25/01/2016 House of Commons

Regrettably they are having to turn away people because of the limited

capacity. Does the Minister field of the department is doing enotgh to

look after children with spdcial complex and educational needs and

does she feel that there is adequate provision for such vulnerable

children across the country? I actually visited the school in the

course of the last year and I found it was truly exceptional st`ffed by

wonderfully head teachers and members of staff. We are investing

in all schools, both those with special education needs and of

course both in the mainstre`m. I think there's more we can do to

prepare teachers for teaching special educational needs and also

of course in terms of funding, we aren't having a dedicated c`pitols

funding stream for schools with people for educational needs and

encourage others to do so. people for educational needs and

encourage others to do Therd's a report saying they have no problem

supporting people who are kden to learn with hectic home lives. What

can the government do so th`t they end up being a court Nader of a

special services operation. Mr Speaker, my honourable friend raises

an important question which many schools raise around having ensured

that every child is in the best possible place at home so they can

learn at school. He will note that the Troubled Families progr`mme

which turned 99% of the famhlies was extremely successful in supporting

schools with those difficult families. We now have a mord

ambitious programme over thd next five years of 400,000 more families,

including the underbelly, to make sure they get support they need so

that children to go to school to learn and make a future for

themselves. Becoming a parent or kinship care means a life for the

mike lifelong commitment to a child. And yet services do not havd the

obligation to parents. Can the Minister urgently review thd

long-time support of those parents and kinship carers for this vital

provision? She will note th`t through the work we have done in the

last Parliament, the support for kinship carers for family and

friends guidance has set up very clearly what the expectations are on

local authorities. We also looked for the review of special g`rden,

guardianship orders the support that is needed post placement for

children who find themselves in that type of arrangement. Part of our

overall strategy that we have set out last week on children's social

care shows the ambition we have to make sure every child get stpport

they need, whatever the typd of long-term placement that happens to

be. I would like to get mord people in, so shorter answers. According to

the analysis, Kingston... Would my right honourable friend join me in

paying tribute to teachers `nd people acting sent an excellent as

House how the learning from the best schools is going to be rolldd out

across the country so that schools have somewhere to go. Can I think my

honourable friend very much, someone who is educated in Kingston, can I

pay tribute to all of the schools and they were much better than in my

day. The teachers and operations there. He is talking about

excellence, positivity and learning, which is better than the constant

negativity we are hearing from the other side of the House. Is the

Secretary of State as alarmdd as I am that Hoppe Worthington w`s not

previously known... Despite the fact that her mother had previously had a

child taken into care and hdr father had been investigated on two

separate occasions due to child sexual abuse. Can I picture me to

the work that he has done as the local member of Parliament speaking

up on this case, yes I am alarmed and as I have said earlier, Cumbria

is all for intervention for my department, supported by

interventions of the Mike advisor, as was still found to be in`dequate,

and I will review progress `nd March this year as part of the broader

package of reforms we need to introduce the tackle failing Child

services which only let down the most runnable. East Sussex County

Council offers award-winning child services but there's more to learn.

What part of the government does the child die government have -, what

part of the government have to reform this. I think my honourable

friend. She raises an important point that the Minister has Arty

touched upon, we are looking at raising the qualifications of social

workers, getting the brightdst and best into the progression. Laking

sure they are stronger for leadership to benefit those in need,

and also to regulate the tr`ining of children social workers. So short is

a hugely vital and underappreciated service and we ought to makd sure

that you get exactly the sale intention, attention as our school

teachers. Many churches, yotth groups, and youth organizathons are

concerned that they may be subject to offset regulation as a rdsult of

nationwide regulation schemd. The head of them said they would not.

Can the Minister tell us wh`t is right? Thank you for your qtestion

and it is right that we askdd the question about registration of out

of school settings and therdfore the inspection but the prime minister

and I are clear that this is not to apply to organizations like Sunday

schools, I am a Sunday school teacher myself will stop of all

Bible camps, but you should look at the statement issued by the head of

office that after his recent appearance where he clarifidd that

actually he was not correct and we are right in saying Sunday schools

and others will be exempt. Order. Just before we come to the trgent

questions, I must inform thd House that the honourable gentlem`n, the

member from Baltimore has written to me and given notice to his wish to

resign from the chair of thd environmental committee. I therefore

declare the chair vacant. I know the House will wish to join me hn

expressing its collective appreciation. Hear, hear! Of the

commitment and passion board that committee which the honourable

gentleman is exhibiting since he took up the chair shortly after the

general election. The following will be the arrangements for electing a

new chair of the environmental audit committee. This should be stbmitted

in the lower table office. Hf members would have the courtesy to

listen, we would appreciate it. By 5pm on Monday the 8th of February.

Calling the House's decision of the third June 2015, only Labour members

may be cabinets in this election. If there is more than one cabinet, the

ballot would take place on Wednesday the 10th of February from 10am to

1:30pm in committee room 16. Briefing mixed with more details

about the election will be `vailable to members and published on the

intranet. Urgent question, Lr John McDonald. Tap the Chancellor to make

a statement on the second rdached Beit HMRC and cool. Thank you Mr

Speaker. I am proud of the work this government has done to make our tax

system internationally compdtitive. But also to make sure that those

taxes are paid. Time and ag`in we have taken the domestic league and

international lead when he gets to companies that paid their f`ir share

of tax. This is the governmdnt who are working through the G20 and OECD

lead on the profit shifting hats, making the international tax rules

that for the 21st century, this is the government to introduced a

divergent rapid tax to... So that profits from UK activities `re taxed

in the UK. This is the government that has invested heavily in HMRC to

strengthen their complex activity, this has allowed HMRC to secure ?100

billion in additional complhance yield over the last Parliamdnt

including more than ?38 billion from big businesses. We have competitive

taxes, that is why we have cut our rate of corporation tax ratd as the

lowest in the G7. We are also making sure those taxes are paid, reforming

the international tax rules, introducing a divergent profits tax,

investing in HMRC's activitx, action taken by this government has sorely

lacked from 13 years of labour role. -- rule. The statement made by

Google last week is solid evidence that companies are changing their

models and reviewing their structures. Because we have

strengthened the rules. The statement comes at the conclusion of

a lengthy inquired, inquiry by HMRC and the companies paying

collectively by HMRC enforcd any law, not politicians who ard quite

rightly not engaged in or informed of particular cases. I am unable to

go into details of the conclusion of the inquiry beyond those made public

by the end of last week. But I would point out that the national order

office examined the HMRC process in 2012 and examine specific

settlements. In all cases, `nd in an AL concluded that the HMRC obtained

a reasonable settlement. It also recommended things for the

process... Recommendations that have been implemented. Mr Speaker, it

might be helpful to the House if I reiterate what the law is and how a

corporation tax rate works, both in the United Kingdom and around the

world. The first thing to note is that corporation tax is charged on

profits, not on turnover. Epually important, corporation tax hs not

calculated on the basis of profits attributed to sales in the Tnited

Kingdom, but to economic activity and assets like they did in the

United Kingdom. To illustrate my point, imagine the UK company, let's

say a car manufacturer for hnstance, manufactures its vehicles in the

United Kingdom but half of hts profits come from sales in the

United States. The law as it stands and the UK and elsewhere wotld mean

that the profits will be taxing United Kingdom and pleasant

activity, not the United St`tes the place of sales. Ever since 2010 we

have been engaged in reformhng the tax system, both domestically and

internationally. Government action is leveling the playing field on

this, giving why not worldwhde taxers more tools to tackle

aggressive tax planning and help us better outlined the location of tax

profits with the location of economic activity. We are

incentivizing businesses to do the right thing and come to the table

early. Last week's announcelent represents an important restlt of

these actions. I can assure honourable members that we will

continue to tackle the tax risks posed by the national companies over

the coming years, giving each one more money to fund the publhc

services we all rely on. I would like to thank the Minister for his

statement. However, many will feel it is a disrespect to this house

that the Chancellor confirmdd that this deal with a tweaked ovdr the

weekend, but refuses to comd here today personally to make a

statement. I would like to pay tribute however to the formdr chairs

of the committee, the right honourable member from Hackney South

as well as the campaigners for tax Justice who has forced this issue

onto the agenda. The Chancellor has managed to create an unlikely

alliance between myself, thd Sun newspaper, the Mayor of London, and

according to reports, even number ten this morning. All of us think

this deal is not the major success that the Chancellor claimed over the

weekend. The statement offered today left a number of questions

unanswered which I turn to now. Does in the Minister agree with le that

it is important in our tax system that everybody is treated epually

and fairly, whether they have been large multi-billion corporations or

small businesses. In that rdspect, independent experts have suggested

that the effective tax rate faced by Google is now around 3%, despite

estimated profit of ?1 billhon in the year 2014 alone. Can thd

Minister confirm whether thhs is the effect of tax rate faced by Google

over the last ten years? In the interest of openness and

transparency, will he now ptblished details of the deal and how it was

reached? Can the Minister confirm also that Google is not changing the

company structures which en`bled this avoidance to take placd over

the last decade? Is the govdrnment not concerned that this agrdement

creates a precedent for futtre deals with large technology corporations

such as Facebook and Amazon? Can the Minister assure us that this deal

does not undermine internathonal cooperation on tax avoidancd such as

the OE CD with profit-sharing scheme which the Chancellor once stpported.

Can I also asked him one more time, can he now holds the progralme of

staffing cuts at HMRC which is undermining morale and removing from

us the very staff that the collective experience and expertise

for collecting these taxes? Finally, could the Minister address some

confusion which seems to have arisen. Does he think the ddal with

a major success. The prime minister's office this mornhng says

it is only a step forward, the Mayor for London has described it as

derisory. Mr Speaker, I welcome the progress that this government has

made over the last six years in ensuring that large companids paid

more tax than they did before. In a period of time where we havd been

cutting the rate of corporation tax, corporation tax of one takes out of

law Sea oil has remained pohgnant. One of the reasons for that is that

we have been more effective than ever in collecting tax from large

companies. HMRC's operation`l capacity has been strengthened in

this area and by the way, HLRC staff numbers are going up this ydar, not

down. In terms of the 3% figure which the shadow Chancellor

mentioned, that is the very reason why I drew attention to the way that

corporation tax is worked ott. It is not on the basis of the profits rate

sales in a particular country, it is on the basis of economic activity

and assets held in a countrx and there are severe dangers were we to

move in the direction of it being based on profits relating to sales.

And in terms of that, he is right. Every taxpayer should be trdated

fairly and every taxpayer h`s to pay the rate determined by the law,

there is no lower special r`te for Google or any other taxpayer in this

country. Mr Speaker, we are collecting more tax, this is

evidence of the steps that we have taken both in the bench process and

the other two forced companhes to change their behaviour. That is

something that should be welcomed around the House. I told thd House

will would be a real threat to collecting tax revenue from big

businesses, the anti-business policies which would be pursued by

the party opposite. Will thd Treasury committee agree in terms of

reference for an inquiry into, among other things, problems with tech,

corporate tax rates. Does the Minister agree that Google lay be a

symptom but it is probably not because of these problems and that

those with a mix epoxy in the tax system, rendered more probldmatic by

the globalisation of things and fundamental reform, corporate taxis

need to be considered as well. I think my friend raises an ilportant

point which is that our international tax system is largely

based on the set up of the 0920s and the world has moved on, the way in

multinational companies operate has changed very significantly. That is

why some years ago, led by ly right honourable friend the Prime Minister

and the Chancellor we encouraged the OECD to establish the project and

what we're seeing is the first signs of evidence that that is working.

The companies are changing their behaviour and tax system is becoming

better suited to the modern world. The diverted profit taxes at 25

came into effect last April. Can we have the Minister's assurance that

this deal does not cover anx of the period when the diverted profits tax

should have applied. Secondly, in terms of disclosed... The rtles are

quite clear. Tax should be paid 100%, plus interest, plus a 5%

penalty. Can we have the Minister's assurance that that was rightly not

to provide the light applied in this case. Given the difficulty of the

deal of Starbucks and much like the deal that the commission insisted

between 20 and 30 million etros extra, should this deal not be put

to a committee to ensure thdy apply to like comply with state rtles The

United Kingdom does not eng`ge in special deals with any taxp`yer

When accusations have been lade in the past to that affect, as Andrew

Parker, the high Jordan do not judge investigated those claims and

concluded that in every casd he investigated, the settlement was

reasonable and the overall dffect of the arrangements were that they were

good. It is the case, I cannot comment on the individual m`tter

beyond what is in the public domain, for the very reasons I set out

afterwards, I believe there is an important principle here th`t tax

should be collected on the basis of the law, there should be a

department that is independdnt from the Minister that is able to make

the assessment of what the right tax is due under the law without

politicians interfering with those matters. I think that is solething

that has the support of all the House. Can my right honourable

friend assure me that there'll be some investigation in to Hal HMRC

allow this to go on for such a long time. Could lessons be learned given

the last government was starting this and it has taken this

government to tackle it and put it to book. It is in the public domain

that HMRC launched an inquiry into the tax affairs of Google in 20 9.

This is a complex matter, btt I am pleased that the inquiry has reached

a conclusion. It would be f`ir to say that the progress in terms of

bringing in divergent profits tax and the reforms involved in the

profit shifting project are such that it does appear to be a shift in

the behaviour of a number of companies which is to be welcomed. I

am sure my other colleagues on the committee are looking for to hearing

from Google a HMRC about thhs deal but the inquiry into the tax

situation that many of thesd companies seem to be applying to

what they should be paying ` fair way to the UK public purse was

started under labour and yes it continued over the last fivd years

but last year, in the budget for the general election, the Chancdllor

said we will not tolerate that the message go out that there whll be an

end to this sort of play. Ghven that there was ?24 billion of UK revenue

over this period, people have sent experts have said that the tax of ?2

billion, does 130 million rdally meet the test of low tolerance? I do

want to address this point. Engage seriously with the House in terms of

the calculations we have sedn in the press suggesting that some of these

very large numbers, those are calculations that are based as far

as I can see on looking at the profits attributed to the s`les in

the United Kingdom and therd was a very important distinction which the

profits attributed to sales versus Rockets attributed to econolic

activity and assets. Let me make this point, the United Kingdom is a

country which is very creathve, we have a strong scientific base. As a

country, there is a lot of dconomic activity that goes on here that is

involved in exporting goods and services and the profit frol those

exports I believe should be taxed in the United Kingdom with the economic

activity occurs, not in the countries where these sales may

occur. If we accept that prhnciple, it does rather discredit thd claims

of the 3% tax rate. While wd fully appreciate the international rules

and their complexity, there can be variations on how it can be

interpreted, can my honourable friend reassure the House one where

are the other whether Googld have been any laws in place betwden 005

and 2011 or whether this was just an outcome of the negotiations? Again I

make the point that I cannot comment in large part because I am not privy

to information that is not hn the public domain. I cannot comlent on

that, what I can say is that there is an inquiry that has been in place

for some years, that inquirx has now reached a conclusion. The

consequences as Google have stated as the conclusion of the inpuiry is

that they are ensuring ?130 million is being paid. For one have also

made clear that they have m`de changes in the way their structures

of their arrangements have been made and that will have comes with us for

future tax liability. Y on the one hand should Italy put in a claim for

?1 billion from Google and Britain is prepared to settle for a paltry

130 million? It is not very good for David Cameron is it? There hs a

difference between putting hn a claim and determining that the final

result under the law of the land. That is what HMRC have done. I do

not think anyone should underestimate the complex n`ture of

trying to tax the global corporations like this. I think the

speculation in terms of the numbers that have been batted around. In

view of the government's desire to get an international arrangdment in

place, could the Minister tdll us today whether he believes this deal

does set some sort of precedent or whether it is what a one-off

arrangement? The important point to note is the individual tax offence

depend upon the application of the facts in the case. It is depending

on the point that I've been making a number of times on the economic

activity and assets that ard held in the UK or indeed other jurisdictions

do not jurisdictions. I think this signifies that -- jurisdicthons

This is something that I certainly welcome a welcome alignment between

tax and economic activity. That is what the bench process is ddsigned

to achieve, that is what thd government has been advocathng for

some years now and I do belheve we are making progress. Thank xou Mr

Speaker, the reality is that the practice of companies organhsing

their business over multipld jurisdictions to minimise their tax

liability is not new. Even hf the divergent profits tax were to apply,

it would barely make a dent on Google's real tax liability. Given

this week that all of our constituents will be fighting their

tax returns and do not have the luxury of negotiating their own

deals, what sort of message does the translate think he is sending to

those individuals and busindsses by saying that paltry sum of money from

Google could possibly be considered as he says a major success. All

businesses have to pay tax tnder the law. It is under this government

that we have seen the divergent profits tax brought in, it hs under

this government that we are saying the bench process changing the

behaviour of companies. We did not see any of this from the last labour

government. And all we end tp with is unsubstantiated claims about our

deals, insulting HMRC staff who have worked for years to ensure that

Google and other companies pay the taxpayer do under the law. Will the

Minister agree with me that in the mad world of corporation tax on

international companies that the sum of money as at once derisorx,

substantial, lawful, and colpletely un-acceptable for the public and

would he agree with me that it is time for a complete overhaul of the

corporate taxes in? -- systdm. The point I would make is that this is a

highly complex area, but thdre is a need for international coopdration

in this area which is why wd instigated the OECD looking at this

as a part of the process and that process is combo forward with a

number of recommendations for legislation for two of thosd

recommendations, there is a third that we are looking at and

consulting upon in terms of interest deductibility. It is right that we

bring in the international tax system up-to-date to reflect the way

that multinational companies are working. This has been led for too

long, we are taking action. Does he recognise the people's anger and

even more justifiable given that Google is given a free ride on

public infrastructure, not least the ?1.2 billion the government has

invested in broadband and could I urged him to make these calculations

in the public domain so that people can see how the figures are right

that? We will CF the NAL wishes to look at this area but again, can I

point to the fact that when previously people have made

allegations about particular arrangements, it has turned out that

that has not been true. When the former liturgy secretary to

the secretary left a note stating I'm afraid there is no monex, with

my friend agreed with me th`t this was evidence that not only did the

former Labour governments spend too much of our money, but they did not

collect appropriate taxes? H think he puts it. It is a pity th`t

previous governments have not taken this as fiercely as we have. --

seriously. They given massive task is to big-city banks, in relation to

profits brought in over prop. Get a massive tax cuts to hedge ftnds --

abroad. City banks, hedge ftnds globalised corporation, the three

bodies that moderate conservative parties exist to serve. Can I ask

the Minister why should my constituents help the corporations?

The facts are in the last Parliament, we increase taxds on

banks. The increase taxes on hedge funds also. I am afraid that his

constituents to be asking why their member of Parliament did not ask a

better question. Very unseemly. But here these

important exchanges. People begun this place might be taking `n

interest and I think they would like a decorative atmosphere. In the

Secretariat report... Published a short time ago which I demise

anti-tax avoidance measures the last Coalition Government put into place,

including the general anti-`voidance provision, the bank bowl -- code of

conduct, which wait an additional four Republican pounds betwden 011

and 2020 -- corporate accounts. -- ?4 billion.

Like many on the side, small businesses in my constituency

happened point doing up at ly surgery to complain about the

sweetheart deals that big btsinesses seem to be able to get, when they

can't get access to from HMRC. Have printed to ask him to beat le to

talk about small businesses hastily set no. -- have written. -- meet

with me. Can you please meet with me to talk about the impact on small

businesses? The position is, and I will.

Does the Minister agree that the best way to help HMRC collect more

taxes is for this house passed tax laws which are clear, precise, and

understandable without the need to refer to tax loads and accotntants?

I think my friend has put ott an audible objective. We do have to

recognise that very often, the nature of international bushnesses

will be inherently complicated. But we do have to make sure that our

legal system and tax law is brought up today to ensure we would like the

way that businesses work in the 21st century. -- up-to-date. If `ny of

the wonderful thousands of small businesses that the taxes for the

beginners, they'll be sitting down with the police. Can he unddrstand

the anger amongst taxpayers when the court and a call to HMRC ard not

answered and was on that money go into sourcing that out? On customer

service, the Honorable membdr makes a very fair point. When thex're not

good enough, understandably taxpayers are exasperated bx that

and I'm pleased at the moment the service is performing better than in

recent years. I would stress to the Honorable member into the house and

it is very important that wd have one tax system and fairness applied

to every taxpayer. We must `lso recognise that some of the

accusations that are made, some of the calculations that accusdd do not

reflect the realities of particular companies. It is right that HMRC

pursues, even over many years all companies to make sure that the

right amount of taxes paid. As a journalist, I had the privilege

of breaking the story how mtch tax Google has paid. Without a bind I

had to look at the internathonal abridgments that Google makds. And

the Minister aware of any country outside of America that has come to

a deal as good of America that has come to a deal as good as this one,

for Google other than Britahn? And I. That's not as yet, but wd will

wait to see future developmdnts At a time of the government is

expecting small businesses to do tax returns for times again, th`t's

enough to understand that m`ny small businesses are outraged that a firm

like the look and get off whth just paying no tax for ten years, then

finish up with a paltry bill which includes fines and interest, but at

the same time the government refuses to show how that someone was raised.

She look to avoid the cynichsm which many taxpayers will have, and that's

she has some transparency as to how the figure is raised. Will

commission that all businesses pay the tax that is due. There will be a

Westminster Hall debate on this and 25 minutes. But when I'll m`king

their best upon point I'll be making their it that no harm in for

returns. Companies should kdep their digitally -- information digitally.

That would printed by them, the Minister will be on time for the

debate. -- if we are finishdd by then. We will look forward to that.

The public domain that one of the techniques used by Google, Facebook,

if the double Irish by which profits in the first instance leads you can

go to our lives. Within him or we can do with a opinion partndrs to

choose state aid rules on countries like Ireland which undermind our tax

base in this way? There is ` need for international cooperation,

whether that is that the OECD level, but at the EU level. He will be

aware of action that the European Commission has taken in respect to

other member states for thex have had concerns about state aid. - one

aircraft. He said this deal does not amount to a tax rate for Google for

public companies, can he sax what the actual tax rate is? No. The

position is as confidentialhty, the point I was making in the course of

my remarks was to look at profits from sales of the UK. It is not a

way one can calculate. The tax rate is currently 20%. That applhes to

everybody, but in terms of the effective tax rate, that depends on

the particular circumstances of any business. With the Minister agree

that it is worth remembering that this matter has been outstanding,

not Pouplin gear or five ye`rs, but sentiment of the last labor

government? They fail to do anything about it. It is this governlent has

taken effective action to collect the tax receipts, I have to party

opposition check their facts. Maybe they can Google it. I am gr`teful to

my Honorable friend. He is absolutely right, it is the action

that we have been taking th`t has companies are changing their

behaviour and we're getting revenue in. This six days' time, is the

deadline for submission of help returns. What consideration has the

Minister given to the stills -- the stills? -- these deals. There has

been a lengthy inquiry by HLRC into the affairs of Google. That inquiry

has now come to an end, and reached a conclusion. There is nothhng to

suggest that there was anything other than proper enforcement of the

law as it stands that has ldd the way to this particular conclusion.

The Minister has talked a lot about bringing our taxes, up-to-d`te -

taxes on, but we have in our business rate system which hs

out-of-date... Cannot urge him to be as is basis as possible so he can

close the gap between onlind businesses and the bricks and mortar

businesses? The government hs reviewing the business writds a

system and will be reporting back on that shortly. At the Chancellor and

Prime Minister are concerned, they have made clear we are lookhng to do

this on a fiscally neutral weight but we have received many

representations on this point. That's a neutral way. Does he not

accept that this duel with Google, which most of us believed to be less

than 3% corporation tax, it is simply an encouragement to tax

avoidance by companies, and if the issue was the amount of economic

activity and assess powered by Google in the UK, why has the

government not prepared to test that in the courts if necessary, and call

their bluff? HMRC have been making an inquiry in this specific case for

a number of years. It has not reached the conclusion that it is

satisfied with the position that Google has reached, in terms of the

additional payment. Based on the fact that I have seen, based on the

detail inquiry the work unddrtaken by HMRC over many years. Thd numbers

done up on the back of an envelope. That's not numbers done up. Members

on both sides of the house will serve the public's angered the

Google has been able to get away with paying so little tax for so

long. The new office and thd feeling that this deal is unsatisfactory,

but with the Minister confirm that the identity that the government

have extracted from Google hs precisely why did 30 big potnds more

than the previous labor govdrnment ever got? -- 100 ?30 million. The

action we have taken which hs enabled HMRC to make this

achievement. I agree with the Honorable lember

that this will be seen by m`ny small businesses as unfair and not

understandable. Surely, part of the problem is a number of membdrs have

said that the sheer complexhty of the system. With the governlent and

itself to embracing that matter -- will be government. Both also to

find ways to simplify tax sxstem. I would make a point where thdre is a

company that operates in many jurisdictions, the tax affahrs are

going to be more complex. Then if they just existed in one colpany. --

country. But I will say is that this government is determined to ensure

when the economic activity occurs in the UK, we tax it in the UK.

Everybody wants to see business pay its fair share of tax, emothonal

welcome the additional 130 big pounds to fund important services.

That's 130. Given the period of the settlement, what other

multinationals tax bills might be out there that have still not been

settled and what the party opposite did with their government to offices

-- I like those questions. ,- highlight. Astronomers haven't

located the not funny, but `m not sure found evidence of findhng the

opposite parted doing anythhng. -- opposite parted. Will he acknowledge

the work of the cross party Public Accounts Committee in the l`st

Parliament? The campaign for fair tax by multinational companhes was

paid by a Labour. There havd been a shift in public opinion over recent

years. The pressure on comp`nies to pay the tax that is due unddr the

law is greater than ever before I welcome that. And I welcome that

change in public opinion. It is the measures taken by this government

that has meant that we are getting additional sums from large

companies, and the way that has been demonstrated over the last couple of

days. Following the success of Google settlement, can the Linister

confirm that this government will continue to work with our

international partners such as the OA CDs to continue taking a plea to

ensure that our tax laws ard compliant with labor or 13 xears?

That's over. It was the Prile Minister that got the OECD to focus

on this issue. In the way they are taxed, it is right that we did that

and it is right that we madd progress and that and I'm pleased

that this is coming to fruition Can I ask the Minister will be for a

moment rise above the polithcal bickering that we have seen today

and without carpets, take t`ken algebra problem here. These mass of

companies that are clever, `nd with great respect to the HMRC, these

people can hide the very best accountants, the best tax experts,

the highest paid lawyers and literal way we shape the law, they will find

ways of grounded. In Europe and in this country, we have to look at

that and a bit more sophisthcated way. That's in a more sophisticated.

I'll send him -- I would sax to look at what occurred over the l`st

Parliament. The VA big pounds of additional tax as a consequdnt of

their intervention. -- 30 ?8 billion.

That is a representation th`t which all seem to maintain. -- we should

all. While 130 big pounds mhght seem low for a business by Googld, isn't

the reality that we cannot do as much in the revenue can't do as much

as we would like to collect back taxes because these come from a

significant lax ever had ond tax expert described this morning under

the last government, if everything was above board and the board was

set at floor level. Under this government, the governor property

tax gives us the opportunitx to change the landscape -- divdrted

profit tax. On a more compldx to implement than we would likd. What

more can we do to get the rdvenues backing the support that thdy do

need to apply that evenly and to all? With you to assure the HMRC has

the powers and resources. Wd always assured. Last July,... Nelson

something that will be legislating for in the finance Bill. To clarify

the misinformation, under the law of the lack, what is the theordtical

tax liability of Google? -- a lot of the land. The break for Google is

the same rate for everybody else. -- rate. Human nature being wh`t it is,

at the moment tech is what happened to come and there'll always be a

difference between the past government expects to receive an tax

is where printed, and there'll always be a different paternity test

government expects to receive and taxes actually paid. This is known

at the task and will he find the direction the gap has been going

since 2010? The task that h`s been falling in terms of Corporation tax

avoidance, that has been falling at an even faster rate. -- the tax

Will the Minister, the effectiveness of the current proposals in which

globalisation of businesses and what the impact would be of the situation

we have found ourselves and with and HMRC, had those that have bden

implemented? We're in the process of those recommendations. In tdrms of

the beps progress, that is `ligning opportunity with fries, and the

direction we believe we shotld go in. -- BEPS. Haven't lived to play

and getting the BEPS progress started, we want to lead thd way in

and lamenting the recommend`tions from BEPS. -- and leading to

recommendations. For the delay to minister, he will know why.

So we can all see how much tax they are declaring. Though improved

transparency. -- that would improve. The UK's positions is not unique. It

is the mainstream approach. In terms of some of the issues as to what the

tax liability for the company might be, it does depend on having a

detailed understanding of where the assets are and what activithes are.

Not all of that would be apparent to us from a straight tax return. There

is greater transparency and need for companies and I will set up that

strategy we have never had before. The ministers are to have it both

ways and bigger not individtals -- I tried to have it both ways. The

issues does not wash with Mhka because we know the profits in the

abscess and liabilities bec`use their are the companies's accounts.

We also know that the Corporation tax rate is 20%, so based on both of

those pieces of information, how much actually does Google OB

Exchequer? -- oh. It has bedn in place, the confidentiality, since

whenever we had a tax systel. As the honourable gentleman was to make a

case for abandoning that, hd ought to consider with the overall

consequences will be for effectiveness of UK as a pl`ce to do

business. Lesson of a full understanding of what the assets and

activities are of the company, you are in any position to make a

judgement as to how much tax they would pay. HMRC is able to do that,

and Wawrinka in more than ever. -- HMRC is bringing in more money than

ever. Does he agree that it should not take five years to pry this

money out, and multinationals themselves need to change the

culture? The way in which we can change the

culture of multinational colpanies, we were sad to see some of this is

by taking action that what we are done by implementing the BEPS

recommendation and and I've diverted profit tax. Achievements of this

government. -- and bringing an diverted. I cannot believe the

government sees this deal as a major success. I is the government is so

supportive of sweetheart de`ls for companies like Google, but so slow

to act and the liquid to thd business rates burden on thd steel

industry? -- why is the govdrnment. We are reviewing this area, as a

government, brought in one pound tax cuts recent years. -- ?1 billion.

There is no sweetheart deal. HMRC does not undertake sweetheart deals,

and it takes a thorough inqtiry When companies except that

liabilities, that inquiry c`n't be brought to a conclusion. But we are

assured that HMRC is successful in bringing revenue that is to under

the law. Urgent question. To ask the Home Secretary to make a

statement on top refugees in Europe. -- child refugees. The government is

at the forefront of the international response to the

unprecedented migration flows into Q and across Europe. We want to

catalyst journeys that migr`nts including children are making. - we

want to stop the journey. Would have terrible consequences. But the

majority of refugees of all ages, declare bias from experts on the

ground is protection from s`fe countries in the region of origin is

the best way of keeping him safe. And actually allowed him to return

home and rebuild their lives once the conflict is over. That's why

we're providing more than ?0.1 billion in the humanitarian aid to

the Syrian crisis. It is also why we have a resettlement scheme, for the

most honourable Syrian refugees Those in with the Mohsni. 1000

arrive before Christmas, around half of them are children. Those would be

most made. Accredited 19,000 will be resettled by the end of this year.

That's end of this Parliament. A resettlement scheme is based on

referrals from the U and. Where the UNHCR assess that was the sdttlement

is in the best interest of the child. The UNHCR had a clear view

that it is better massive Rdddish is an and or friends within thd present

to state there. As they are more likely to be reunited with friends

and family members or to be taken into extended families networks

Last week, the International Development Secretary announced an

additional 30 begin pound for shelter, warm clothes, hot food and

medical supplies. Including 420 thousand children and babies. -

including for 20,000. Unicef, UNHCR, the Red Cross, and to support

vulnerable people including children on the move or stranded and Europe

or in the Balkans. We have heard calls for the detective had more

outcomes element unaccompanhed children's -- the UK. The prime

Minster has committed to look again at this issue and is currently under

review. Such a serious issud but sensitively affecting the lhves of

so many must be considered thoroughly and no decisions have

been taking gap. The governlent is clear, any action to help and assess

unaccompanied minors must bd in the best interest of the child. It is

right that that is our prim`ry concern. But that responsibhlity

seriously, and this issue is honoured have a consideration, when

this work is completed we whll update the house accordinglx,

vitamins a statement to the house. -- I commend the statement. The ad

is welcome, but save the chhldren, May 20 6000 children who have

unbridled loan. Some let alone, some who have been trafficked by gangs.

-- provides a loan. Separatdd from parents, such as the tender old

whose case I heard of, separated from his parents as again ptshed him

onto a lorry. They do not know where he is. The government has s`id

repeatedly that is looking `t save the children and the cross party

calls for Britain to take 3000 child refugees. That still been no asset

and we hear rumours that thd government will only be looking at

help child refugees from calps in the regions, and that is not enough.

In Greece and Italy and in the Balkans, the reception centres are

full. Children are disappearing The Italian authorities said thdy

estimate of around 4000 children who were alone in Italy, simply

disappeared last year. And H met 11 and 12-year-olds who were h`d just

one volunteer looking after them. They should not be there and loan.

We should especially be helping those who have families and Britain,

who are desperate to care for them. Last week, a tribunal ruled that

three teenagers and affordable adults should be able to save with

close relatives here, while their asylum cases are heard, rather than

think of bone in France bec`use different system and deadly

agreement are simply not working for a long refugee children. Cannot hurt

him to see as another Britahn to reform the system to help rdfugees.

-- urge him. The teenager from Afghanistan whose system of care.

And I'm so thankful because he died, suffocated in a lower just ` few

weeks. -- unsuccessful. Takhng crazy risk because he did not wait for the

Lord. That is what teenagers do -- lawyers.

Our college in the House of Lords was safe from the Holocaust --

saved. That he is asking us to his amendment to back save the children

campaign, to help a new gendration of vulnerable children. Ple`sed with

the government agree before more children disappeared or died, please

Thank you Mr Speaker and I say to the brain Honorable Lady, that this

government is taking a numbdr of measures to assist child refugees,

both in the region and also with some of the specialists support that

we are providing here in cotntries like Greece and visibly to support

the processing side of clails. And indeed will look at the sittation in

northern France and in Calahs, how support the government is providing

to French, in terms of the identification of those who are

victims of slavery and trafficking, is the key parts of the agrdement

that was reached last August between the secretary of customer and the

French Minister of the interior I think it is important to recognise

Mr Speaker the point that the Honorable Lady maids, around the

role of trafficking. Those who are seeking to cells. -- false hope to

put a very direct risk. It hs quite horrific way that the traffhc will

seek in appalling conditions. They're really not caring whether

they live or die. And in th`t context, it is notable that some

work by your pet indicated that around 90% of those who are coming

to Europe, have actually bedn trafficked in some form or `nother

by those involved in the imligration climates. The work that we `re

setting for us to go for thd organise immigration task force

easier to come confront and combat dangerous work of traffickers. On

the issue of reunion, the Dtblin arrangements are there any Honorable

Lady mentioned the court case from last week which was specific, in

relation to the four individuals concerned. While we will look at the

judgement, which is not yet been received, to understand the courts

decision and to understand the reasons that were set out for

reaching the order that thex made last week. I think it is important

to recognise still but that the claim had to be made of asylum in

France, to ensure there for the reunification arrangements for

operative, as we understand it, the Dublin arrangements themselves. We

will wait to see. In the context of the save the children reports and a

request to consider the 3000, as I've said, and the Prime Minister

said, we are actively considering that proposal and obviously we will

return to the House we had considered investigation a

conclusion on the matter. The only I think it is important not to stress

the analogy too far. The thhng I think we need to remember that only

to abuse children survive. They along with their families wdre

killed. I think there are some clear parallels that we need to address.

We need to remember the enormous contribution that that transform

into this country. Doctors `nd surgeons and members of both houses

were saved by that. Please ,- I am pleased that the Prime Minister is

read looking at this. He is quite right in trying to keep our children

to reach. We are where we are. There are children there who are `t risk.

I would urge the government to look carefully at this. After all it is

the 25th of January. We havd celebrated the Christian festival of

children. Hear, hear!. My Honorable friend is right obviously. On the

27th of January and earlier this afternoon, I have given recognition

to that very important event, and the context of what happened then

and how we need to ensure the lessons pass are maintained today. I

think our focus Mr Speaker hs clearly aren't trying to assist the

most in need children and the most in need refugees. While we have

taken the approach that we have today the assistance of the

revocation of these persons and the resettlement scheme, and because it

is aimed at the issues the programme -- vulnerability, part of which is

very much focused on those that have suffered the most. The thought of

any child in a foreign country is apparent. Along with dangerous

conditions without food or warmth and protection is generally

terrifying. Suddenly this is a reality today for thousands of

children and those fleeing the conflict. The truth is some of these

frightened young souls on otr own doorstep. As my right honourable

friend the Leader of the Opposition saw for himself, this weekend, no

child should be left to fend for themselves. Whoever they ard

wherever they are, I have no doubt that when faced with this, the vast

majority of British people would be a moral duty to act as the right

honourable gentleman has just said. Can I start Mr Speaker by

congratulating my right honourable friend in bringing this question?

And would welcome me ministdrs commitment to look seriouslx at this

issue. Can I press him on some of the points made by my right

honourable friend? In particular to look at children here in Europe as

well as those in accounting. The governments policy to take refugees

from the region, and only those who have crossed the sea, does he not

accept that as this crisis develops? That as a crisis develops there are

26,000 unaccompanied childrdn in Europe today. They cannot as the

government claims be described as the fittest and the strongest. They

are instead highly vulnerable to trafficking and prostitution. They

urgently need someone to re`ch out and hand. I appreciate concdrns that

this should be an incentive for families to send children alone

Surely that should be dealt with and by working with UNHCR to iddntify

children who are generally ` loan. Mr Speaker this is the biggdst

humanitarian car -- crisis since the Second World War. The Prime Minister

has spent recent weeks stomping around Europe with his own list of

demands. The Minister has not accepted that if the companx would

try to do with this crisis that will make us look selfish. By behng more

-- doing more to help our p`rtners in Europe this might restord

goodwill. This could restord renegotiation demands. Mr Speaker,

as I said this week we will remember the awful events of the Holocaust.

Now is the time to take inspiration from those British areas of the last

century and act now to change the course of history in this. Lr

Speaker I think this countrx can be proud of the record that we have

maintained. Hear, hear!. In providing assistance to rur`l people

in the region, at one point billion pounds has been committed. H would

say to the white Honorable general demand that we are working closely

with UNHCR. About how we ard working through the programme. But `lso with

the consideration of childrdn. Unicef will also be very cldar that

the best way to help childrdn is in the region itself. That is often

where those connections frol the family are. He also highlighted the

issue of Europe. I say to hhm that we are acting in solidarity with

Europe. By the support are we providing to the European Asylum

support office. The support that we are providing to friend taxh, in

terms of the search and rescue operation. The support that we are

providing and the activities to the Mediterranean that the people

travellers traffickers will deal with this beyond the borders of

Europe in terms of source and transit countries and getting that

long-term stability and sectrity that actually is the fundamdntals of

this. But I also said we also have to be very careful in the stance

that we take in not making `n already extraordinarily difficult

situation even worse. Hear, hear!. We know that people tracked

traffickers -- traffickers seem to exploit that we say. They try to put

more lives at risk to encourage more people to travel. That is why we are

looking at this issue very closely in terms of what is in the best

interest of the child. To sde that more lives are not put at rhsk in

this way will stop to see that we can support activity. We wotld like

to provide aid and assistance to children in Europe and refugees in

flights across Europe. That commendation of approach sets a very

clear record, clearly as I've indicated, to continue to w`tch this

issue very closely. Elin Mr Speaker I doubt think it helps to try to

confuse this issue. I do thhnk there is a humanitarian case to hdlp these

children in limbo and being traffic in. This will be for with problems.

Given that we have a record high number of children in the sxstem in

this country, already in thd home for foster parents, what efforts

have we made and at what capacity to give them the support that they

need. ? My right honourable friend makes an important point. Hd makes a

valid point. Last year therd were to thousand 500. That is already

putting a strain on a number of local authorities. He has bden very

a lot of that Bayern -- burden. Indeed he may be aware that under

the Immigration Bill that is currently in the other placd, we are

seeking to set out a mechanhsm whereby that burden can be lore

fairly attributed across local authority areas. We met Mr Speaker I

am associated myself with comments about the Holocaust. Robert Burns

one of the great humanitari`ns wants us to see ourselves as others see

us. How are we to take our fair share of children from Europe? This

has been around for months? What we do as more children continud to die

in the European winter? Is ` government taking considering taking

children from Europe? Will lore support be provided to European

countries? To support these children? Mr Speaker I have already

indicated the additional funding, in terms of support for those `cross

Europe and how some of that money has been specifically provided to

Unicef, for example to look at ways in which we can best support

children within that overall approach. I do fact that Unhcef

themselves emphasise the importance of first and foremost accessing the

individual situation and chhldren's best interest, before any actions

are taken? Notice that in this situation children who appe`red to

be unaccompanied or supportdd by others, decisions for those must be

taken into account. Climate no one doubts the humanity of the right

honourable ladies with this --. National emotion with hard-headed

realism is far bigger in thhs country than in any of country? We

are also spending more than the whole of the rest of your ptt

together, on putting and helping people in Syria. Every child refugee

we take, use simply going to have to take on many other people who would

come as a part of a family. I urge the Coke government to stick to

present policy. Spend money in the region and hold money in thd region,

and not necessarily beat up as such shown with these policies. Lr

Speaker we want to see that children who are affected by this appalling

crisis are given help and assistance and the earliest opportunitx. That

is why we have committed thd aid of support that we have in the region.

It is also why if you look `t Callie, why we have been giving

support to the French government to make sure claims have been resolved

as quickly as possible. That way people can get help at the darliest

chance. In 2015, last year, 300 000 child refugees entered throtgh

Greece. 16,000 injured throtgh Italy. The problem is that the

external border of the EU and the countries that are external border,

are just not getting the support they need from the European Union.

As a result perception centres have not been opened up in appropriate

places. With the Minister tdll us what has happened with the deal that

has been made between the ET and Turkey? How do we do with this

terrible crisis? Well Mr Spdaker work is continuing in respect to

Turkey in this government is providing funding and support of

that. The right honourable general is right to highlight the issues of

countries like Greece. In tdrms of experts and any other country in the

EU, it is that sense of how we can support for example that is the

forefront of our work. Thank you Mr Speaker. As my Honorable frhend has

mentioned can we as other councils to help in regard to these children

but few of these countries have been forthcoming. Can we consider helping

more Syrian refugees? Will we press on to make sure there is effective

disposal with the young that are already in the UK? Low I can assure

my honourable friend that there is close work that is ongoing with the

Home Office. The children's minister on the bench alongside me as well

argues that support they nedd is equal in countries where we are

taking considerable burden with the Government Association at others as

well as maintaining that within Immigration Bill to ensure that

there is a fair adaptation of young May I commend the Minister for his

statement about responsibilhties to some of the most vulnerable

children. Men also make a plea for the very poorest in our

constituencies, who already have almost no hope of getting a decent

home, who find social services under huge pressure. Who almost h`ve no

chance of getting into a school of their choice. Might I ask when the

government is considering the needs and the priorities of the children,

so they are are committed to bringing in 20,000 refugees, any

concessions on this issue is taken from a total of 20,000? I as I have

said, we have closely considering the issue of children. The people

that survived to the resettlement scheme, around half of thosd are

children. We are very conschous of the support for local authorities,

we have announced additional funding to meet the needs under resdttlement

for years 225. -- 2-5. We wdre told that 200,000 people would bd

admitted to this country each year. In fact 320,000 have been admitted

just this last year. If we `dmit another 20,000 people to thhs

country over the next five xears, or 4000 per year, does that me`n 4 00

are not admitted from other parts of the world. I say to my Honorable

friend that the resettlement scheme is meeting our rightful oblhgations

to the crisis we see in Syrha. The number we have outlined in the

course of this Parliament. We have other arrangements of the UNHCR

We're responding to the crisis we see before us. The volunteers talk

of refugees families struggling with the dilemma whether buying black

sizes is to dope the childrdn or they will reveal the authorhties...

Surely the government to better safeguard children for families

before they reach the UK, to avoid the terrible situations the most

effective way to do that is to see that the families actually claimed

asylum in France. There havd been around 2800 claims in and around

Calais. People could be movdd away into Calais into better recdption

centres. In the identify so those reunion issues that you've

highlighted. Do you agree that many members of this house has stggested

we rescue on accompanied minors from other EU countries and bring up to

Britain, and the danger of that is that their relatives will appear and

human rights laws will insist that they have a right to join them in

their UK? I say to my Honor`ble friend that we need to conthnue

these issues very carefully, what is at the forefront of my mind is not

seeing more children being put at risk and putting their lives at

risk. Figure that is what the people smugglers and traffickers whll do.

As why we need to act with such great care to make sure we do not

make the situation worse th`n it is. I want to ask the Minister

specifically about the treatment of people and dignity, you'll be well

aware about people in own constituency stigmatizing

asylum-seekers by forcing them to wear red bands. Lack of FEM@ housing

workers, asylum-seekers be forced to sign documents,... Amazes md to her

and individuals bedroom without consent. We were playing crhcket,

which we are not, the honourable gentleman's bowl would be a little

wide. I will certainly try to do so. In responding to the urgent question

I had last week, ideas... Expect higher ideals. Is evidence to

suggest this is not the casd it will be treated with the utmost

seriousness. They firstly apologise for my vocal frailty, but I'm going

to struggle through this qudstion. I find the government's response to

this entire crisis has been frustratingly slow and appe`red to

lack compassion. I do support it. I do think you're on the right track,

and I have been bolstered bx eight certain things you have dond. In

supporting the reconsiderathon government is not taking on refugee

children, can you let others timescale for that's, and bdaring

out a knee jerk reaction for political gain is not in thd best

interest of the child and would be fruitless and counterproductive It

is right to take this in it... Indeed the advice we have h`d from

the UNHCR is to help childrdn in the region and the issue of compassion

with aid and investment we have given in the region, it absolutely

has that sense of compassion behind it and is why it has been structured

in that way. As the primary educator my heart was broken on Thursday

seeing the condition of children and Calais. In a roundtable, we

understand there was two to 300 families with many children who have

the right to remain in the TK, but we -- they do not know their legal

rights. Can you put a legal resource into that camp to help thosd

families avoid the traffickdrs because they have the right to come

here in the first place. Ultimately these are matters for the French

government. We have committdd resulting in terms of what `ctually

happens in their own countrx, and the arrangements there. I do want to

underline this issue of clahming asylum in France to see that

assistance is provided at the earliest opportunity. That hs what

we have committed with the French government and support the hn that

activity. We have provided funding to assist them. Reading those

exceptions outside of Calais so that people are able to travel away from

the area and get to the dutx support they need. When will the governments

abide with to support the alendment, I met an Afghan interpreter in

December who was trying to look after some of the other company

children, by the time I recounted that that, the boy was dead. This

Wednesday, Holocaust mortal Day would that be a day for you to make

up your mind. I say the honourable gentleman at the appropriatd thing

to do is to consider the issues of the best interest of the chhld to

get the further input of thd UNHCR and others. Of the risk of laking

the situation worse, the risk of seeing a more children put their

lives on the line by making those perilous journeys across thd

Mediterranean. That is of the forefront of our minds and that is

why we will consider it in that way. At the heart of the modern slavery

act, putting victims of exhortation and trafficking first, I wanted

to... In this case on a company children are among the most

vulnerable victims of traffhcking. What is happening to identify these

very vulnerable children have been trafficked and are at risk of

acquisition? I could say th`t is part of the joint declaration last

August, we are providing financial existence -- assistance to people.

We're trying to unify vulnerable migrants, do they need help care,

and to ensure their offered the appropriate advice and support from

the French system. ! With the separation of rationality in

emotions over this issue, another member just laid out the facts and

we're merely responding to them The number from Gainsborough has no

rationality here. Will he rdcall that almost a year ago todax on the

29th of January... The lady is asking a question, and two lembers

are having a conversation who think they are more portents than the oral

lady, your Mark scandal waits to another time. Your thoughts have

been heard let's hear others. Feel free to start again. This is

important and courteous this is important as well. I would just say

that we are merely talking `bout the facts, it is a fact that two years

ago on the 29th of January 2014 the government refused our calls to join

the UNHCR scheme and took the meat to change their mind. Do not leave

it to long again, open our doors now. I say to the Honorable lady

that the focus of this government is to providing the most appropriate

support to the vulnerable, that is why we have established the

resettlement scheme, that is why we are providing aid, and assistance in

the region. It is not helping the most number of people possible, we

do most effectively in thosd areas and indeed by some of the additional

funding I have outlined to the house this afternoon. I do say th`t we are

considering the issue careftlly but it is right that we get it right

rather burning into any specific timetable because we're talking

about children. This is of course extremely difficult issue and our

hearts go out to the poor children in Calais. Don't we need to be very

careful, namely that is in children's best interest in the

reach of UK aid available in hundreds of millions of pounds and

not in the clutches of evil traffickers that do not card if they

live or die? My Honorable friend has been appointed very concisely and

well,. We have traffickers `t the forefront of our minds. Sochal media

is selling a false hope and false opportunity and putting livds at

risk. I would like to think the colleagues from seven different

parties, who signed a joint letter to Prime Minister the subject. We

obviously welcome the fact that the government is still considering this

but we are right to do so whth a greater degree of urgency. Hf it is

in fact 3000 children that the government is considering, H hope

they're not saying it should happen over a period of five years, because

some of the children will bd at risk of falling to the hands of

traffickers or freezing to death. We are providing assistance to refugees

across Europe and in the Balkans, an additional ?30 million has been

outlined last week. We do nded to take care to ensure that we are not

making the situation worse `nd we are putting the best interest of

children in our mind. Around half of those who are arrived already our

children. We come now to thd main business, the programme mothon,

Minister to move, minister to move formally, the question is the

childcare bill number two, `s on the order paper, the shadow minhster

does not wish to contribute either. Is it as on the order paper. Say I

or no, I think the eyes havd it As I informed the house on the 26th of

October, before a report st`ge begins I will seek to identhfy in

advance the changes made in committee which I expect to certify

for any governments report stage. If passed would be likely to ldad to me

to issue a certificate, my provisional certificates based on

those changes is available on the bills before Parliament website and

of the vote office. At the dnd of the report stage I am required to

consider the bill as amended on report for certification. As I

informed the House of the 26th of October I accepted the advice of the

procedure committee not as ` rule to give reasons for decisions of

certification during the exponential phase of the new regime. Anxbody

wishing to make presentations to me prior to any decision should send

them to the clerk of registration. Order the court will now proceed to

lead the orders of We will take New Clause one with

which it will be convenient to consider New Clause 2 and alendments

one and two. To move New Cl`use one, I'd call the shadow minister. Thank

you Mr Speaker, it is a ple`sure to move New Clause one and New Clause 2

and also speak to amendment two Having spent five years on the

Justice team, Mr Speaker, and having to speak to many quite dreadful

bills going through this pl`ce and this time, it is quite a soft

landing for me to be greeted by the remaining stages of the childcare

bill which I think is essentially quite uncontroversial and whose aims

we enthusiastically support. I would like to pay tribute to the Honorable

member of Northwest or him for his work in challenging the Minhster as

it made its way through the committee stage. Everybody here will

know she is a ferocious chalpion for quality provision for all children

and has particular expertisd and services for children with

disabilities. Having read the record of the debate in committee, it is

obvious how valuable her contributions were. She will be a

menace to our education teal on this side of the House but in her new

role she will be a robust champion and defender of Britain's place in

the European Union. New Clatse one titled in my name and those of my

Honorable friend requires the government to evaluate the

implementation and effectivdness of this bill should it become `n act. I

have also spent, as my time and justice, five years in the procedure

committee of the House of Commons and in that time we pondered the

value of free legislative scrutiny and longed for a petition. Where

governments would consult meaningfully on their planndd. I

think Post legislative scrutiny would be similarly of value. The

principal problem that we c`n see with this bill is that it does not

do what the Prime Minister claimed that it would and during thd

election campaign, I know these are heady moments for all of us, and

there are those in my party to who gets occasionally carried away, I am

sure. In one particularly effervescent moment the PM

proclaimed and in a quote for his press release that for families with

young children, child care hs not one issue it is the issue. They are

asking how could we make thhs work, how could we afford it. Will one of

us have to quit work? It should not be this wave he said, it is why we

are defined 15 hours of fred child care a week for working pardnts of

three and four-year-olds and I could tell you today he said that we are

going further, a lot further. We're going to take that free childcare

and we are going to it. It hs fantastic stuff, isn't it? @nd with

a conservative government you can get 30 hours of free child care a

week. Marvellous! And if I believed it at the time I might have voted

for it myself. The trouble hs that thousands of families did bdlieve

the Prime Minister when he promised them that he would be doublhng the

current 15 hours of free chhld care a week. And how disappointed they

will all be to discover that the promise was false. Even those who do

not leave and read the small print are going to be disappointed because

when he made the promise, and the notes at the bottom of the press

release, was a caveat. Children will only get the free child card if

their parents are working more than eight hours a week. So thousands of

families where both parents work more than eight hours a week each

could proceed to plan on th`t basis. Or so they thought. What is in the

bill, it does not say anythhng about eight hours in the bill. Thd

government now says that both parents must be working at least 16

hours a week at the minimum wage, or just to help confuse things a little

bit more, be earning above the equivalent earnings of 16 hours per

week on the minimum wage but in fewer hours. The government misled

the public and now it is confusing parents and providers with the

implementation. This is why am supporting New Clause one, because

it is needed. It is needed to ensure that the government examines the

consequences of the enactment of this bill, because there ard some

very serious potential and H know unintended, consequences of this

measure. The first potential consequence, I would like the

government to monitor, is the impact on supply of childcare placds in

their quality. I will explahn why this is a problem after I h`ve given

way to the Minister. All parties of the last general election promise to

increase the free entitlement in one way or another. The Honorable

member's party from us to include the Mac increase it from 15 to 5

hours but the conservatives promised 15 to 30 hours, can she tell the

House who she could have included or excluded the definition of working

parents? The problem I'm gohng to go on to explain is the people the

government is going to excltde could well be on higher earnings than the

minimum wage but working fewer hours, they would be entitldd to his

free additional 15 hours, whereas someone who is working for 05 or 16

hours, or someone working 14 hours on the minimum wage, correct me if I

am wrong and I will let him intervene again, will not bd

entitled to the additional 05 hours. She did mention the comments by the

Member for an Northwest door am -- North West Durham and use that in

the committee stage this is a good bill, I can find nothing to disagree

with it, so I hope in the h`ndover they did have that discussion. In

terms of the eligibility crhteria, it is very straightforward, she

asked me to intervene. It is can be judged based on income, if xou are

under 25 Comey you need to darn ?107 a week, if you are over 25 `nd on

the national living wage to be introduced by this government then

you will be the national living wage times the numbers you can work, it

is very straightforward. Th`t is as simple as they get, I said on the

outset that I support the bhll and I support it, it used to be

enthusiastically. But the Mhnister to suggest that it is a perfect

bill... It does not have anx complexity. I think as he

demonstrated incredibly well there is a huge amount of complexhty, my

point is that you can be on low earnings and work less than 16 hours

a week, you will not qualifx but if you are on higher earnings `nd. .

The honourable gentleman saxs from a sedentary position that universal

credit will help improve thd situation but I bet to suggdst that

it will actually further colplicate the situation and the amendlent that

I have tabled seeks to make sure that these perceived complications

and anticipated complications do not actually have an intended

consequences. As I said thex are unintended but the Minister would be

rather naive to think that these are consequences that could not ever

occur. I give way to the Honorable Lady. I am extremely grateftl to the

Honorable Lady for giving wdight, I've struggled how any of this is

undone by Clause one? Is shd looking at the wrong piece of paper because

I will go on to explain what is a New Clause one and I hope if she

listens carefully she will see what it is we are trying to get `t. The

new analysis by the House of Commons Library reveals that there hs a

black hole of ?480 million hn the funding of this childcare offer and

this shortfall represents ?470 per child each year for those t`king up

the 430 hours of free child care. Independent research taken by

research company Cedar, comlissioned by the Pre-school Learning @lliance

suggest that the funding review undertaken by the department has

underestimated the cost of delivering childcare, the rdsearch

has found that if funded, at the average rate announced by the

government on the 25th of November of ?4 83 per hour, which is ?4 8

minus the earliest pupil prdmium which they say the good is going to

be worth 5p an hour, they whll face an annual shortfall of... Pdr child

for three and four-year-olds. Taking up the 15 hour entitlement. What

could be the consequence of this spending gap? Childcare providers

will have some difficult choices to make. There is every possibhlity

that an attempt to make ends meet, the gap is met through drivhng down

quality and others may leavd the market altogether, resulting in less

choices for parents and lack of supply. The preschool learnhng

alliance warns, ominously, that the existing scheme is underfunded, it

is now they say, crunch timd for the sector. The sector is already in a

precarious position in the Linister needs to reflect on the fact that

the family and childcare trtst reflects that a quarter has a

shortage of... There are less places now than there were in 2010 and as

the government failed to buhld capacity in the sector, where are

the extra hours going to happen And how does the Minister think

providers are going to pay for it? New Clause one flags these hssues

with the government and askdd that ministers monitor the effect of the

arrangement. I give way. I think the Honorable member for being so

generous in giving way. The Labour Party did not promise to increase

the hourly rate, so if the Honorable member is arguing that fundhng is

not am not, could she tell ts what the Labour Party considers `s the

right funding rate? I do wish it was my bill here that we were ddbating.

I really do. It is his bill and he has to defend his bill and he asked

to argue against my Clause. That is why we are here. This is not a rerun

of the election campaign and I am sure we are all glad about that New

Clause one also asks that the government evaluates the impact on

parental employment in the administrative burdens placdd on

parents and providers. What parents want aside from high-qualitx and

affordable provision, is a scheme that is easy to understand `nd is

predictable. Deciding when to and for how many hours to return to work

after having a baby is a difficult and finely balanced choice.

Employers, parents, they nedd certainty. As parents fret over the

balance of work and family life employers and co-workers also make

choices about their hours and staffing. We want those pardnts who

choose to, to be able to work. And any opaqueness about a elighbility

is damaging to the take-up of this game. And harms confidence that the

government will not move thd goalposts once complex family

arrangements have been put hnto place. The proposed scheme, where

someone owing ?107 and have a day, would be eligible for 30 hotrs a

week but someone who works 05 hours a week on minimum wage is not

eligible, will seem bonkers to most people and therefore I would urge

the government as New Clausd one suggests, to monitor the impact of

this change. And monitor thd impact it has on parental employment, in

particular. It is not just the complexity of the scheme th`t will

put so many parents off, it is the potential of the administration

involves improving their entitled to free additional hours. How does the

Minister and vitiated parents be asked to provide... Prove to

providers that they can provide We are aware of the difficultids

encountered by the tax credht system when earnings fluctuate, wh`t will

happen when a parent entitldd to 30 hours free but then there are dip

between the threshold for some reason, who will be responshble for

policing this? I do notice hn the bill that there are provisions for

HMRC to become involved. As well as tribunals and local authorities and

the Minister has explained previously that he secured ?1

million, for emergency fundhng and contingencies fund to pay for

development of joint online child application checking system which is

to be devised by HMRC. The Linister says that this system will be simple

and straightforward and it will save parents valuable time. New Clause

one asks that the Minister hs held to this assertion. We just want to

hold him to it. Experience tells us that schemes that administr`tive

Tivoli are bird him some ard open to abuse and off-putting to potential

beneficiaries. The purpose of New Clause one is to ensure that these

unintended consequences of the bill which the government has bedn warned

within the sector, are closdly monitored so steps can be t`ken to

ensure the new measures do not in any way harm availability or

quality. They do not place unreasonable burden on parents or

providers. I give way again. Thank you for being so generous. Xou raise

quite important questions, `nd she raise quite important questhons

around parents and zero hours contracts and how they will be

monitored. The first point hs that parents on zero hour contracts are

self-employed and are all entitled to childcare under this schdme. HMRC

will check the income levels and in the case of self-employed, they will

know how much they earn over a period of time. In addition to more

important there is a grace period. So if you fell out of work for that

period, you will not lose your childcare. Am grateful to the

Minister for his intervention but I might suggest that he make his own

speech when I finished, he light want to answer some of my qtestions

at that point. I will move on to giving weight to the member. Am

grateful to my member for ghving way and I am pleased to serve the

committee and I've never sedn a minister intervened so often in

other peoplespeeches. When the Minister be really assuring us that

the excepted Clause one havd accepted this scrutiny down in law?

I think my Honorable friend makes a good point. He makes it verx well.

We all like a keen and perkx minister, but it will be rather good

should he be more willing to hold himself or account after thd

introduction of this bill bx adopting the Clause. However I shall

move on to New Clause to. This Clause also tabled in my nale and

that of my Honorable friend's. Requires the government to lonitor

the attainment gap between xoung children and it specifies bdtween

different genders, different ethnic backgrounds and socioeconomhc

background. Those living in different parts of the country, and

those who do and do not havd a disability. We think, and otr

experience tells us, unless miniatures monitor and are required

to report on this gap, focus will be lost and equality of opporttnity for

all young people will never be achieved. In preparing New Clause 2

would like to acknowledge the invaluable work of the soci`l

mobility in child poverty commission. Setting up the

commission, was relatively dasy but listening and acting on what it has

to say seems going a bit far for this government. Perhaps thd Clause

would be an opportunity to put that right in a very small way. @s the

commission says the Britain we all should aspire to help build the Mac

build is where opportunities are shared equally and not dependent on

the family you are born into, the place where you live or the school

that you attend. It is a society where being born poor does not

condemn someone to a lifetile of poverty, instead it should be a

society where your progress in your life, the job you do in the income

you earn and be by cellular enjoyed our dependent on your ability, not

your background or birth. The social mobility and child poverty

commissions report says that Britain is on the verge of becoming a

permanently divided nation. It exposes some of the deep divisions

that characterize our nation. Those at the top in Britain today look

remarkably similar to those who rose to the top 50 years ago. For

example, 71% of senior judgds, 2% of senior armed forces and 45% of

civil service departmental heads attended private schools, compared

to 7% of the general population Britain could become the most open,

fair and mobile society in the modern world. A policy and practice

of government needs to change and it all starts, I think, with e`rly

years. All children, whatevdr their background should be school ready by

the age of five. But less than half of the poorest children in Dngland

are ready for school by then. Compared to two thirds of the others

and a deep gender divide me`ns girls from the poorest families do almost

as well as boys from the better off families at this point. The

commission finds that efforts to improve the school readiness of the

poorest children are uncoordinated, confused, and patchy. They `lso

comment that the complexity of the childcare funding system is

hampering efforts to increase maternal employment. The colmission

has some straightforward suggestions for the government to help narrow

the gap at age five. It says that the government needs to end the

strategic vacuum in the early years by introducing to clear strdtching

long-term objectives. This hs the government's commission to have the

development gap between the poorest children and the rest at agd five

and to have the maternal employment gap between Britain and the best

performing nations, both by 202 . Further, the commission argtes that

the government needs to radhcally simplify the multiple streals which

finance childcare. New Clause to tells the government that whlling

the gap in attainment and... Is not enough. I believe they have the

will, but will is not enough. They are very quiet now aren't they?

Willing the ends without thd means will cause more resentment `nd more

division and not last. This New Clause enforcing the governlent to

assess and report on the gap development and attainment, will

ensure that progress is measured. And allows this happens,

opportunities to intervene will be missed and inequality will be

further entranced. I will ghve way. -- entrenched. In 2016 and tore

Britain, as the inequality gap widens, the most important decision

for our children is how thex choose their parents in a is how they will

get on in life. I think New Clause 2 is a modest request given the scale

of the challenge we face. And it is something the government ought to be

doing any way. A strategy to narrow the gap to properly co-ordinate

policy and were reporting to Parliament is needed. The mdasures

in this bill have the potential to diminish supply and quality of

childcare. New cost to encotrages the government to do some of the

strategic thinking that we need if adopted, the government will have to

carefully track the taker of the offeror, among the 40% most

disadvantaged to better unddrstand the reasons for low take-up. So then

we can address them. The kex in approving the attainment of poorest

children, high-quality earlx education is at risk due to the

question marks next to fundhng. That is why I encourage the government to

support this New Clause. We know poor areas have a higher proportion

of providers from the maint`ined sector, mainly preschools in

children's centres. This sector aces particular capacity challenges. This

is simply because these providers tend to take two groups of children,

one in the morning and in the afternoon and a physically do not

have the space to double thdir numbers. Schools have also tended to

cross subsidize the findings of their early years for vision from

elsewhere in their budget to ensure quality. The government has

committed ?50 million of new capital funding to help with us, so the

government does acknowledge that this is a problem. But the figure is

unlikely to meet the need and may leave some areas without thd

permission. All this Clause does is to seek to ensure that this problem

does not result in a widening of the attainment gap. I will give way

Does she agree that the Minhster could win his place in educ`tion by

accepting this Clause? Not only will will be attainment gap, he believes

everything will work, so wh`t does he have to fear from the scrutiny

associated with this partictlar Clause? I think my Honorabld friend

makes a good point, when... Clause? I think my Honorabld friend

makes a good point, I think it would be the first in Parliament dver for

a government to actually accept that a New Clause tabled by the

opposition. Dot IFF says th`t we have already stumbled along way in

the dark in this policy are` but it is time to stop stumbling. Stop ..

Shine a light on the policy landscape and bought an effdctive

route forward. If the government plans to spend ?6 billion a year on

childcare, by 2019-2020, I would argue and I think they would if they

were in opposition to that the risks of an ill targeted, ineffichent

system should not be ignored. New Clause 2 asked that the govdrnment

turns its head to narrow thd gap in early years attainment and lonitored

the impact of its policy on this issue to ensure that the nation s

investment is rewarded. I would also like to speak very briefly to Clause

two, I think the description is probing amendment. It is attended

to... In this case it is sttdent nurses. This came up at comlittee

stage and I think it is worth our concern on this particular group and

their needs at this time. Mdmbers will recall that last week there

were thousands of student ntrses and midwives marching through London in

protest of plans to stop tr`ining nursery. Many have financial

obligations, and the Council requires students to have 4000 hours

while studying with half of those in practice. And they work equhvalent

of 37 and a half hours a wedk at least, they work nights, daxs and

weekends. It is very diffictlt to get a part-time job to support

dependents while training this particular group. So has thd

government made any assessmdnt to the costs of extending the

additional student nurses whth eligible children. My parents were

both nurses and at the time, they were hospitals social clubs and that

was obviously not recently, but the amendment encourages the government

to work with other departments to ensure particular grids, in this

case student nurses are not disproportionately disadvantaged by

a combination of the governlent s policies. And with that I commend

new clauses one and two to the House. It isn't Mr Deputy Speaker

now. -- it is Mr Deputy Spe`ker now.

Mr Deputy Speaker, thank yot for this important debate and I once

again welcome the honourabld member to her position. I'm grateftl for

the amendments that have tabled in the number of interesting qtestion

have been raised, and I will try to deal with them in turn. I lhke to

say at the outset that extending the 15 hours to 30 hours is prilarily a

work incentive. That is why the first 15 hours is universal but the

second 15 hours is based on economic eligibility criteria. When judging

and evaluating the impact of this policy we must bear in mind the work

incentive elements as well. That is correct, of course that is his

intention. As you'll see in new clause one, we must assess how

successful this bill is on delivering that intention. Xour

right to ask the question I will be resisting the amendment, but I will

go on to explain why. The m`in reason why I'm resisting is the

number of evaluations that xou have asked for already underway. The are

existing in important progr`mmes focused on reducing the gap of