-productive," he said.

Pledge

Mr Pritchard praised staff in HM Revenue and Customs and the Department for Work and Pensions for their swift delivery of the furlough scheme.

But he added: "I have concerns that the Government could be paying the wage bills of thousands of companies that are still making considerable profits, perhaps waiting until the end of the furlough scheme only to make their staff redundant."

Mr Pritchard said he had concerns that the various schemes to support employment, and the furlough scheme in particular, could be open to fraud.

He also voiced concerns about the Government's pledge to 'do whatever it takes'.

"Of course that offers huge reassurance to my constituents and to millions up and down the country, but I also hope that means what is realistic, what is proportionate, and, ultimately, what is affordable," he said.

Mr Pritchard said that while he commended the near £30 million of funding which had been given to Shropshire Council and Telford & Wrekin Council during the crisis, he said some of that money should be passed to parish and town councils which were also under pressure.

He said the Shropshire Association of Local Councils was right to ask the Government to consider relaxing regulations around the use of capital receipts, and to consider extending business rate relief for councils that run markets, car parks and sporting venues.

Mr Pritchard also asked the Government to issue local authorities with guidance on how to administer the discretionary business grant.

He said that many jobs in Shropshire were dependent on international tourism, and was concerned about the possible impact of the quarantine measures announced this week.

"If this measure is to go ahead, may I appeal to the Government to ensure that it is reviewed on a regular basis, perhaps every two weeks, and that there is a sunset clause so that it will be removed as quickly as possible?"