'Tampon Tax' full list of MPs who voted against lowering the rate

[cricketballs]

interesting link which shows the list of MPs who voted against cutting VAT on sanitary products. Interesting to see its only conservatives and includes female MPs

"Tampons are a luxury item."

See WMittens' post at Wed 28-Oct-15 09:57:55.

Sorry, Mittens, looks like you might need to post some more.

My MP is on the list too so I've emailed her to ask her to explain herself! I'd recommend everyone who disagrees with their MP to do the same

The misrepresentation of the original post here was raised in Parliament today:

www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/commons/todays-commons-debates/read/unknown/222/

"Communications received by Members this week seem to suggest that some members of the public have been misled about the true nature of proposed new clause 7 to the Finance Bill, on which we voted on Monday, and the true position of this House in relation to the European Union and VAT. May we have a statement from the Leader of the House that makes clear the true position, and what does he plan to do to counter the occasional misrepresentation of the business of this House?

Chris Grayling:
Members have raised that concern with me over the past couple of days, particularly the fact that the Public Whip website gives no clarification of the nature of a Division. I have listened to colleagues and I intend to write to the website, asking it to provide a degree of explanation for Divisions on such issues.

The debate was about principle, not substance, and it is not possible, under the current treaty arrangements, for this House to decide to cut VAT to zero. That decision has to be taken in Brussels, but there is strong interest in securing change. The campaign that has grown off the back of that vote is utterly unacceptable. It is completely unacceptable for third party groups to misrepresent the vote as being a vote against a zero rate for tampons. I think that most Members support the principle of a zero rate for a product that is clearly not a luxury. The Financial Secretary gave a commitment in the debate that he would raise the issue in Brussels; indeed, we have done so. It is not acceptable for third party pressure groups to misrepresent the votes in this House. They give the impression that they are simply left-wing groups attacking the Conservative party and that they are not making legitimate points.

Paula Sherriff (Dewsbury) (Lab):
The Leader of the House will be aware that in response to my proposed new clause 7 the Financial Secretary promised to negotiate at European level to achieve a zero rate of VAT on women’s sanitary products. However, he did not commit to a timetable and he did not say that the issue would be placed alongside the Prime Minister’s other core demands in the forthcoming EU renegotiations. Will the Leader of the House give Government time for a ministerial statement confirming that women’s rights are not a second-class issue on this Government’s European agenda?

Chris Grayling:
Women’s rights are never going to be a second-class issue for this Government. The Labour party was in power for 13 years and did not secure any change on this front that would have brought the rate down to zero. [Interruption.] That is all very well, but since Monday’s debate the Vice-President of the Commission has said the Commission is willing to consider the issue, so we are already taking a step in the right direction after that debate. If a Minister gives a commitment to this House, they will follow it through."

I was just about to add that, RickRoll. I hadn't added to the thread as the deliberate misrepresentation, in some sectors, had wound me up a little

just done my sums, it costs me £4.38 a year.
These 75p a year people must have very light periods.

Shoxfordian
err have you actually read the thread? The vote was meaningless as the UK parliament has no power to reduce VAT to 0% on any item - VAT is an EU wide issue and rates are set for the whole EU.

So you have written to your MP asking them to explain why they didn't vote for a measure that the UK Parliament had no power to implement.

Actually, the proposed amendment was to put pressure on Osbourne to find a way to negotiate this with the EU

"amendment would have forced George Osborne to set out how he would negotiate the end of VAT on sanitary products within three months. The chancellor would also have to update the Commons on his progress."

www.theguardian.com/money/2015/oct/26/britain-lobby-european-commission-tampon-tax

The UK Parliament could have made this a point of negotiation and I understand Mr Gauke has now undertaken to raise the matter. This is a step-down from the strength of the original proposed amendment.

Why didn't Labour deal with this when they were in power? Why did they wait until there was a Conservative government?

What happens if the EU decides that Sanitary products should be subject to the full VAT rate rather than the 5% rate.

It's politicians playing games trying to score points off each other, if Labour had cared so much about this issue they had had plenty of time in power to raise it themselves. I wish all parties in Westminster would stop with the political posturing and look outside their little bubble.

Certainly Labour should have dealt with it; actually the reason it is now 5% instead of 17.5% is due to Labour MP Dawn Primarolo

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-32883153

"After the UK joined the Common Market in 1973, a 17.5% Value Added Tax (VAT) was introduced on sanitary products. In 2000, after lobbying by Labour MP Dawn Primarolo the tax was reduced to 5%. She explained the reduction was "about fairness, and doing what we can to lower the cost of a necessity".

As I understand it, the EU made it difficult, not impossible, to lower it further without lobbying & generally making it an issue.

This was all discussed further up the thread. I know who lowered the VAT rate. Why didn't Labour lobby for a zero rate?

Because it wasn't at 0% before we joined the EU? So successive governments have to abide by the EU rating of 5%, I think.

And I doubt that tampax were high in the list of important things while the economy was in meltdown!

The real questions are why now? What are we being distracted from? Or is this one of those meeja storms?

It is a media storm really. Or some.clever spin from a party that claim to be above that now.

If the media hadn't started reporting lists of disgusting MPs who voted against we wouldn't have had the ridiculous twitter storm.

I am minded of the Kaiser Chiefs Angry Mob.

PassiveAgressiveQueen

just done my sums, it costs me £4.38 a year.
These 75p a year people must have very light periods.

You spend £91.98 a year on tampons? 76 tampons per period, is that the common experience?

This was all discussed further up the thread. I know who lowered the VAT rate. Why didn't Labour lobby for a zero rate?

That was also discussed further up the thread: it is not possible to zero rate a product that was not zero rated before 1st January 1991, or even one that was zero and then increased to a higher rate after that date.

The comments in Ricks post would support that, Libraries

Another fine mess and all that. Wonder what the 3rd for the week is... meat, tampax and..........

Spending a lot of money on tampons and sanitary towels may not be some people's 'common experience' but it can be others'.

Some women for all sorts of reasons bleed (indeed 'flood') to the extent they can go through many sanitary products very quickly indeed. They are not freaks. They are women.