03/02/2016

:00:00. > :00:07.children's mental health and eating disorders where we tragically see a

:00:08. > :00:16.real growth. The money is there. Statement, the Prime Minister. With

:00:17. > :00:19.permission I would like to make a statement on progress with our

:00:20. > :00:24.renegotiation. The House has now had the chance to study the document is

:00:25. > :00:29.published by the European Council yesterday. I believe this is an

:00:30. > :00:32.important milestone in the process of reform, renegotiation and

:00:33. > :00:36.referendum that we set out in the manifesto and which this Government

:00:37. > :00:40.is delivering. We have now legislated for the referendum and we

:00:41. > :00:44.are holding the renegotiation. Let me set out the problems we are

:00:45. > :00:50.trying to fix and the progress we have made. First, we don't want our

:00:51. > :00:56.country to be bound up in an ever closer political union in Europe, we

:00:57. > :00:59.are a proud and independent nation with proud democratic institutions

:01:00. > :01:04.that has served us well over the centuries. Europe is about working

:01:05. > :01:11.together to advance shared prosperity and security. It's not

:01:12. > :01:16.about being sucked into a European superstate, not now, not ever. The

:01:17. > :01:20.draft text set out in full the special status according to the UK

:01:21. > :01:24.and clearly cards us out further political integration and it will go

:01:25. > :01:29.further to make clear that EU countries don't even have to aim for

:01:30. > :01:33.a common destination. This is a formal recognition of the flexible

:01:34. > :01:38.Europe that Britain has been long arguing for. In keeping Britain out

:01:39. > :01:42.of ever closer union I wanted to strengthen the role of this House

:01:43. > :01:46.and all national parliaments. We have a proposal that if Brussels

:01:47. > :01:50.comes up with legislation we don't want we can get together with other

:01:51. > :01:57.parliaments to block it with a red card. We have also proposed a new

:01:58. > :02:00.mechanism to finally enforce the principle of subsidiaries which

:02:01. > :02:05.states that as far as possible, powers should sit in this parliament

:02:06. > :02:09.and not in Brussels. Every year the European Union has to go through the

:02:10. > :02:13.powers they exercise and work out which are no longer needed and

:02:14. > :02:18.should be returned to nation states. I said we wanted to make Europe more

:02:19. > :02:21.competitive and deal with rule-making and bureaucracy that

:02:22. > :02:28.costs jobs in Britain and indeed across the EU. We asked for

:02:29. > :02:32.commitments on all of the areas central to European competitiveness.

:02:33. > :02:41.We want trade deals, the single market completed, and trade... There

:02:42. > :02:49.are specific targets to reduce burdens on business in key sectors.

:02:50. > :02:53.Barra is a new mechanism to drive through targets -- varies. Cutting

:02:54. > :02:58.the target year-on-year. We are clear that Britain will keep the

:02:59. > :03:02.pound, in my view for ever. We need to be just as clear that we can keep

:03:03. > :03:06.the pound in a European Union that will be fair to our currency, but

:03:07. > :03:12.simply the EU must not become the euro only club and if it does it

:03:13. > :03:15.would not be a club for us. We call for a series of principles to

:03:16. > :03:20.protect the single market for Britain, we said there must be no

:03:21. > :03:24.discrimination against the pound, no disadvantage for businesses using

:03:25. > :03:30.our currency wherever they are located in the EU and no option for

:03:31. > :03:32.Britain to ever again be forced to bailout Eurozone countries. These

:03:33. > :03:39.principles are reflected in the draft text which is legally binding.

:03:40. > :03:43.Britain has the ability to act to uphold principles and protect our

:03:44. > :03:47.interests. We should be clear that British jobs depend on being able to

:03:48. > :03:52.trade on a level playing field within the European single market,

:03:53. > :03:57.whether in financial services or cars or anything. This plan if the

:03:58. > :04:01.grid would apply the strongest possible protection for Britain from

:04:02. > :04:06.discrimination and unfair practices. Never again could the EU try the

:04:07. > :04:10.so-called location policy, the settling of complex trades in Euros

:04:11. > :04:14.must only take place in Eurozone countries, that would outlaw that

:04:15. > :04:18.sort of proposal. These are protections we could not have if

:04:19. > :04:23.Britain were outside the European Union. We want to deal with the

:04:24. > :04:27.pressures of immigration which have become too great. Of course we need

:04:28. > :04:32.to do more to control migration from outside the European Union, we will

:04:33. > :04:40.be announcing more measures. We need to control migration within the EU

:04:41. > :04:45.too. The draft text represents the strongest ever tackling of closing

:04:46. > :04:50.down back routes to Britain. It includes active against fraud and

:04:51. > :04:56.preventing those who provide a threat from coming to the country.

:04:57. > :05:00.It will overturn a decision which has allowed illegal migrants to

:05:01. > :05:04.marry and stay in the country. It has been a source of perpetual

:05:05. > :05:09.frustration that we can't impose our own rules on third country nationals

:05:10. > :05:12.coming from the European Union. After the hard work of the Home

:05:13. > :05:17.Secretary we have a proposal to put it right. There are also new

:05:18. > :05:21.proposals to reduce the pull factor that our benefit system exerts

:05:22. > :05:26.across Europe by allowing instant access to welfare from the day

:05:27. > :05:31.someone arrives. People said Europe wouldn't even recognise we have this

:05:32. > :05:34.problem but the text explicitly recognises that welfare systems act

:05:35. > :05:41.as an unnatural draw to come to the country. Our manifesto set out four

:05:42. > :05:45.objective is to solve the problem, I mention these at PMQs. We already

:05:46. > :05:49.delivered on two of them within months of the general election.

:05:50. > :05:53.Already migrants from the EU will not be able to claim Universal

:05:54. > :05:56.Credit while looking for work and if they haven't found work in six

:05:57. > :06:01.months they can now be required to leave. In these texts we have secure

:06:02. > :06:06.proposals for the other two areas. If someone comes from another

:06:07. > :06:10.country in Europe, leaving their family at home, their child benefit

:06:11. > :06:15.will be paid at the local rate and not the generous British rate. We

:06:16. > :06:19.have reduced the draw of the generous in work benefits. People

:06:20. > :06:22.said it would be impossible to end the idea of something for nothing

:06:23. > :06:27.and that a four year restriction was out of the question but that is now

:06:28. > :06:32.what is in the text. An emergency brake that will mean people coming

:06:33. > :06:36.from within the EU will have to wait four years until they have full

:06:37. > :06:40.access to the benefits. The European Commission clearly said that Britain

:06:41. > :06:43.qualifies already to use the mechanism so with the necessary

:06:44. > :06:48.legislation we could implement it shortly after the referendum.

:06:49. > :06:51.Finally let me be absolutely clear about the legal status of these

:06:52. > :06:54.changes that are now on offer. People said we would never get

:06:55. > :07:00.something that was legally binding but this plan if agreed will be

:07:01. > :07:04.accepted at. These changes will be binding in international law and

:07:05. > :07:08.will be deposited at the UN. They cannot be changed without the

:07:09. > :07:12.unanimous agreement of every EU country including Britain. So when I

:07:13. > :07:19.said I wanted change that is legally binding and irreversible that is

:07:20. > :07:22.what I have got. In key areas treaty change is envisaged in the

:07:23. > :07:27.documents. We are making real progress in all four areas but the

:07:28. > :07:31.process is far from over. There are details that still need to be pinned

:07:32. > :07:32.down and intense negotiations to try to agree the deal with 27 other

:07:33. > :07:53.countries. It is right that the house debate

:07:54. > :07:56.the issues in detail, so following a council statement later, the

:07:57. > :08:01.government will make time for a full day of debate on the floor of this

:08:02. > :08:05.house. Mr Speaker, as we approach this choice, let me be clear about

:08:06. > :08:10.two things. First, I'm not arguing, and I will never argue, that Britain

:08:11. > :08:14.could not survive outside the European union. We are the fifth

:08:15. > :08:17.largest economy in the world, the biggest defence player in Europe

:08:18. > :08:21.with one of the most extensive and influential diplomatic networks on

:08:22. > :08:25.the planet. The question is not good Britain succeed outside the European

:08:26. > :08:30.Union, but how will we be most successful? How will we create the

:08:31. > :08:34.most jobs and have the most influence on the rules that shape

:08:35. > :08:39.the global economy and affect us? How will we be most secure? I always

:08:40. > :08:43.say the best answer to those questions can be found within a

:08:44. > :08:48.reformed European Union. Let me say again, if we cannot secure the

:08:49. > :08:52.changes, I rule nothing out. Second, even if we secure the changes, you

:08:53. > :08:56.will never hear me say that this organisation is now fixed all stop

:08:57. > :09:01.far from it. There will be many things to remain to be reformed and

:09:02. > :09:05.Britain will remain -- continue to lead the way. We will make sure

:09:06. > :09:08.Britain works are the countries of Europe, for the businesses and

:09:09. > :09:11.people of Europe and crucially for the British people who want to work

:09:12. > :09:15.and have security and get on and make the most of their lives. If we

:09:16. > :09:19.stay, Britain will be in there, keeping a lid on the budget,

:09:20. > :09:22.stripping away unnecessary regulation and seeing through the

:09:23. > :09:29.commitments we have secured in this renegotiation. Ensuring that Britain

:09:30. > :09:32.truly can have the best of both worlds. In the parts of Europe that

:09:33. > :09:37.work for us and out of those that don't. In the single market, free to

:09:38. > :09:40.travel around Europe, part of an organisation where cooperation on

:09:41. > :09:43.Security and trade can make Britain and its partners safer and more

:09:44. > :09:49.prosperous, but with guarantees that we will never be part of the euro,

:09:50. > :09:53.never be part of Schengen, never be part of a European army, never be

:09:54. > :09:56.forced to bail out the Eurozone with taxpayer money and never be part of

:09:57. > :10:01.a European superstate. That is the prize on offer, and a clear path

:10:02. > :10:05.that can lead to a fresh settlement the Britain in a reformed European

:10:06. > :10:09.Union. A settlement that offers the best future for jobs, security and

:10:10. > :10:14.strength for the country, a settlement, that as the manifesto

:10:15. > :10:18.promised, this security and comfort at every stage of their lives. That

:10:19. > :10:25.is what we are fighting for and I commend this statement to the house.

:10:26. > :10:28.Jeremy Corbyn. Thank you, Mr Speaker, I'm grateful to the Prime

:10:29. > :10:33.Minister for sending me a copy of the statement 45 minutes ago, an

:10:34. > :10:37.hour ago, I'm sorry. And I'm pleased he has decided to finally update the

:10:38. > :10:43.house. But it is a bit unfortunate that despite his trumpeting of

:10:44. > :10:47.sovereignty of national parliaments in the EU negotiations, the Prime

:10:48. > :10:50.Minister didn't think to come and update our own Parliament first. I

:10:51. > :10:55.hope he had a good day in Chippenham yesterday, but I note that he spent

:10:56. > :10:58.a lot of time answering questions from journalists when it would have

:10:59. > :11:05.been more respectful to the house to come here first and answer the

:11:06. > :11:07.questions from members. In truth, Mr Speaker, his negotiation, in

:11:08. > :11:14.reality, is a Tory party drama that is being played out in front of us,

:11:15. > :11:17.as we see at the moment. The Labour Party is committed to keeping

:11:18. > :11:28.Britain in the European Union because we believe it is in the best

:11:29. > :11:30.framework for European trade and cooperation in the 21st-century and

:11:31. > :11:34.in the best interests of people in this country. We believe the Prime

:11:35. > :11:39.Minister has been negotiating the wrong goals in the wrong way to the

:11:40. > :11:43.wrong reasons. All the sound and fury, the Prime Minister has ended

:11:44. > :11:47.up exactly where he knew he would be, making the case to remain in

:11:48. > :11:51.Europe, which is what he always intended, despite renegotiating

:11:52. > :11:56.spectacles choreograph for TV cameras over the whole continent. Mr

:11:57. > :12:00.Speaker, as his own backbenchers keep telling us, the proposals from

:12:01. > :12:04.the European Council are simply tinkering around the edges. They

:12:05. > :12:10.have little impact on what the EU delivers for workers in Britain

:12:11. > :12:13.British business. We welcome the proposals for the majority of

:12:14. > :12:18.national parliaments to have a veto over commission legislation, even if

:12:19. > :12:20.it is heavily qualified, it seems the Prime Minister has finally moved

:12:21. > :12:29.towards the Labour Party view on the issue and we welcome that.

:12:30. > :12:34.Protecting non-Eurozone states is necessary but we cannot let these

:12:35. > :12:42.proposals hamper efforts to regulate the financial sector, including

:12:43. > :12:46.bankers bonuses. The crucial detail of the emergency brake on workers

:12:47. > :12:50.benefits for EU migrants is entirely absent. When is that information

:12:51. > :12:54.going to be made available? But in any case the Prime Minister calls

:12:55. > :12:57.the strongest package ever on the abuse of free movement, but it

:12:58. > :13:02.doesn't actually tackle the real problems around the impact on

:13:03. > :13:07.migration -- of migration on jobs, wages and community. They demand

:13:08. > :13:11.action to support public services in areas of high population growth, and

:13:12. > :13:15.regulation to prevent the subsidising of low pay and the

:13:16. > :13:20.grotesque exploitation of migrant workers by some very unscrupulous

:13:21. > :13:26.employers. It is the same with competitiveness. Is the Prime

:13:27. > :13:30.Minister out to strengthen genuinely competitive markets, or is this

:13:31. > :13:38.proposal a figleaf for increasing presser to privatise public services

:13:39. > :13:42.and a reduction of consumer standards, environmental protection,

:13:43. > :13:47.all workers rights? This is why Labour will continue to oppose the

:13:48. > :13:54.threats to services and rights from the negotiations and we need to

:13:55. > :13:58.reform to ensure that all European governments have the right to

:13:59. > :14:04.intervene and to protect publicly owned industries and services. This

:14:05. > :14:08.side of the house is delighted that the Prime Minister has been forced

:14:09. > :14:12.to back down on his hopes to water down workers rights. However, Mr

:14:13. > :14:17.Speaker, we want to see workers rights further protected and

:14:18. > :14:22.extended within the European Union. We need a strengthening of workers

:14:23. > :14:27.rights in a really social Europe. And we want to see a democratic

:14:28. > :14:31.reform to make the European Union decision-making more accountable to

:14:32. > :14:36.its people. We must drive economic reform to put jobs and sustainable

:14:37. > :14:40.growth at the centre of European policy and work with partners in

:14:41. > :14:46.Europe to bring tax avoidance under control. That is so we can get a far

:14:47. > :14:55.better deal than the Chancellor managed with Google last week. But,

:14:56. > :14:59.Mr Speaker, to extend the employment protections we have to remain within

:15:00. > :15:04.the European Union or leave the field to the Conservative Party to

:15:05. > :15:08.make a bonfire of workers rights. The Prime Minister says he has

:15:09. > :15:11.secured Britain's exclusion from Schengen, European army and a

:15:12. > :15:15.European superstate. The Prime Minister is living in a never-never

:15:16. > :15:20.land. We have never argued for those things and we don't intend to. We

:15:21. > :15:28.need to work with allies in Europe to achieve more progressive reforms

:15:29. > :15:31.and to build a more democratic Europe that delivers jobs,

:15:32. > :15:37.prosperity and security for all of its people. We must do this

:15:38. > :15:41.together, which is why when the referendum is finally held we will

:15:42. > :15:48.be campaigning to remain a member but I end by asking the question to

:15:49. > :15:52.the Prime Minister, does he now agree that once this smoke and

:15:53. > :15:58.mirrors sideshow deal is finally done, we will get on with it, end

:15:59. > :16:06.the uncertainty and the referendum will be held on June 23, 2016? Can I

:16:07. > :16:10.thank the Right Honourable gentleman for his questions. First of all, on

:16:11. > :16:15.the issue of making a statement today rather than yesterday, I felt

:16:16. > :16:18.yesterday I was in possession of all the documents but I didn't think

:16:19. > :16:22.every member of the house would be, so I thought it better to give

:16:23. > :16:29.honourable members a day to read the documents and have the debate today.

:16:30. > :16:34.It gave me the added advantage of being able to visit Chippenham,

:16:35. > :16:38.which, of course, is the town of the right honourable gentleman's birth

:16:39. > :16:42.and I was able to thank them for putting him on Earth and delivering

:16:43. > :16:50.him safely to this place. In terms of the questions, first of all, he

:16:51. > :16:55.criticises the issues we put on the table, getting out of ever closer

:16:56. > :16:59.union -- union, waiting times for welfare and guarantees for fairness

:17:00. > :17:03.in ins and outs. I know he did not read the Labour manifesto, but I

:17:04. > :17:07.did, and all of those things were in the Labour manifesto. Labour

:17:08. > :17:11.actually wanted a two-year welfare weight rather than a four-year wait,

:17:12. > :17:16.but the other elements of the gauche elation were supported by Labour --

:17:17. > :17:21.of the negotiation. So they can feel they have a mandate for backing

:17:22. > :17:25.these measures. He asked about the detail on the emergency migration

:17:26. > :17:29.brake because there are gaps in the text, and he is right about that. We

:17:30. > :17:33.need to secure the best possible outcome at the February Council. He

:17:34. > :17:36.asked about the danger of exploitation of migrant workers, and

:17:37. > :17:43.this is an area where we agree, as we have boosted the gang master

:17:44. > :17:45.license authority and putting better coordination between them and the

:17:46. > :17:51.National Crime Agency and we're actually making sure there are more

:17:52. > :17:54.investigations and prosecutions. There is one area where we

:17:55. > :18:01.profoundly disagree, and other socialist governments in Europe take

:18:02. > :18:04.my view, which is that TTIP will be good for jobs, growth and business.

:18:05. > :18:09.I'm not sure I should advise him to spend more time with trade unions,

:18:10. > :18:12.but if he did with Swedish trade unions and other northern European

:18:13. > :18:16.countries, he might find that they support TTIP because they want jobs

:18:17. > :18:20.for their members. In the end, what I would say to the right honourable

:18:21. > :18:24.gentleman and all members across this house, this is an important

:18:25. > :18:27.moment for our country. Yes there will be areas of disagreement

:18:28. > :18:32.between Conservative and Labour but we are involved in trying to get the

:18:33. > :18:36.best negotiation for Britain. And the European Parliament plays a part

:18:37. > :18:39.in that and the party of European Socialists does, so I urge more

:18:40. > :18:43.members that if you want to have no more something for nothing and get

:18:44. > :18:48.Britain out of ever closer union, and fairness between those in and

:18:49. > :18:50.out of the euro and you want a more competitive and successful Europe,

:18:51. > :19:04.let's fight this together. Mr Kenneth Clarke.

:19:05. > :19:10.Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister has actually achieved more on the big

:19:11. > :19:14.issues in this negotiation that I -- than I ever expected, and I suspect

:19:15. > :19:18.more than hardline Eurosceptics ever expected, which is why they are

:19:19. > :19:23.denouncing it so fiercely. But as he says, he still has to deliver it.

:19:24. > :19:26.Does he accept he will have great difficulty persuading governments in

:19:27. > :19:31.Central and Eastern Europe in particular to accept that their

:19:32. > :19:34.citizens lawfully working here alongside English people in key

:19:35. > :19:39.sectors like the health service and the construction industry should

:19:40. > :19:45.have lower take-home pay in the first few years than their English

:19:46. > :19:50.workmates? So, if he has to do offer something in exchange for that,

:19:51. > :19:54.could he perhaps consider underlining our Nato commitment to

:19:55. > :19:58.those countries as their biggest concern is future military

:19:59. > :20:06.adventures by Putin's Russia. And to underline our role to not be the

:20:07. > :20:12.leading military contribute through Nato to the European alliance would

:20:13. > :20:16.be a good offer to make by deploying troops in order to get what is a

:20:17. > :20:25.difficult concession for our partners to make in those countries?

:20:26. > :20:29.My right honourable friend has huge experience of European negotiations,

:20:30. > :20:31.both treaty negotiations and also ongoing negotiations on the Council

:20:32. > :20:36.of ministers, so I'm grateful for what he says. He is right that these

:20:37. > :20:39.are difficult issues. My argument is that while we have the free movement

:20:40. > :20:48.of people that many British people take advantage of. The second point

:20:49. > :20:53.I make is, when countries in Europe have problems they believe key

:20:54. > :20:56.national interest, we have to be flexible enough to deal with them.

:20:57. > :21:04.That is what the agreement is showing. And it shows they have the

:21:05. > :21:06.support of the European Commission and that will reassure some of the

:21:07. > :21:11.states in Europe who have misgivings. He is right that we can

:21:12. > :21:17.reassure them about investment in their security, because I think that

:21:18. > :21:21.is an important issue, with Putin to the east, with Isil to the south, so

:21:22. > :21:29.this is a moment where we need to work together. We in the Scottish

:21:30. > :21:33.National party warmly welcome the opportunity to make the positive

:21:34. > :21:38.case for the European Union. It really matters that we are part of

:21:39. > :21:42.the world's largest single market. It helps we can determine rules and

:21:43. > :21:47.laws that applied for us and it matters we have a social Europe with

:21:48. > :21:51.rights and protections for citizens and workers. Will the Prime Minister

:21:52. > :21:54.commit to a positive campaign to remain in the European Union and not

:21:55. > :22:02.resort to the negative tactics of project fear? On the Prime Minister

:22:03. > :22:08.'s negotiations, can iced suggest he stops presenting -- pretending to

:22:09. > :22:12.have one major victory. He has not secured the treaty change and much

:22:13. > :22:15.else besides. What is at stake is much much bigger than recent

:22:16. > :22:19.discussions. It is about whether we are in the EU or not, and that is

:22:20. > :22:27.what the debate across the UK will be in the run-up to the referendum.

:22:28. > :22:31.The timing matters to electorates and the governments of Scotland,

:22:32. > :22:45.Wales and Northern Ireland as well is that there are elections in

:22:46. > :22:49.London in May. The First Minister of Northern Ireland... I think the

:22:50. > :22:54.first ministers of Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland deserve a bit

:22:55. > :23:00.more respect. From the Tory side. The First Minister of Northern

:23:01. > :23:03.Ireland Arlene Foster and the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland

:23:04. > :23:07.Martin McGuinness have written to the Prime Minister today. They say

:23:08. > :23:09.the following and I think that honourable and right honourable

:23:10. > :23:15.say. We believe that holding a say. We believe that holding a

:23:16. > :23:19.referendum as early as June will mean that a significant part of the

:23:20. > :23:26.run in parallel with those elections run in parallel with those elections

:23:27. > :23:31.and risks confusing issues at a moment when clarity is required. We

:23:32. > :23:42.believe that the European referendum is of vital importance to the future

:23:43. > :23:50.of the whole UK. The debate should therefore be free of this. The Prime

:23:51. > :23:53.Minister should defer until at least late in the year. Will the Prime

:23:54. > :23:57.Minister confirm that he will be respectful of the views of the

:23:58. > :24:03.governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and defer the

:24:04. > :24:08.referendum beyond June? May I take the opportunity to ask the Prime

:24:09. > :24:13.Minister to answer the question he has failed to do so so far, can he

:24:14. > :24:17.confirmed there are still no safeguards in place which would stop

:24:18. > :24:24.Scotland being taken out of the EU against the will of the Scottish

:24:25. > :24:29.electorate. Yes, of course I think when this campaign comes and we need

:24:30. > :24:32.first and agreement and recommended position by the British Government

:24:33. > :24:40.and the rest of it but when it comes in should be positive campaign. In

:24:41. > :24:43.terms of treaty change and whether this is legally binding, as I

:24:44. > :24:49.explained it is and it does envisage treaty change. In terms of timing,

:24:50. > :24:52.it is a matter for the house who debated it and ruled out coinciding

:24:53. > :25:00.with the Scottish, Welsh and London elections. The house did not rule

:25:01. > :25:03.out holding a referendum at another time and specifically the former

:25:04. > :25:10.First Minister said six weeks was the appropriate gap. Obviously we

:25:11. > :25:16.have to wait to see if an agreement is reached but I disagree in that I

:25:17. > :25:20.don't believe this is confusing issues, people are personally

:25:21. > :25:24.capable, six or more weeks after one set of elections to consider

:25:25. > :25:28.another. I know that the Leader of the Opposition whose party is in

:25:29. > :25:34.control of Wales was pressing me to hold the referendum on the 23rd of

:25:35. > :25:37.June. There is a range of opinions out there and the best thing to do

:25:38. > :25:48.is to get the deal done and hold a referendum. This is all about

:25:49. > :25:55.voters' trust. Why has my right honourable friend, in order to stay

:25:56. > :25:59.in, bypassed so many promises and principles? Our national parliament,

:26:00. > :26:06.he said at Bloomberg, is the root of our democracy. Not a majority of red

:26:07. > :26:16.cards in other parliaments. That we would have for long treaty change --

:26:17. > :26:22.We were promised a fundamental change in our relationship with the

:26:23. > :26:26.EU and that we would deal with excessive immigration numbers which

:26:27. > :26:30.has now been whittled down to an issue about in work benefits

:26:31. > :26:35.controlled by the European Court of Justice. Above all, the entire

:26:36. > :26:42.package Mr Speaker, we were told and promised would be legally binding

:26:43. > :26:48.and also irreversible. But now it will be stitched up by a political

:26:49. > :26:56.decision, by the European Council, and not by a guaranteed treaty

:26:57. > :27:00.change at the right time. And this, I have to say to the Prime Minister,

:27:01. > :27:07.is a wholly inappropriate way of dealing with this matter. I have

:27:08. > :27:11.great respect for my honourable friend but on the issue of whether

:27:12. > :27:14.it is legally binding I do believe he is wrong, if the document is

:27:15. > :27:19.agreed it would be an international law decision and the European Court

:27:20. > :27:24.of Justice has do take that into account. He follows these things

:27:25. > :27:31.closely, Denmark negotiated the same sort of opt outs and 23 years on

:27:32. > :27:35.they clearly stand and are legally binding and those are the facts. He

:27:36. > :27:40.asked whether we are meeting what we set out in terms of promises that we

:27:41. > :27:46.made, we made clear promises to get Britain out of the ever closer

:27:47. > :27:50.union. That is a promise we kept. Restrict welfare benefits for

:27:51. > :27:53.immigrants and that is a promise we are keeping. Real fairness between

:27:54. > :28:00.ins and outs, that is a promise we are keeping. In every area we have

:28:01. > :28:04.met the promises that we set out. There will be those who say, we

:28:05. > :28:09.didn't ask for enough or we need more reform. I believe these reforms

:28:10. > :28:13.get to the heart of the concerns of the British people who feel this

:28:14. > :28:18.organisation is too much of a political union, too bureaucratic

:28:19. > :28:21.and not fair for non-euro countries. And we want control of immigration.

:28:22. > :28:27.Those four things are largely delivered. I would ask my colleagues

:28:28. > :28:33.on all sides of the house, I have sat on both sides and heard about

:28:34. > :28:37.the Maastricht Treaty, Amsterdam Treaty, but I've never seen a Prime

:28:38. > :28:40.Minister standing here with the unilaterally achieved declaration of

:28:41. > :28:48.bringing powers to our country and that is what is within our grasp.

:28:49. > :28:54.Will the Prime Minister join me in welcoming the launch of an

:28:55. > :28:59.environmentalists for Europe today, quoted by Stanley Johnson the father

:29:00. > :29:04.of the right Honourable Member for books bridge and South Ruislip. Will

:29:05. > :29:07.he also welcome the article setting out the importance for science and

:29:08. > :29:12.technology of remaining in the European Union, penned by the

:29:13. > :29:18.brother for the right-armer Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip! --

:29:19. > :29:25.the right Honourable Member. Will he tell him the importance of family

:29:26. > :29:33.solidarity, and joining the swelling ranks of Johnsons. We can't have too

:29:34. > :29:36.many Johnsons agreeing. He is right. There is also the columnist Rachel

:29:37. > :29:41.Johnson, we will have to go after her. He makes an important point

:29:42. > :29:46.about universities because we all complain rightly about the European

:29:47. > :29:51.budget and that is why it is so important it has do fall every year,

:29:52. > :29:55.but we did safeguard negotiations, the money that British universities

:29:56. > :30:00.benefit from on a disproportionate basis. As for completing the happy

:30:01. > :30:09.family pack of the Johnsons, we may have to wait longer. I would call

:30:10. > :30:15.the Honourable Member if he were standing, but he isn't. As we are

:30:16. > :30:21.driven towards an ever closer union and to political union, how does it

:30:22. > :30:26.help to try to fit a couple of emergency brakes that lie within the

:30:27. > :30:30.control of the EU and not us? Isn't the only way to control borders, tax

:30:31. > :30:34.revenues and welfare systems, to leave and be a good European and let

:30:35. > :30:41.them get on with their political union? Well, I don't agree with that

:30:42. > :30:46.because I think actually what we are doing is making sure that it's very

:30:47. > :30:50.clear that Britain is carved out of an ever closer union and that is an

:30:51. > :30:55.advance. Indeed it is something that he and other colleagues have been

:30:56. > :30:59.asking for quite rightly. I have always believed it is right because

:31:00. > :31:01.our view is that we are not therefore political union but

:31:02. > :31:06.cooperation and trade and working together on the things that matter.

:31:07. > :31:12.These documents can change and this is all drafts, but one of the issues

:31:13. > :31:16.is that the EU has gone further than I thought they would and said this

:31:17. > :31:19.which colleagues will find interesting: the references to an

:31:20. > :31:24.ever closer union do not offer a basis for extending the scope of any

:31:25. > :31:28.provision of the treaties or secondary legislation. They should

:31:29. > :31:32.not be used to support an extensive interpretation of the competences of

:31:33. > :31:36.the union or the power of institutions as set out in the

:31:37. > :31:40.treaty. That has never been said before in those ways and for those

:31:41. > :31:44.who care about getting out of an ever closer union, this goes a long

:31:45. > :31:52.way to achieving more in many ways that we asked for. The European

:31:53. > :31:58.continent has seen flows of people and refugees, largely since the end

:31:59. > :32:03.of the World War II and the Balkans are becoming more volatile and part

:32:04. > :32:09.of Turkey is not behaving in a helpful way. Of any of the

:32:10. > :32:16.negotiations the Prime Minister has been involved in, have any increased

:32:17. > :32:21.the security of Europe or the UK? I would argue both, when it comes to

:32:22. > :32:25.the security of the continent we recognise that Europe's external

:32:26. > :32:30.border, although it is not ours, because run-off in Schengen, it does

:32:31. > :32:35.matter and that is why we send more representatives to help with asylum

:32:36. > :32:38.and immigration than any other country and why we are happy to do

:32:39. > :32:43.even more and we work with Greece and Turkey. There is an important

:32:44. > :32:48.change which increases the security of Britain going forward. First of

:32:49. > :32:53.all, because we are not in Schengen, foreign nationals, we don't have to

:32:54. > :32:58.let them into Britain and long may that be the case. The key changes

:32:59. > :33:02.that the Home Secretary and I have secured about protecting the

:33:03. > :33:06.immigration system from fraudsters and sham marriages and criminals and

:33:07. > :33:11.people who get married to European nationals to get into our country,

:33:12. > :33:14.frankly, they have become even more important and we will secure those

:33:15. > :33:24.if this goes ahead from within the EU. Boris Johnson. CHEERING

:33:25. > :33:28.Since you have been so kind as to call me, perhaps I could ask the

:33:29. > :33:35.Prime Minister how these changes as a result of this negotiation will

:33:36. > :33:40.restrict the volume of negotiations... Legislation coming

:33:41. > :33:43.from Brussels, to restrict the treaty to assert the sovereignty of

:33:44. > :33:48.this House of Commons and these houses of parliament. Let me take

:33:49. > :33:52.those issues in turn. He is right to raise them. In terms of the

:33:53. > :33:56.sovereignty of the House, that is what we did in 2010 through the

:33:57. > :34:00.European referendum act, and something I am keen to do even more

:34:01. > :34:04.on to put beyond doubt that the House of Commons is sovereign, and

:34:05. > :34:10.that is something we will look to do at the same time as concluding the

:34:11. > :34:13.negotiations. In terms of what are we doing to restrict the flow of

:34:14. > :34:17.legislation from Brussels? The first time ever in here is a commitment

:34:18. > :34:20.not only that Europe is to examine all of its competencies every year

:34:21. > :34:27.to work out what should be returned to nation states, subsidiary in

:34:28. > :34:30.action rather than words, but the proposal to cut Brussels regulations

:34:31. > :34:35.with these bureaucracy cutting targets and that has never been

:34:36. > :34:38.there before. If you look across this you can see welfare powers

:34:39. > :34:43.coming back, immigration powers coming back that I have just spoken

:34:44. > :34:49.about. Bailouts powers coming back and of course the massive return of

:34:50. > :34:53.power achieved that the last parliament. The biggest return of

:34:54. > :34:56.power from Brussels to Britain since joining the EU, and we have nailed

:34:57. > :35:02.it down in these discussions to make sure they can't get round it. These

:35:03. > :35:05.were all key objectives. I'm not saying it's perfect, or that the

:35:06. > :35:10.European Union will be perfect after the deal, it certainly won't, but

:35:11. > :35:16.will the British position be better and stronger? Yes, it will. Since

:35:17. > :35:20.assuming office in 2010 the Prime Minister has on occasion tried to

:35:21. > :35:26.his credit to limit the increases in the contributions by the UK to the

:35:27. > :35:31.European Union budget. Varying degrees of success on that front.

:35:32. > :35:37.Can he tell us as a result of the agreement, given that the UK pays ?9

:35:38. > :35:43.billion into the EU every year, can he tell us how much our contribution

:35:44. > :35:49.will go down in net terms each year as a result of this agreement? We

:35:50. > :35:54.have already done the European budget agreement which was the first

:35:55. > :35:57.time, when you look at the seven year financial perspective that is

:35:58. > :36:01.the budget over the last seven years and it will be lower over these

:36:02. > :36:05.seven years than the last and that is a real terms cut, something no

:36:06. > :36:10.one thought would possible. The exact amount of money we give does

:36:11. > :36:13.depend sometimes on the growth and success of our economy and one of

:36:14. > :36:17.the consequences of our strong growth and the difficult times in

:36:18. > :36:21.the Eurozone is that it has meant a little bit more has been contributed

:36:22. > :36:27.but the overall financial perspective is coming down and it is

:36:28. > :36:33.good news for Britain. My right honourable friend has achieved, I

:36:34. > :36:37.believe, quite a remarkable result because of the legally binding

:36:38. > :36:43.nature of the document which he brings back if it is accepted by the

:36:44. > :36:47.European Council. In that context he will know that one of the principal

:36:48. > :36:52.problems that has bedevilled the UK relationship with the European Union

:36:53. > :36:55.has been the capricious interpretation of the treaties,

:36:56. > :37:02.sometimes to circumvent what the UK has believed to be its true treaty

:37:03. > :37:05.obligations. In view of the remarkable specificity of this

:37:06. > :37:09.document, does he agree with me that this will be a very powerful tool in

:37:10. > :37:14.preventing that from happening in the future? I think my right

:37:15. > :37:18.honourable friend makes an important point, if we stand back and ask how

:37:19. > :37:24.it is that powers have been taken from this house to Brussels, it's

:37:25. > :37:27.really happened in two ways. You have had a successive range of

:37:28. > :37:32.treaties passing competencies from Britain to Brussels. That can't

:37:33. > :37:33.happen any more because we legislated in the last parliament

:37:34. > :37:41.for the referendum lock. So if me or any subsequent Prime

:37:42. > :37:45.Minister tried to sign up to a treaty to pass powers, they

:37:46. > :37:49.couldn't. The second way the powers get past is through the judgment of

:37:50. > :37:53.the European Court of Justice, and that is why securing closer union is

:37:54. > :37:58.important because it says if we can get this agreed, you cannot use that

:37:59. > :38:03.clause to drive a ratchet of competency is going from Britain to

:38:04. > :38:06.Brussels. So the two routes for further integration where Britain is

:38:07. > :38:15.concerned have been effectively blocked off. Can the Prime Minister

:38:16. > :38:19.confirm that nothing in this renegotiation waters down important

:38:20. > :38:24.security cooperation at the EU level? Like intelligence sharing,

:38:25. > :38:28.joint investigations and the EU arrest warrant. And that when a deal

:38:29. > :38:33.is done, finally, he will join members on this side of how -- the

:38:34. > :38:36.house to make a strong case that our membership of the EU helps bring

:38:37. > :38:46.criminals to justice and keeps Britain safe. The security argument

:38:47. > :38:53.is an important one. When the Europe minister was asked questions

:38:54. > :39:00.yesterday, is it consistent to say, as we do in the document that

:39:01. > :39:03.security is a national competence, so is it consistent to say that and

:39:04. > :39:09.also say it's important for security? It's important that when

:39:10. > :39:14.we come to policing and intelligence services and those core competencies

:39:15. > :39:18.they are for the house and for government decision. But there are

:39:19. > :39:22.ways we can cooperate in Europe to make ourselves safer, making sure we

:39:23. > :39:26.know when criminals cross borders and when we exchange passenger name

:39:27. > :39:31.records to keep a safe, which is why when we opted out of the Justice and

:39:32. > :39:35.home affairs area, repatriating about 100 powers to Britain, we

:39:36. > :39:39.stayed in the ones that mattered for keeping us safe. I think that's

:39:40. > :39:42.important in demonstrating that we both maintain national security as a

:39:43. > :39:50.national competence but work with partners to keep our people say. Can

:39:51. > :39:53.I first say to the Leader of the Opposition that I prefer what he

:39:54. > :40:00.describes as the drama of the Conservative Party to the tragedy of

:40:01. > :40:03.his Labour Party. Mr Speaker, whether or not an emergency brake

:40:04. > :40:11.kicks in is ultimately the decision of the European union, and the level

:40:12. > :40:14.of education is a decision for the European Union, not the UK.

:40:15. > :40:21.Ultimately the benefit level sent abroad is a decision on the EU, not

:40:22. > :40:26.the UK. Is it clear we are not sovereign in these areas and we do

:40:27. > :40:30.not have independent control in these policy areas, and is at the

:40:31. > :40:35.decision on the -- on the referendum on decisions on laws and borders to

:40:36. > :40:42.be determined here, not applied by someone else. With great respect for

:40:43. > :40:46.my right honourable friend, I thought he explained clearly on the

:40:47. > :40:49.radio that he would be for leaving the EU, even without the

:40:50. > :40:54.renegotiation. He was very honest and frank about it, and in terms of

:40:55. > :40:57.dramas and tragedies he will echo the old insurance advert that we

:40:58. > :41:04.should not turn a drama into a crisis. What I would say about the

:41:05. > :41:07.emergency brake is that the European Commission have been clear, and it

:41:08. > :41:11.says in the documents, that they consider the kind of information

:41:12. > :41:14.provided by the UK shows the type of exceptional situation that the

:41:15. > :41:20.intended to cover and exists in the intended to cover and exists in the

:41:21. > :41:24.UK today. So I am all for maximising the sovereignty of the house and our

:41:25. > :41:27.government and the ability to do things, but we said we wanted no

:41:28. > :41:31.more something for nothing and we want the welfare brake and we want

:41:32. > :41:35.to be able to deny benefits to people before they have been here

:41:36. > :41:41.four years, and this says it can happen as soon as the legislation

:41:42. > :41:46.allows. Could I reassure the Prime Minister that in my estimation most

:41:47. > :41:51.of us in Northern Ireland agree with him that we would be much more

:41:52. > :41:56.successful in the European Union van out, and could we urge that the

:41:57. > :42:00.referendum be held later than June so all aspects could be fully

:42:01. > :42:06.discussed and debated? But could I ask him if and when the negotiations

:42:07. > :42:12.are completed that there is a positive staying in result for the

:42:13. > :42:15.referendum, so can he see the UK taking a more positive and engaged

:42:16. > :42:21.role within the structures of the European union? What I would say to

:42:22. > :42:27.the honourable gentleman is, were there to be agreement in February, I

:42:28. > :42:31.don't think a four-month period before a referendum would be too

:42:32. > :42:35.short. I think four months is a good amount of time to get across the key

:42:36. > :42:39.arguments and facts and figures and the both sides to be able to make

:42:40. > :42:43.their points. I think it will be equally important in Northern

:42:44. > :42:47.Ireland and I give him the guarantee that if there is an agreement, I

:42:48. > :42:53.will personally spend time in Northern Ireland making the points I

:42:54. > :42:57.think most important. As for the role of the EU in helping to bring

:42:58. > :43:02.about the successful transformation of Northern Ireland, there have been

:43:03. > :43:10.some very positive moves in terms of grants and structural funds to help

:43:11. > :43:13.build a strong economy that we need. As a former Secretary of State for

:43:14. > :43:18.Social Security, can I ask my right honourable friend to clarify the

:43:19. > :43:22.status of the agreement on migrant benefits? The EU has no competence

:43:23. > :43:26.over benefits rules in member states unless they conflict with the

:43:27. > :43:33.freedom of movement clause in the treaty, so if the proposed changes

:43:34. > :43:36.do not conflict with the treaty, we could have introduced them

:43:37. > :43:40.immediately without using negotiating clout on this issue, but

:43:41. > :43:45.if the changes do not conflict with the treaty they will be struck down

:43:46. > :43:55.by the EU court unless the treaty is changed first. What I would say is

:43:56. > :44:00.that the view is that this emergency brake can be brought in under the

:44:01. > :44:05.existing treaties but only with legislation through the European

:44:06. > :44:12.Parliament and on an accelerated timetable the leader of one of the

:44:13. > :44:16.parties said it could take one, two, three months. What it makes clear is

:44:17. > :44:26.you can act in this way legally, and crucially, in my view in the view of

:44:27. > :44:31.the British public, but quickly. When the Prime Minister meets the

:44:32. > :44:34.various leaders of the EU, can he make it clear to them that the

:44:35. > :44:37.result of the referendum is to be decided by the black -- British

:44:38. > :44:42.people and they should not be trying to interfere in any way of the

:44:43. > :44:47.British's peoples views, and will he say to the Irish leader that it not

:44:48. > :44:49.helpful and in fact very complimentary to the people of

:44:50. > :44:57.Northern Ireland that he implied that of the British people decided

:44:58. > :45:00.to leave the European Union that it would threaten the peace process. I

:45:01. > :45:03.absolutely agree with the honourable lady that this is a decision to the

:45:04. > :45:08.British people and British people alone. We certainly don't want to

:45:09. > :45:17.hear lectures from other people about that. Because this does affect

:45:18. > :45:20.Britain's relations with the rest of the world and other issues, there

:45:21. > :45:25.may well be people who want to make a positive contribution, and that is

:45:26. > :45:27.a matter for them. The only thing I would say about the Irish leader is

:45:28. > :45:31.that the priest processes secure and that the priest processes secure and

:45:32. > :45:37.we must keep going, but I do believe he is a friend of the United Kingdom

:45:38. > :45:41.-- the peace process is secure. He spoke very strong for Britain at the

:45:42. > :45:45.European Council and was influential in trying to build goodwill and

:45:46. > :45:49.saying that all in the European Union should recognise that of a

:45:50. > :45:52.country has a national interest that is at stake and needs things fixed

:45:53. > :45:56.we need to be a flexible enough organisation with, because otherwise

:45:57. > :46:01.we won't be able to sort anything out. The Prime Minister has said

:46:02. > :46:07.that if we vote to leave the EU he wants to continue as Prime Minister,

:46:08. > :46:13.a combination I would fully support. And he certainly fancies himself as

:46:14. > :46:18.a negotiator. So given that we have a net contribution each year to the

:46:19. > :46:23.EU of ?19 billion, and given that we have a trade deficit with the

:46:24. > :46:27.European Union of ?62 billion, and if we were to leave we would be the

:46:28. > :46:32.single biggest export market of the European Union, does he think he has

:46:33. > :46:35.the ability to negotiate a free trade agreement from outside of the

:46:36. > :46:41.EU without handing over ?19 billion per year? I have great respect for

:46:42. > :46:48.my honourable friend who I think wanted to leave the EU whatever came

:46:49. > :46:53.out of these negotiations. And I am sure he will make his argument is

:46:54. > :46:58.powerfully. Obviously, you have to look at all of the issues, and once

:46:59. > :47:02.this debate starts, people want to look at the alternatives. Would

:47:03. > :47:07.Britain be better off in a customs union arrangement like turkey? Would

:47:08. > :47:11.we be better off in a free trade agreement? Would we be better than

:47:12. > :47:17.the situation of Norway and Iceland? I think the Norway example is not a

:47:18. > :47:24.strong example because they actually contribute more per head to the EU

:47:25. > :47:27.and look at the EU legislation passed in Brussels but I think it

:47:28. > :47:33.will be an important part of the debate to come. As the Prime

:47:34. > :47:38.Minister has so far said in the exchanges, he doesn't seem to have

:47:39. > :47:42.persuaded any of the critics on his side over the virtues of his

:47:43. > :47:49.negotiations. He may have persuaded the Home Secretary for reasons that

:47:50. > :47:57.we don't understand, but apparently none of the other critics. Maybe he

:47:58. > :48:01.can help me out, I don't know. This is a very important issue for our

:48:02. > :48:04.country, but in the end it won't be decided in this chamber. All of us

:48:05. > :48:08.will have to reach our own conclusions and the only thing I

:48:09. > :48:11.would say to honourable members is that if you passionately believe in

:48:12. > :48:15.your heart that Britain is better off outside the EU, you should vote

:48:16. > :48:24.that way and even if you think it's on balance that they are better off,

:48:25. > :48:28.do it. Don't take a view because of what your constituency association

:48:29. > :48:31.might say or you are worried about a boundary review or you think it

:48:32. > :48:34.might be advantageous this way or that way. Do what is in your heart.

:48:35. > :48:47.If you think it's right for Britain, do that. Since no one else has done

:48:48. > :48:51.it so far after nearly an hour, and as my mum always says I should say

:48:52. > :49:00.thank you, can I thank the Brymon is the beginning is a choice in the

:49:01. > :49:05.first place. What is the point of having an emergency brake on your

:49:06. > :49:09.car if the back-seat driver, namely the European Commission, has the

:49:10. > :49:14.power to tell you when and for how long you should put your brake on

:49:15. > :49:17.that -- foot on the brake pedal? This is a different situation when

:49:18. > :49:20.they are telling us in advance that because of the pressures we face,

:49:21. > :49:26.this is a break that we can use and a break we can use relatively

:49:27. > :49:31.rapidly after a referendum. I think it would make a difference. The

:49:32. > :49:36.facts are these, and 40% of EU migrants coming to Britain are

:49:37. > :49:42.accessing the in work benefits system. The average payment per

:49:43. > :49:47.family is ?6,000. Don't tell me ?6,000 quite a major financial

:49:48. > :49:52.inducement. I it's over 10,000 people getting over ?10,000 a year.

:49:53. > :49:56.The benefits system, because you get instant access, is an unnatural

:49:57. > :49:59.drawer to the country so one of the things we should do to fix

:50:00. > :50:04.immigration is change it and that is what we are going to agree. Will he

:50:05. > :50:10.acknowledge that the referendum will be won and lost on bigger issues

:50:11. > :50:13.than the renegotiation, not least on the judgment that the greater

:50:14. > :50:19.challenges facing us better solved when countries work together. So

:50:20. > :50:22.again can I ask him to welcome the establishment of environmentalists

:50:23. > :50:24.for Europe which recognises that cross-border problems require

:50:25. > :50:28.cross-border solutions and highlights the crucial role the EU

:50:29. > :50:34.weighs in protecting wildlife and nature in the country. Where you

:50:35. > :50:37.have genuine cross-border problems you need to work across borders to

:50:38. > :50:42.make sure you have a strong solution and I think the key issues our

:50:43. > :50:45.prosperity and security, but insecurity comes environmental

:50:46. > :50:51.security. Britain at the Paris accords was able to play a strong

:50:52. > :50:54.role because of the example of getting carbon emissions down and

:50:55. > :50:59.having a strong plan for the future encourage other countries to do the

:51:00. > :51:00.same thing. That brought about a better deal for the best -- rest of

:51:01. > :51:09.the world. Much has been said about the

:51:10. > :51:13.Conservative Party manifesto that he and the rest of these benches fought

:51:14. > :51:18.on. I have an electronic copy of that in front of me now. Should the

:51:19. > :51:22.Prime Minister succeed in his negotiations he will have achieved

:51:23. > :51:26.not only the letter of what we promised, but also the spirit, and

:51:27. > :51:31.perhaps most important of all, it would give the British people a

:51:32. > :51:36.chance to vote for a reformed Europe ought to vote for the uncertainty of

:51:37. > :51:41.leaving. I am very grateful to my honourable friend. I do think that

:51:42. > :51:45.we are delivering the manifesto in fact and spirit, not just by doing

:51:46. > :51:49.something people we thought we would not deliver on, which is to hold a

:51:50. > :51:53.referendum. I remember sitting over there when Tony Blair stood here and

:51:54. > :51:57.said let battle commence, let the referendum begin over the

:51:58. > :52:01.constitutional treaty, and the fact that that referendum was never held

:52:02. > :52:05.in many ways poisoned a lot of the debate in Britain. That is why the

:52:06. > :52:09.manifesto is so clear about the referendum and the renegotiation

:52:10. > :52:13.aims. Some people will say the better approach is to go in, kick

:52:14. > :52:17.over the table, walk out of the door and say I won't come back in unless

:52:18. > :52:22.you give me a list of impossible demands. That was never the plan we

:52:23. > :52:26.set out. The plan we set out was to address, specifically, the biggest

:52:27. > :52:30.concerns of the British people about competitiveness, closer union,

:52:31. > :52:33.fairness and about migration and that is what this negotiation, if we

:52:34. > :52:40.can complete it, that is what I believe it will do. Can I

:52:41. > :52:44.congratulate the Prime Minister on the progress he has made in tackling

:52:45. > :52:55.what I think voters from all parties see as unfair

:52:56. > :53:02.ness of workers claiming benefits in the UK. If we left the European

:53:03. > :53:09.Union would this put at risk our core operation in Calais with French

:53:10. > :53:12.authorities to protect UK borders? -- cooperation. She raises an

:53:13. > :53:18.important point and there is no doubt in my mind that the agreement

:53:19. > :53:25.is incredibly beneficial. It works well for both countries, but for

:53:26. > :53:29.Britain, being able to have border controls in France and dealing with

:53:30. > :53:34.people there, that is something we should be very proud of and do

:53:35. > :53:41.everything we can to sustain. It is part of the European cooperation

:53:42. > :53:46.that we have. Given the difficulty of getting any change to the EU

:53:47. > :53:50.membership opposed by the other 27 countries, what we have got is as

:53:51. > :53:54.good as anyone might have expected and more and I congratulate the

:53:55. > :53:58.Prime Minister on his achievement. But will my right honourable friend

:53:59. > :54:04.confirmed that once the European Council has made its decision he

:54:05. > :54:08.will respect the views of those ministers who might publicly

:54:09. > :54:12.expressed the opinion that the UK should now leave the EU and that the

:54:13. > :54:19.careers of those ministers in this Government would be jeopardised or

:54:20. > :54:24.threatened as a consequence? I can certainly give my honourable friend

:54:25. > :54:28.that assurance. We are still in the process of negotiation and the

:54:29. > :54:33.manifesto said that we wanted the best possible deal for Britain and

:54:34. > :54:38.we will work on that together. If the deal is agreed, whether it is in

:54:39. > :54:42.February or later if it takes more time then there will be a cabinet

:54:43. > :54:47.meeting to decide if we can take the recommended position to the British

:54:48. > :54:52.people and if that position is to recommend we stay in a reformed

:54:53. > :54:55.European Union then yes, ministers who have long-standing views and

:54:56. > :54:59.want to campaign in another direction are able to do that. The

:55:00. > :55:03.Government will still have a position. Not a free for all but a

:55:04. > :55:07.clear Government position from which ministers can depart. They should

:55:08. > :55:15.not suffer disadvantage because they take that view. The Prime Minister

:55:16. > :55:20.has now listened to the views of the EU president and the other 27 heads

:55:21. > :55:23.of state in the European Union about his proposals. In the spirit of his

:55:24. > :55:30.own one nation respect agenda, will he also now listened to the heads of

:55:31. > :55:33.governments in the devolved parliaments of the UK who are

:55:34. > :55:40.unilateral in their belief that his preferred referendum timetable is

:55:41. > :55:44.disrespectful and wrong? In terms of the respect agenda my right

:55:45. > :55:48.honourable friend the Europe Minister has had conversations with

:55:49. > :55:54.their heads the devolved administrations. In terms of the

:55:55. > :55:59.referendum date, we need an agreement first, but I don't believe

:56:00. > :56:04.that a four month period, six weeks or more between one set and another

:56:05. > :56:07.of elections, I don't believe that is in any way disrespectful and I

:56:08. > :56:10.have great respect for the electorate in our countries that

:56:11. > :56:18.they can separate these issues and make a decision. I commend my right

:56:19. > :56:21.honourable friend. King to his commitment to offer the British

:56:22. > :56:24.people a choice on this matter and I support very much what he has said

:56:25. > :56:31.about maximising the sovereignty of this Parliament. Would he not agree

:56:32. > :56:34.that the proposals to agree the support of continental parliaments

:56:35. > :56:38.to block EU directives that this Parliament opposes does not

:56:39. > :56:45.constitute a fundamental reform that he seeks? What I would argue is that

:56:46. > :56:48.the red card proposal is something new. Something that did not

:56:49. > :56:54.previously exist. Of course it will take a lot of communication between

:56:55. > :57:00.parliaments but where it is more powerful than the previous proposals

:57:01. > :57:03.is that this would be an absolute block, if you get the right number

:57:04. > :57:11.of parliaments together, the commission wouldn't go ahead. It

:57:12. > :57:15.goes alongside the subsidiary test which takes place, getting Britain

:57:16. > :57:23.out of an ever closer union, it is one more measure that demonstrates

:57:24. > :57:30.we believe in national parliaments. There is a much broader case for

:57:31. > :57:34.continued UK membership of the EU beyond the four items in the Prime

:57:35. > :57:39.Minister's negotiations, based on jobs, economic interests, collective

:57:40. > :57:44.security and our place in the world. Does the Prime Minister accent that

:57:45. > :57:48.if we voted to leave the European Union, but then found ourselves

:57:49. > :57:52.still having to accept all of the rules of the single market, that

:57:53. > :57:58.would be to swap our position as a rule maker for that of being a rule

:57:59. > :58:03.taker and that is not control and it is not the right future for Great

:58:04. > :58:09.Britain. As ever the right Honourable Member speaks clearly and

:58:10. > :58:13.powerfully. There are bigger arguments that will take place over

:58:14. > :58:17.the coming months and I'm not over claiming about the four areas we

:58:18. > :58:21.have made progress but I merely say that they relate to the four things

:58:22. > :58:25.that most concern the British people about Europe and we are somewhere

:58:26. > :58:29.down the road of fixing them. The point he makes about being a rule

:58:30. > :58:35.maker and not a rule taker, is vital. Written is a major industrial

:58:36. > :58:40.economy with a huge car and aerospace industry and important

:58:41. > :58:44.financial services. We need to be around the table making the rules

:58:45. > :58:48.because otherwise there is a danger that the rules will be made against

:58:49. > :58:56.you and that is what we need to avoid. Among the other important

:58:57. > :59:00.measures successfully negotiated by my right honourable friend the Prime

:59:01. > :59:03.Minister I welcome in particular the recognition of the need to be more

:59:04. > :59:09.competitive to exploit the untapped potential of the single market and

:59:10. > :59:14.press on with vital trade negotiations with the United States

:59:15. > :59:17.right honourable gentleman confirm right honourable gentleman confirm

:59:18. > :59:24.that when these negotiations are I hope happily concluded, the national

:59:25. > :59:28.debate must move on to the real questions relating to the safety,

:59:29. > :59:32.economic security and prosperity of the UK and the role we are to play

:59:33. > :59:37.in the world over the decades to come. My right honourable friend is

:59:38. > :59:41.absolutely right and we will be holding this debate at a time of

:59:42. > :59:48.great uncertainty and insecurity in our world. We have Russia with its

:59:49. > :59:53.destabilisation of the Ukraine to our East and the horrors of Daesh to

:59:54. > :59:57.the south. This is a time when we need to work closely with our

:59:58. > :00:01.neighbours and friends to make sure that we can deliver greater security

:00:02. > :00:10.for our people. It is true to say that of our security is our special

:00:11. > :00:16.relationship with the United States and these things are vital, but in

:00:17. > :00:18.the modern world passenger name records and criminal records

:00:19. > :00:23.information systems, sharing information about terrorism and

:00:24. > :00:27.fighting together against the Islamist extremism, that we see not

:00:28. > :00:31.just in Syria and Iraq but tragically in our own countries

:00:32. > :00:37.across the European Union. These are important issues. Can I wish him and

:00:38. > :00:42.the British negotiation team well for what remains of this process?

:00:43. > :00:46.Will he acknowledge that all of the major threats and challenges Britain

:00:47. > :00:50.faces as a country from international terrorism to climate

:00:51. > :00:53.change demands that we work closely and collaboratively with our close

:00:54. > :00:59.neighbours and not relegate ourselves to a position of isolation

:01:00. > :01:03.and impotence? My judgment in all of this is that I want things that

:01:04. > :01:09.increase the power and the ability of Britain to fix problems and deal

:01:10. > :01:12.with our own security and stability and RM prosperity. What matters is

:01:13. > :01:20.whether we are able to deal with these things now. -- our own

:01:21. > :01:24.prosperity. We need to get rid of the pettiness on small things that

:01:25. > :01:32.don't actually make a difference and focus on prosperity and jobs. That

:01:33. > :01:35.is the focus. A large number of Members are seeking to catch my eye.

:01:36. > :01:39.The Prime Minister on several occasions has been here for long

:01:40. > :01:46.periods to respond to questions but there is now a premium on brevity

:01:47. > :01:50.which I'm sure will be demonstrated now. Can I point out to my right

:01:51. > :01:54.honourable friend that the former director-general of the Council of

:01:55. > :01:58.ministers has said, and I quote, ministers has said, and I quote,

:01:59. > :02:03.there is no possibility to make a promise that will be legally binding

:02:04. > :02:11.to change the treaty later. He then uses a word that I would describe as

:02:12. > :02:15.male bovine excrement. Can the Prime Minister give a single example of

:02:16. > :02:19.where the European Court of Justice has ruled against the treaties in

:02:20. > :02:25.favour of an international agreement such as this one he is proposing?

:02:26. > :02:34.Well, as I said to our right honourable friend the Member for

:02:35. > :02:40.Stone, Denmark negotiated the same opt outs and they still stand 20

:02:41. > :02:49.years on and are no binding. -- and are binding. In July 2005, four

:02:50. > :02:55.weeks after suicide bombers murdered 52 people on the London transfer

:02:56. > :03:00.network, Hussain Osman tried to blow himself up on a Hammersmith and City

:03:01. > :03:04.Juba line, fleeing to Italy and speedily extradited to face justice

:03:05. > :03:08.in this country in a matter of weeks rather than the years that bilateral

:03:09. > :03:11.extradition process would have taken. Can the Prime Minister

:03:12. > :03:15.reassure me and honourable Members that nothing he does in the

:03:16. > :03:22.renegotiation process will put the functioning of the European arrest

:03:23. > :03:26.warrant at risk? I can give her that reassurance, the House debated the

:03:27. > :03:30.issue as we opted out of much of Justice and home affairs but we

:03:31. > :03:35.specifically opted in to the arrest warrant because it has proven

:03:36. > :03:40.valuable, not least in the case that she said and other cases, making

:03:41. > :03:47.sure that serious criminals can be returned to Britain. If we stay in

:03:48. > :03:50.her report -- if we stay in a reformed European Union it is more

:03:51. > :03:57.of a question about putting back in place something is powerful is what

:03:58. > :04:01.we have. I very much admire the tenacity, courage and skill with

:04:02. > :04:06.which my right honourable friend is defending and polishing this deal,

:04:07. > :04:09.but what happens to our 2010 manifesto commitments on the charter

:04:10. > :04:17.of fundamental rights and social and unemployment law? Well, we have put

:04:18. > :04:20.in place as I have said, and as my honourable friend the former Local

:04:21. > :04:24.Government Secretary of State said, put in place the things we put in

:04:25. > :04:30.the manifesto, the manifesto in which he and I stood at the last

:04:31. > :04:33.election. In terms of the social chapter, the social chapter no

:04:34. > :04:39.longer exists and it is merely part of the single market legislation.

:04:40. > :04:43.What we have secured for the first time is an annual reduction in terms

:04:44. > :04:47.of legislation to try to reduce the level of legislation and it can of

:04:48. > :04:54.course include the sorts of legislation that he is talking

:04:55. > :04:59.about. In the words of John Kenneth Galbraith, all great leaders have

:05:00. > :05:02.one characteristic in common, a willingness to confront the major

:05:03. > :05:11.anxiety of their people in their time. This and not much else is the

:05:12. > :05:15.essence of leadership. When the negotiations are complete will you

:05:16. > :05:21.confront anxiety and unequivocally come out in favour of EU membership?

:05:22. > :05:26.I have been very clear, if we achieve this negotiation I will work

:05:27. > :05:29.hard to convince people that Britain should stay in a reformed European

:05:30. > :05:34.Union and it would be very much in the national interest. I'm not a

:05:35. > :05:39.great JK Galbraith expert but when people have serious concerns as

:05:40. > :05:43.people do in our country about levels of immigration it is right to

:05:44. > :05:50.act to address those concerns and that is what part of this is about.

:05:51. > :05:54.In welcoming the Prime Minister's very substantial progress towards an

:05:55. > :05:59.agreement which would allow us to stay in, does he agree with me that

:06:00. > :06:03.one of the most important aspects is that it is legally binding and gives

:06:04. > :06:09.a lot more clarity about Britain's role within the EU, both in terms of

:06:10. > :06:12.the new dispensation but also in relation to existing treaties and

:06:13. > :06:17.therefore it is extremely powerful from a legal point of view and can

:06:18. > :06:26.only be revoked if we agree and it has embedded force into it. We have

:06:27. > :06:30.now heard from the former Attorney General and former Solicitor General

:06:31. > :06:34.who have great legal expertise, this would be legally binding as a matter

:06:35. > :06:39.of international law and of course it still is to be agreed but when

:06:40. > :06:43.agreed it would be irreversible because it would only be amended or

:06:44. > :06:47.revoked if all Member states Britain included decided to reverse it.

:06:48. > :06:54.Bearing lies the irreversible nature of it. I want us to stay in the

:06:55. > :06:58.European Union but the Prime Minister indicated he would seek to

:06:59. > :07:03.address the unfairness in the European sugar market which affects

:07:04. > :07:07.cane sugar refiners like Tate Lyle in my constituency. I wonder whether

:07:08. > :07:11.he can tell us if he has made progress on the issue. I think I

:07:12. > :07:21.will have to write to the honourable gentleman about that issue. The

:07:22. > :07:24.commission might agree that we have met the requirements to have a break

:07:25. > :07:29.but that is his decision and they may not agree in a few years' time

:07:30. > :07:32.at every step of these negotiations unfortunately still relies on

:07:33. > :07:36.somebody else giving us permission to make decisions for this country

:07:37. > :07:41.like the thousands of harmonised directives that we struggle with day

:07:42. > :07:44.in day out. Businesses have to ask permission of other countries and

:07:45. > :07:48.this is not what the British public wants.

:07:49. > :07:57.Let me deal with the harmonised directives. Because we have the

:07:58. > :08:01.test, the European Council and commission will have to look at all

:08:02. > :08:04.of these competences and return to the member state those that are no

:08:05. > :08:09.longer necessary. It does seem important progress in the area she

:08:10. > :08:12.states. On the issue of migration, the European Commission said as far

:08:13. > :08:18.as they were concerned, Britain qualifies now. Where she is right is

:08:19. > :08:22.that we know that as proposed, this is the ability to stop somebody

:08:23. > :08:26.getting full access to benefits for fall -- for four years but we also

:08:27. > :08:32.need to fill in the detail about how long the mechanism Larsson when it

:08:33. > :08:35.can be removed. In the Welsh general election, how will his conservative

:08:36. > :08:40.colleagues are given the economic stability that Wales so sorely needs

:08:41. > :08:46.when it might be overthrown by the referendum six weeks later? The

:08:47. > :08:50.British people, including people in Wales, voted for a government that

:08:51. > :08:53.would deliver economic stability but would also put this great question

:08:54. > :09:00.about Britain's future in front of the British people. As I have said

:09:01. > :09:03.before, if you look at public opinion in Wales, England, Scotland

:09:04. > :09:07.and Northern Ireland it is all, to a greater or lesser extent, in favour

:09:08. > :09:12.of holding a referendum. Some I think this is the right policy the

:09:13. > :09:17.whole of the UK. My right honourable friend has talked about what will

:09:18. > :09:23.happen with the European Court of Justice. Does he recall that under

:09:24. > :09:26.the Lisbon Treaty there is a requirement, a treaty requirement

:09:27. > :09:30.that the European Union should join the European Convention on human

:09:31. > :09:35.rights. That has not been implemented because the European

:09:36. > :09:39.Court of Justice says it's incompatible with EU treaties.

:09:40. > :09:42.Doesn't it show that, ultimately, although they might have to take

:09:43. > :09:48.something into account, they don't have to comply. I would say two

:09:49. > :09:52.things to my honourable friend. Firstly, I don't think the EU should

:09:53. > :09:55.join the European Convention on human rights. That has been the

:09:56. > :10:01.British government position. Secondly, we are committed in the

:10:02. > :10:05.manifesto to change the British perspective on the European Court of

:10:06. > :10:12.rights and have our own Bill and we will come forward with proposals

:10:13. > :10:16.that shortly. British workers benefit from employment rights

:10:17. > :10:20.guaranteed at the EU level, so can the Prime Minister assure the house

:10:21. > :10:24.that is renegotiation does not affect important employment rights,

:10:25. > :10:30.including rights to paid leave, equal rights for part-time workers

:10:31. > :10:35.and fair pay for agency workers? All of these rules are now no longer in

:10:36. > :10:39.a social chapter but are part of single market legislation. We have

:10:40. > :10:43.the opportunity now to make sure that single mark -- single market

:10:44. > :10:46.legislation is something that is proportionate in need to be done at

:10:47. > :10:50.the European level rather than national level and that is the

:10:51. > :10:54.ongoing conversation they should be under the rules set out here. Does

:10:55. > :10:58.my right honourable friend agree that all the documents issued

:10:59. > :11:02.yesterday, the most significant set of words are in Donald Tusk's letter

:11:03. > :11:06.to the members of the Council, where he says that in light of the UK's

:11:07. > :11:12.special situation under the treaties it is not committed further

:11:13. > :11:15.political integration. Isn't this precisely what the majority of the

:11:16. > :11:21.British people have always wanted, and to revive an old phrase, to be

:11:22. > :11:24.in Europe but not run by Europe? Is that not what he is achieving? I

:11:25. > :11:30.thought the letter was interesting in that regard. The truth is that

:11:31. > :11:32.Britain's membership of this organisation is different to other

:11:33. > :11:36.members of the organisation because of the document sets out, when not

:11:37. > :11:39.in the euro and we don't participate in Schengen and we keep our own

:11:40. > :11:44.border controls and we choose whether to participate in measures

:11:45. > :11:48.of freedom, security and justice. We opted out of the Justice and home

:11:49. > :11:52.affairs area and now we are opting out of ever closer union. Ala

:11:53. > :12:01.membership is different and we need to make that case as we go forward.

:12:02. > :12:04.With the South of Ireland being by far Northern Ireland's biggest

:12:05. > :12:07.export market, will the Prime Minister state what assessment he

:12:08. > :12:13.has made of the impact leaving the EU would have on the border in

:12:14. > :12:17.Ireland, whether continued free movement in Ireland can be

:12:18. > :12:24.guaranteed, and the damage that Customs border could on Northern

:12:25. > :12:26.Ireland's financial security? The honourable lady asks important

:12:27. > :12:32.questions and I think I'm writing saying that in the amendment to the

:12:33. > :12:43.European referendum Bill, and accepted here, there is a series of

:12:44. > :12:51.documents the form proposals and the alternatives and the obligations of

:12:52. > :12:54.rights in the European Union and through this process we should

:12:55. > :13:05.address the important question that affects one part of the United

:13:06. > :13:07.Kingdom quite intensely. In 2014/ 15, economic migrants came from the

:13:08. > :13:12.European Union, none of whom would be deterred by anything we have

:13:13. > :13:15.heard so far. Ever closer union might be taken out of the preamble

:13:16. > :13:20.but it remains in the central text of all of the treaties. On

:13:21. > :13:23.protecting the inner hand-outs, all that will happen is there will be a

:13:24. > :13:27.discussion and there are plenty of discussions the European Union and

:13:28. > :13:31.on competitiveness, that has been part of the European Union's own

:13:32. > :13:38.ambition since the Lisbon agenda of 1999. The thin gruel has been

:13:39. > :13:41.further watered down. My right honourable friend has a fortnight, I

:13:42. > :13:50.think, in which to salvage his reputation as a negotiator. Let me

:13:51. > :13:53.say that my honourable friend is extremely articulate the Lemi take

:13:54. > :13:58.two of the points and say why I think, actually he has got it wrong.

:13:59. > :14:05.Firstly, the principles that will be legally binding in terms of how

:14:06. > :14:11.currencies other than the euro are treated, is a real advance. That

:14:12. > :14:15.means, for instance, never again can the European Union suggest that you

:14:16. > :14:17.can only have the clearance of euros in Eurozone countries. That would

:14:18. > :14:22.have been disastrous for the financial service industries. They

:14:23. > :14:26.cannot even promote that again. That is so important, because if we

:14:27. > :14:32.weren't in the European Union we wouldn't have that protection at

:14:33. > :14:36.all. He doesn't understand the power of the principles of no

:14:37. > :14:41.discrimination and no disadvantage and no cost so we cannot bail out

:14:42. > :14:45.European countries as we were nearly forced to do last summer. One ever

:14:46. > :14:52.closer union, I would encourage him to look at section C, page nine of

:14:53. > :14:56.the documents. References to a closer union do not offer a base for

:14:57. > :15:01.extending the scope of the treaties. As far as I can remember, and I was

:15:02. > :15:05.advising a minister when we had the Maastricht debates and I sat through

:15:06. > :15:09.watching Lisbon and Nice and Amsterdam, this has never been set

:15:10. > :15:14.out that way. This means you cannot use ever closer union to drive the

:15:15. > :15:18.process of integration. If we have got in this house the protection we

:15:19. > :15:22.have to have a referendum if any minister ever suggest we sign up to

:15:23. > :15:26.another treaty that passes power, that is protection one, and we have

:15:27. > :15:30.this, we are well on our way to saying that our different sort of

:15:31. > :15:35.membership of the EU is not only safeguarded but it is being extended

:15:36. > :15:41.because not only are we out of the euro and Schengen, we're out of ever

:15:42. > :15:44.closer union as well. Once the workshop of the world, Birmingham in

:15:45. > :15:48.the West Midlands is now the industrial heartland of Britain. Key

:15:49. > :15:53.to that success is inward investment, including that of the

:15:54. > :15:57.3000 strong Jaguar factory in my constituency. Key to inward

:15:58. > :15:59.investment is continuing membership of the European Union. Does the

:16:00. > :16:03.Prime Minister agree with me that it is strongly in the best interests of

:16:04. > :16:08.Midland workers that we remain part of Europe? Provided we get the

:16:09. > :16:13.agreement we need, yes, of course I do. We are seeing an industrial

:16:14. > :16:16.renaissance in the West Midlands, a lot of it around the automotive

:16:17. > :16:23.industry. I've had a number of meetings with car manufacturing

:16:24. > :16:28.members and I had conversations with Jaguar Land Rover and others. I was

:16:29. > :16:34.with BMW in Germany and they make the point that Britain is a great

:16:35. > :16:38.centre for manufacturing and engines, and this comes to the point

:16:39. > :16:45.that the standards set in Europe that being a maker and not a rule

:16:46. > :16:48.taker. Following the Prime Minister's response to my recent PMQ

:16:49. > :16:54.I have taken the advice and cleared the diary for a debate tomorrow in

:16:55. > :16:58.this chamber on Parliamentary sovereignty. Given the importance of

:16:59. > :17:01.sovereignty to the new negotiations, will he join us in the debate and

:17:02. > :17:08.perhaps respond on behalf of the government? I'm very sorry. I've not

:17:09. > :17:14.been able to clear my diary. Tomorrow I have the Syria conference

:17:15. > :17:17.and many people are coming at night, over 30 presidents and prime

:17:18. > :17:22.ministers and the aim of trying to raise twice as much for the Syrian

:17:23. > :17:26.refugee appeal this year as we did last year, but I know my honourable

:17:27. > :17:37.friend is keen to have a word and I will make sure we fix that up. There

:17:38. > :17:41.are 14,000 jobs in old dependent on Europe and I'm very much in favour

:17:42. > :17:45.that we remain. But the Prime Minister mentioned in his statement

:17:46. > :17:49.that the emergency brake would apply immediately after the EU referendum,

:17:50. > :17:54.yet it was reported yesterday that it would be at least 18 months. Can

:17:55. > :17:59.he clarify which it is and will he report on any other transitional

:18:00. > :18:04.arrangements or measures? What I said is because this is not relying

:18:05. > :18:08.on changes to the treaty but will be European legislation, it can enter

:18:09. > :18:14.into force relatively shortly after the referendum but it will require

:18:15. > :18:17.some legislation and the leader will be one of the biggest parties in the

:18:18. > :18:21.European Parliament and he said it could be a matter of months. You

:18:22. > :18:24.could accelerate the process. It goes to show how much you need to

:18:25. > :18:28.bind everyone into the agreement that we hope to achieve in the

:18:29. > :18:33.coming weeks so that the parliament is able to pass the legislation as

:18:34. > :18:36.swiftly as possible. Does my right honourable friend agree that one of

:18:37. > :18:40.the biggest concerns about the direction of travel in the European

:18:41. > :18:45.Union is that there are countries within it, the Eurozone members that

:18:46. > :18:49.wish to integrate more deeply in terms of protecting their country.

:18:50. > :18:52.We have our own country -- currency but it was an incredibly important

:18:53. > :18:57.part of the negotiation ambition that we should be protected from any

:18:58. > :19:01.discriminatory measure that might prevent their ability to integrate

:19:02. > :19:08.more closely. Is that not why the proposed package is significant and

:19:09. > :19:12.that we have not just the position of two different speeds, but also a

:19:13. > :19:16.different destination from our European partners which gives us a

:19:17. > :19:19.relatively advantageous position. I'll make two points. This reference

:19:20. > :19:24.to a different destination is significant. We talk about Europe

:19:25. > :19:29.moving at different speeds but we might not all be trying to achieve

:19:30. > :19:34.the same ends. That is important. On the in and outs section, the most

:19:35. > :19:40.technical and in some ways the most impenetrable, there simple

:19:41. > :19:44.principles like the no cost principles as I referred to. There

:19:45. > :19:50.is also a very important concept in their that should we need to take

:19:51. > :19:53.action against financial supervision to secure our own financial

:19:54. > :19:56.stability, nothing should get in the way that, and think that's a very

:19:57. > :20:03.important clarification for the good of the country. With over 80% of

:20:04. > :20:08.businesses in my constituency wanting to stay in the EU, and over

:20:09. > :20:13.50% of jobs are linked to trade with the EU, so the member should be as

:20:14. > :20:18.vital for trade and prosperity, so this side of the house is united to

:20:19. > :20:23.campaign to stay in Europe. Don't we need now to end the uncertainty and

:20:24. > :20:28.have the referendum as soon as possible and campaign to stay in the

:20:29. > :20:30.EU. I am keen to end the uncertainty, obviously, but I'm not

:20:31. > :20:35.in a hurry if we can't get the right deal. We have set out what needs to

:20:36. > :20:39.be done and I think it's possible to be agreed in February, but we have

:20:40. > :20:46.to make sure we are patient, because getting this right really matters.

:20:47. > :20:52.Mr Speaker, week or so ago 2500 people turned up at Kettering to the

:20:53. > :20:56.first Go conference which is a grassroots organisation to get out

:20:57. > :21:00.of the EU and we had cross-party speakers at it and we are doing the

:21:01. > :21:03.same in Manchester. The thing that has not been commentated on, and I

:21:04. > :21:07.had an e-mail from the Prime Minister about this yesterday was

:21:08. > :21:14.the fact that he rules nothing out. This is a process where he might not

:21:15. > :21:17.get what he wants. We understand he might not get to Manchester because

:21:18. > :21:22.he is in negotiation, but could he come on the debris -- the 19th of

:21:23. > :21:26.February if he does not get what he wants, and would it be possible to

:21:27. > :21:34.drop off a tie at Downing Street for him? My honourable friend is always

:21:35. > :21:40.very generous with his time, his advice and now also with his

:21:41. > :21:44.clothing. The tie is here, and I think the Blazer will soon follow. I

:21:45. > :21:48.won't be able to come on the 19th of February. I hope I will still be in

:21:49. > :21:55.the thick of negotiations, but I will of course report back to the

:21:56. > :21:59.house and give the results. It is a very dairy site, I am bound to say,

:22:00. > :22:07.but who am I to object to that -- eight bearish item. I have suddenly

:22:08. > :22:14.been afflicted by a loss of hearing. I hope my ties knot to Gerrish. When

:22:15. > :22:19.the Prime Minister welcomes Northern Ireland, will he visit the

:22:20. > :22:25.devastating fishing villages, and the families angered by EU court

:22:26. > :22:29.rulings on terrorists dishes and is, and manufacturers smothered in red

:22:30. > :22:34.tape is and all of the companies whose employers run the gauntlet at

:22:35. > :22:38.Calais every week because of the chaotic EU immigration policy, and

:22:39. > :22:43.would he explained to them how he's red card. Any further destructive EU

:22:44. > :22:49.legislation when it requires him to get in 12 weeks 50% of parliaments

:22:50. > :22:53.across the EU to oppose proposals backed by their own governments?

:22:54. > :22:58.When I come to Northern Ireland I want to address those issues and

:22:59. > :23:02.when we look at the reform we have had in the fisheries policy, that

:23:03. > :23:07.has lead to improvement, but there is more to be done. When we look at

:23:08. > :23:10.the rules that manufacturers face, we have shown how we will cut

:23:11. > :23:14.bureaucracy, and in terms of one of the problems that has been happening

:23:15. > :23:19.between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland in terms of sham

:23:20. > :23:21.marriages and people trying to get around immigration controls, that is

:23:22. > :23:29.expressly addressed in these documents. We need now to carry them

:23:30. > :23:33.into force. While the Prime Minister is trying his best to renegotiate

:23:34. > :23:38.the position, would he not agree that the reforms as they stand do

:23:39. > :23:41.not do anything to make the immigration system in this country

:23:42. > :23:53.fairer regardless of where people come from in the world? I do think

:23:54. > :24:00.they do make it fairer, because the year -- for years we have not been

:24:01. > :24:03.able to apply some of the rules regarding marriages between British

:24:04. > :24:08.nationals to European nationals, but now we can do this. All sorts of

:24:09. > :24:10.sham marriages and forces and criminals who have been getting

:24:11. > :24:17.round our immigration controls will no longer be able to. The Sunday

:24:18. > :24:21.Times has reported that as part of the negotiations the Prime Minister

:24:22. > :24:24.is seeking to deny UK citizens access to the fundamental rights

:24:25. > :24:27.guaranteed by the EU charter as part of his plan to restore the

:24:28. > :24:33.sovereignty of Parliament, does he appreciate that in the well-known

:24:34. > :24:37.case of McCormick against the Lord Advocate, the sovereignty is a

:24:38. > :24:41.distinctly English prince or, in Scotland the people are sovereign

:24:42. > :24:50.and they do not want human rights to be reduced. -- English principle.

:24:51. > :24:55.People in this country have had human rights long before the

:24:56. > :24:58.European union human rights Charter was even thought of, so we do not

:24:59. > :25:02.need these to be in force in Britain because we have our own Parliament

:25:03. > :25:06.and our own rights and soon we will have our own British Bill of Rights,

:25:07. > :25:11.as well. Families at home will be thinking about what the future holds

:25:12. > :25:15.and I think all aspects of disagreement are important to our

:25:16. > :25:19.constituents, but most of all is the protection for non-Euro countries.

:25:20. > :25:23.Will the Prime Minister guarantee this house that he will look at the

:25:24. > :25:29.detail, that there are no loopholes, as the Eurozone integrate, that we

:25:30. > :25:32.are not discriminated against? I will certainly do that, this will be

:25:33. > :25:35.complex, because the Eurozone countries want to be able to

:25:36. > :25:40.integrate more, and they want to know that we are not trying to block

:25:41. > :25:45.the necessary action that they need to take, but clearly what we want to

:25:46. > :25:49.make sure is that they will not make us disadvantaged as single market

:25:50. > :25:53.members. I'm sure the prime and Mr will welcome the news that the

:25:54. > :25:57.largest offshore wind farm in the world is to be built off the East

:25:58. > :26:04.Yorkshire coast -- the Prime Minister will welcome. Creating 2000

:26:05. > :26:11.jobs in the Humber Estuary and investing ?6 billion, so this shows

:26:12. > :26:15.that what ever the debate and frustration is, it is part of our

:26:16. > :26:20.country's interest to be involved in the EU as a leading player. I'm

:26:21. > :26:23.delighted with the news, we have given a lot of support to this

:26:24. > :26:28.energy and we have the biggest offshore wind market anywhere in the

:26:29. > :26:32.world because we have given the regulatory certainty that the

:26:33. > :26:36.industry needed. What they are achieving in the east of England is

:26:37. > :26:40.not just one big factory but an industrial regeneration of all the

:26:41. > :26:44.industries that relate to it, but irrespective of the outcome, we have

:26:45. > :26:47.got to make sure that Britain is the best place in the world to invest

:26:48. > :26:54.and grow a business, and I'm sure the arguments will come, there will

:26:55. > :26:57.be many that will want us to stay and making the argument, that will

:26:58. > :27:02.make us even more attractive, but we have got to wait until the starting

:27:03. > :27:07.gun is fired. The scope and scale of this reform package does actually

:27:08. > :27:11.reflect the key interests of a widespread range of people in this

:27:12. > :27:14.chamber, does the Prime Minister agree, the important thing now is to

:27:15. > :27:18.make sure that it is legally binding, and make sure the details

:27:19. > :27:23.are absolutely right, but above all sketch out the case for the economic

:27:24. > :27:27.reasons why we need to be in the EU, not least the fact that more than

:27:28. > :27:32.half of our foreign investment comes from the European Union. You are

:27:33. > :27:36.right. The next few weeks will be about trying to secure this detail,

:27:37. > :27:43.and then if that is successful they will be the bigger items that he

:27:44. > :27:46.refers to. I suspect there will always be issues which divide the

:27:47. > :27:49.Prime Minister and myself, but on this, the thing that matters is the

:27:50. > :27:53.national interest and what the Prime Minister has described in his

:27:54. > :27:57.statement as the greater prize. Isn't one of the real issues and the

:27:58. > :28:03.real benefits of having a document which is legally binding and

:28:04. > :28:07.ratified by the British people in a referendum, that it will be the

:28:08. > :28:11.British people who decide and that had the Prime Minister gone for a

:28:12. > :28:15.treaty change, that that would have been potentially scuppered by

:28:16. > :28:20.referendums in France, the Netherlands, Ireland and other EU

:28:21. > :28:25.member states, whose public might have come to a different view to the

:28:26. > :28:31.British one? I'm grateful for what you said, and clearly this is a

:28:32. > :28:34.legally binding arrangement, if it is agreed, for the reasons I've

:28:35. > :28:39.given, but we are aiming for a treaty change for those things that

:28:40. > :28:44.need to change the next and the treaties are altered. He makes a

:28:45. > :28:47.good point, the more we can bring this together in one place and

:28:48. > :28:52.explain what it is about, the more the British people will be able to

:28:53. > :28:56.see the force of the arduous. -- the next time the treaties are altered.

:28:57. > :29:05.-- the force of the argument. If the United Kingdom left the European

:29:06. > :29:11.Union we will be able to regain our seat at the world trade table, we

:29:12. > :29:19.lost its voice by being a member of the European Union. You are right,

:29:20. > :29:22.of course outside the EU one of the options is to take our seat at the

:29:23. > :29:27.World Trade Organisation 's, Buglioni problem with that, the

:29:28. > :29:29.World Trade Organisation has not signed many trade agreements in

:29:30. > :29:35.recent years -- the only problem with that. They have tended to be

:29:36. > :29:40.bilateral agreements, you have the EU agreement with Canada, the EU

:29:41. > :29:43.agreement with career. Britain could independently go and sign trade

:29:44. > :29:48.agreements, but we have got to weigh up the arguments, how much weight

:29:49. > :29:52.does Britain have as a member of the European Union, part of a market of

:29:53. > :29:55.five meeting people, will you are trying to negotiate the biggest and

:29:56. > :30:00.best trade deals with the fastest-growing countries in the

:30:01. > :30:11.world? -- part of a market of 5 million people. The German

:30:12. > :30:14.government and the European car lobby see this as an opportunity to

:30:15. > :30:20.water down new proposals on emissions standards and approval,

:30:21. > :30:22.does the Prime Minister accept that would be unacceptable to British

:30:23. > :30:28.drivers and make sure that will not be a bargaining chip? There is net

:30:29. > :30:31.connection between this renegotiation and those directives,

:30:32. > :30:34.the only connection I can see is the one I was making earlier, Britain

:30:35. > :30:37.needs to be in the room when these decisions are made for the good of

:30:38. > :30:43.our car industry and for our consumers stash there is no

:30:44. > :30:48.connection. The Prime Minister has set out but he would like... Sorry,

:30:49. > :30:53.that there are many things to be reformed, but if this grudging and

:30:54. > :30:58.threadbare deal is the very best the EU are prepared to concede to us,

:30:59. > :31:04.what serious hope is there of meaningful renegotiation if and when

:31:05. > :31:12.we are tied in long-term after a referendum? I would make a couple of

:31:13. > :31:17.points, first of all, this is not coming at the time of a more general

:31:18. > :31:21.treaty change, this is a one off, the first thing, because government,

:31:22. > :31:25.the first Prime Minister that from a standing start has achieved a

:31:26. > :31:28.unilateral agreement for the good of their country inside the EU and I

:31:29. > :31:35.don't think that is threadbare. It is very solid. There will be treaty

:31:36. > :31:40.changes in the EU coming down the track, and the process of reform is

:31:41. > :31:43.never fully completed. The other thing, there is no danger after this

:31:44. > :31:48.agreement being signed, and I would hope confirmed, in a referendum,

:31:49. > :31:51.there is no danger of year running away with a load of other plans for

:31:52. > :31:57.Britain, because we have got that referendum. Nothing can happen to

:31:58. > :32:01.Britain without a referendum in this country, that was such an important

:32:02. > :32:05.piece of legislation in 2010 and I think we have forgotten about that

:32:06. > :32:09.at times. The Liberal Democrats believe in the United Kingdom being

:32:10. > :32:13.in Europe but we also believe in the European Union being reformed. I

:32:14. > :32:18.congratulate the Prime Minister and his team and I wish them well. When

:32:19. > :32:22.he is leading the campaign to stay, will he reminds the British public

:32:23. > :32:27.of the mutual defence clause and the frankly, in his unstable world, it

:32:28. > :32:33.would be an absurd time to turn our backs on our nearest neighbours and

:32:34. > :32:38.allies? This will be an important... Thanks for your good wishes, for the

:32:39. > :32:43.final stages. This will be a big argument, in the campaign, like many

:32:44. > :32:50.on this site, I have seen Nato as the cornerstone of our defence, but

:32:51. > :32:54.in the modern networked world, the work you do, for instance, in the

:32:55. > :32:58.Mediterranean to try and stop people leaving Libya and making the

:32:59. > :33:02.perilous journey to Italy, that could be a Nato operation, but right

:33:03. > :33:07.now this is a European operation in which we are playing a leading part.

:33:08. > :33:16.Being a member of networks where you can work together for your security

:33:17. > :33:19.is important. Small businesses are looking at the targets for

:33:20. > :33:24.regulation reduction with optimism, but what they are seeking is a

:33:25. > :33:28.reassurance that these are stretched targets and the real goal has got to

:33:29. > :33:33.beat beyond them and make sure there is a real terms reduction in the

:33:34. > :33:43.amount of bureaucracy small-business face. You are right, what we have

:33:44. > :33:47.achieved is a 18% reduction, but what we want is a reduction in the

:33:48. > :33:50.existing base of regulation and legislation where it is not

:33:51. > :33:58.necessary and are going for the first time that is what we have

:33:59. > :34:02.secured targets towards. Can the Prime Minister confirmed that

:34:03. > :34:05.British women as rights at work, especially around paid maternity

:34:06. > :34:07.leave and it will play an anti-disconnection laws, will remain

:34:08. > :34:13.firmly in place and will not be affected by any deal? -- British

:34:14. > :34:20.women's rights. And how far has he got with the tampon tax? I can give

:34:21. > :34:24.you that reassurance, not only are those guarantees, but the action we

:34:25. > :34:27.have taken domestically on things like shared parental leave, which

:34:28. > :34:34.I'm very proud of and make Britain a more family friendly country. In

:34:35. > :34:38.terms of the tampon tax, this is difficult, because of the VAT rules

:34:39. > :34:41.in Europe, so I've nothing to add to what I've said before about this,

:34:42. > :34:47.but I totally agree about the desirability of trying to get this

:34:48. > :34:51.fixed. May I join other colleagues in thanking the Prime Minister for

:34:52. > :34:54.his work in negotiating a better deal for Britain in the European

:34:55. > :35:03.Union. I agree that these reforms are substantial and a better change,

:35:04. > :35:11.but what has he made in terms of reforms regarding car Manufacturing

:35:12. > :35:15.work? A constituent of mine contacted me yesterday to say, what

:35:16. > :35:21.is the impact on my grandchild if we left the European Union? Inevitably,

:35:22. > :35:27.these negotiations, they focus on important ideas and concepts,

:35:28. > :35:30.sovereignty and non-discrimination, deregulation, but we have got to

:35:31. > :35:36.make sure that this is a debate that is about consumers and how we are

:35:37. > :35:40.affected in terms of the freedom to travel and to study, the price of

:35:41. > :35:44.flights, the availability of roaming charges, and all the rest of it, how

:35:45. > :35:48.we are affected as pensioners and car workers and as young people

:35:49. > :35:54.looking for university places, and hopefully the debate will bring up

:35:55. > :35:58.these issues. The Prime Minister has outlined the action he has taken in

:35:59. > :36:01.the negotiations, but what is missing from his statement, with the

:36:02. > :36:08.respect, is any referral to the fishing sectors. There is too much

:36:09. > :36:16.prerequisite, farmers have two wade through red tape just to farm. --

:36:17. > :36:22.there is too much bureaucracy. Have a referendum as soon as possible and

:36:23. > :36:25.let's rid ourselves of the top EU, -- the top-heavy EU, and get out of

:36:26. > :36:30.Europe. When will the referendum take place? I can't give a date

:36:31. > :36:33.because we don't have agreement in place, but I would say that there

:36:34. > :36:37.have been significant improvements in the Common fisheries policy, not

:36:38. > :36:43.least dealing with the appalling situation of discards, but as for

:36:44. > :36:46.farmers, let the debate begin. Let's say from farmers and their

:36:47. > :36:51.representatives about what they think about these but they get and

:36:52. > :36:53.the actions we have taken to try and simplify the bureaucracy with you

:36:54. > :36:58.inspections, but I look forward to hearing from all farmers and their

:36:59. > :37:05.representatives stashed few were inspections. Thank you very much,

:37:06. > :37:11.the report is fantastic, but can I draw your attention to section B,

:37:12. > :37:17.and Donald Tusk's part on competitiveness. Especially small

:37:18. > :37:21.and medium enterprises. And the unnecessary legislation. This is

:37:22. > :37:25.what so many companies complain about and this is very welcome to

:37:26. > :37:28.all businesses, especially those who want to invest in Europe and the

:37:29. > :37:29.reason why we should be staying in the market which has over 500

:37:30. > :37:43.million people. Of course section B is important but

:37:44. > :37:52.it is worth looking at the detail on competitive which adds section B.

:37:53. > :37:56.Any referendum debate will centre on the bigger picture and the longer

:37:57. > :38:00.term challenge and deeper interest. As well as the issues raised by my

:38:01. > :38:05.honourable friend, the member for South Down, can he address, not a

:38:06. > :38:10.package he has come up with, the changes in relation to child

:38:11. > :38:15.benefit. We'll be extend to cross-border workers in a

:38:16. > :38:19.constituency like mine where it EU presets do apply? I will look

:38:20. > :38:24.carefully at that issue but I remember from conversations I have

:38:25. > :38:28.had, there are particular arrangements for the common travel

:38:29. > :38:34.area. But I will come back to the honourable gentleman. The legal

:38:35. > :38:39.certainty which the Prime Minister referred to in the protections in

:38:40. > :38:43.the economic government section of the document, are very important to

:38:44. > :38:46.maintain the status of London as an international business and financial

:38:47. > :38:51.centre. Would he agree with me one of the risks that would remain if

:38:52. > :38:57.this agreement or not successful to that position, would it be

:38:58. > :39:01.uncertainty of leaving a market we can grow, improve and strengthen and

:39:02. > :39:08.then having to try and get back in to the market from the outside at on

:39:09. > :39:12.certain cost, time and terms? He is right to talk about the importance

:39:13. > :39:18.of financial services and the City of London. We have 40% of Europe's

:39:19. > :39:21.financial services in the UK. The current arrangements work well

:39:22. > :39:28.because you can passport your weight to establish yourself in any

:39:29. > :39:31.European country. So those wanting alternatives will have to answer

:39:32. > :39:37.difficult questions as to how you put those protections in place. Can

:39:38. > :39:40.the Prime Minister confirm he is in receipt of a letter from my right

:39:41. > :39:46.honourable friend from Gordon, that makes it clear he does not think six

:39:47. > :39:50.weeks is a long enough gap between national elections and the

:39:51. > :40:01.referendum? It wasn't intentional, we will accept that, but can I

:40:02. > :40:06.stress the views of the former First Minister, and the real reason the

:40:07. > :40:13.Prime Minister once a June referendum is a short campaign is to

:40:14. > :40:16.cover up the obvious divisions within the Conservative Party? I

:40:17. > :40:21.don't think four months is a short period of time. By the end of four

:40:22. > :40:28.months, I think people might be sick of the whole subject. I notice the

:40:29. > :40:32.thumbscrews and the other instruments of torture available to

:40:33. > :40:37.the current First Minister, have been applied to the former First

:40:38. > :40:40.Minister. In a miraculous conversion, six weeks was enough,

:40:41. > :40:49.now six weeks is not enough. I wonder what she did to him? Can I

:40:50. > :40:54.thank the Prime Minister for giving the country the chance for a

:40:55. > :40:59.referendum. Would he agree he, I am this government are nothing more

:41:00. > :41:02.than tenants, his duty, while we serve to protect our island

:41:03. > :41:08.inheritance, our democracy, sovereignty and freedom. We have no

:41:09. > :41:12.right to sell it all, let alone cheaply to a bureaucratic and

:41:13. > :41:19.unaccountable institution like the EU? We are tenants, he is right.

:41:20. > :41:23.That is why I think after 40 years of the British people not having a

:41:24. > :41:28.say, when Europe has changed so much, it is right to give the

:41:29. > :41:32.British people say again. I wanted to give them the best possible

:41:33. > :41:36.chance, not between the status quo today and leaving altogether, but an

:41:37. > :41:43.settlement and plan for Britain, which they can choose to stay in, or

:41:44. > :41:49.get out of. Mr Tom Elliott, don't be diverted by the honourable gentleman

:41:50. > :41:55.next to you. Mr Speaker, I would not. One of the major drawbacks to

:41:56. > :42:01.businesses is the red tape and bureaucracy. I did note within

:42:02. > :42:05.yesterday's document said it would be repealing unnecessary legislation

:42:06. > :42:10.in that respect. When will the public and businesses be able to see

:42:11. > :42:16.what legislation is planned to be repealed? It is, as the document set

:42:17. > :42:21.out, it will be an annual process. What is different about this,

:42:22. > :42:25.instead of just words about deregulation, there are two

:42:26. > :42:30.mechanisms put in place. Once you enforce subsidiarity, and one for

:42:31. > :42:38.burden reduction targets. Those two things are new. On this side of the

:42:39. > :42:42.House, we want what is best for Britain when it comes to jobs and

:42:43. > :42:45.security. I have one vote and I believe there are aspects of the EU

:42:46. > :42:52.that needs serious scrutiny and reform. My constituents share those

:42:53. > :42:56.thoughts. This party has brought the opportunity for this much-needed

:42:57. > :43:03.referendum and the reality of reform, and we cannot at this and

:43:04. > :43:08.examine what it is us. Would the Prime Minister agree, on all sides,

:43:09. > :43:12.and open argument on this, rather than open warfare is what voters

:43:13. > :43:18.will all want? People want open argument and they want unbiased

:43:19. > :43:23.statistics and clear independent advice as well. As well as there

:43:24. > :43:28.being an in campaign and an outer campaign, once the deal is agreed,

:43:29. > :43:35.several out campaigns, as you say... We need to make sure that

:43:36. > :43:39.independent organisations, businesses and NGOs and others, who

:43:40. > :43:44.think they would be affected, everybody should he encouraged to

:43:45. > :43:52.come forward and give their view. Mr Speaker, will the Prime Minister

:43:53. > :43:54.tell us in the spirit of subsidy and action, when he said strengthening

:43:55. > :43:58.all national parliaments, what does that mean for the Scottish

:43:59. > :44:05.Parliament? We are currently giving the Scottish Parliament the immense

:44:06. > :44:09.responsibility of being able to raise its own taxes. Which we are

:44:10. > :44:14.still negotiating. This is probably the biggest act in a British

:44:15. > :44:20.subsidiarity we have had in many years. I would urge the SNP to pick

:44:21. > :44:26.up the Batten and run with it. On the topic of in work benefits, the

:44:27. > :44:28.Prime Minister has already said the emergency brake is in the hands of

:44:29. > :44:34.the commission. Would the Prime Minister agree it would help the in

:44:35. > :44:38.case, if over the last few weeks he could get a stronger commitment to

:44:39. > :44:44.apply the handbrake for a period into the future, not just initially?

:44:45. > :44:46.And what would happen if we voted to stay in but the European Parliament

:44:47. > :44:54.subsequently didn't ratify these measures? On his latter point, I

:44:55. > :44:57.make a point the European Parliament are a party to these negotiations

:44:58. > :45:01.and I have had a number of meetings with them. If he looks at the draft

:45:02. > :45:07.declaration of the European Commission on the safeguard

:45:08. > :45:10.mechanism, it is very clear we are justified in triggering the

:45:11. > :45:14.mechanism straightaway. But his other point is absolutely right, we

:45:15. > :45:18.need to secure, in the negotiations, the best possible agreement about

:45:19. > :45:23.all the other aspects of this mechanism, how long it lasts for,

:45:24. > :45:29.how many times it can be renewed, and all the rest of it. There were

:45:30. > :45:31.500 days between the announcement and the date of the Scottish

:45:32. > :45:39.independent referendum which is roughly the same between now and the

:45:40. > :45:42.23rd of June. But the are thousands of European citizens living in

:45:43. > :45:48.Britain and claiming benefits so how will this draft package be legally

:45:49. > :45:52.binding and affect them? I can let the House into a secret, the reason

:45:53. > :45:57.there were 500 days between the announcement of the Scottish

:45:58. > :46:00.renderer and the Scottish referendum itself, I was determined there would

:46:01. > :46:04.be one question only that I granted the former First Minister the right

:46:05. > :46:09.to name the date. He wanted to make sure it was after as long as

:46:10. > :46:14.possible, after the anniversary of Alnwick Burn, everything you could

:46:15. > :46:24.throw in. The result was still, from my point of view, very, very clear.

:46:25. > :46:28.Benefits is pulling factor for migration and it may have been

:46:29. > :46:33.blunted under these proposals, but not eliminated. The biggest pull

:46:34. > :46:38.factor for migration is our successful economy and job creation

:46:39. > :46:42.in the UK. Can I ask the Prime Minister what the long-term view is

:46:43. > :46:46.in these draft proposals for the UK to be able to control immigration

:46:47. > :46:50.within the EU beyond the four years of the emergency brake? The

:46:51. > :46:55.long-term approach is, first of all we are dealing with the abuses of

:46:56. > :46:59.free movement in a more comprehensive package than before,

:47:00. > :47:05.fraudsters, criminal calls and sham marriages. We have this four-year

:47:06. > :47:10.break, which is significant. Frankly, I am sure the Eurozone

:47:11. > :47:14.economies over time will start to recover, because that has been one

:47:15. > :47:17.of the issues. In the long term we need to do better controlling of

:47:18. > :47:21.immigration from outside the EU, but we need a welfare policy and

:47:22. > :47:28.training policy inside our own country, which trains up the people

:47:29. > :47:33.in our own country to do the jobs is a strong economy is providing. One

:47:34. > :47:37.of the top five economies in the world, Britain has to have a

:47:38. > :47:41.worldview and we need friends and allies, not just in one continent,

:47:42. > :47:46.but in six. But I agree with the Prime Minister as to whether we can

:47:47. > :47:50.manage outside the European union, but where we are better off. What

:47:51. > :47:54.feedback has he had from his negotiations from our allies in the

:47:55. > :47:58.Commonwealth and Britain's wider networks around the world? The

:47:59. > :48:02.advice has been comprehensive from all of them. They valued the

:48:03. > :48:05.individual relationship with Britain, but they think we are

:48:06. > :48:12.better off inside a reform European Union. Whether it is the Prime

:48:13. > :48:15.ministers of New Zealand, Australia, Canada, the American president or

:48:16. > :48:20.others, they are clear about this, not simply because they think we are

:48:21. > :48:23.better off, but also the influence we bring to bear on the European

:48:24. > :48:30.Union is positive from the point of view. The SNP in rummaging for an

:48:31. > :48:37.argument referred to in 1953, the case of McCormick and comments, side

:48:38. > :48:41.passing comments. Can I remind the Prime Minister that he, among EU

:48:42. > :48:48.leaders, has unique, up-to-date experience of tough negotiations,

:48:49. > :48:52.which led to a referendum agreement, which led to 55% of the Scottish

:48:53. > :48:57.electorate voting to keep the sovereign united Kingdom together.

:48:58. > :49:02.Can I say to the Prime Minister, he should take comfort in his success,

:49:03. > :49:06.because those 55% will be voting just like the English, the Welsh and

:49:07. > :49:12.Northern Irish, to listen to the British premiere on what is in

:49:13. > :49:17.Britain's best interests. I am grateful to my honourable friend.

:49:18. > :49:20.What these two referenda have in common, as a country we should be

:49:21. > :49:25.confronting and dealing with these big issues. The Scotland want to

:49:26. > :49:30.stay in the United Kingdom and does the United Kingdom want to stay

:49:31. > :49:34.within a reformed Europe? Just as important are the result, is the

:49:35. > :49:39.legitimacy of the result and a high turnout will be essential. What will

:49:40. > :49:43.the Prime Minister do to engage with trade, industry and businesses to

:49:44. > :49:48.discuss with their employees the implications for which ever way this

:49:49. > :49:52.debate goes? I will do everything I can in the results of a successful

:49:53. > :49:57.negotiation to encourage engagement at all levels. I would encourage

:49:58. > :50:01.businesses and charities and other organisations, to make sure they

:50:02. > :50:04.feel they can come forward. Some in the business community feel there

:50:05. > :50:09.are corporate governance concerns they have to go through. I would

:50:10. > :50:13.advise them to get on with that process, so if they think they have

:50:14. > :50:17.important arguments to put forward to the workforce, customers and

:50:18. > :50:22.shareholders, they should do so. The key question is whether the UK can,

:50:23. > :50:28.when we need to, say no to European migrants. This draft agreement says

:50:29. > :50:34.we can on the grounds of public policy, public health or public

:50:35. > :50:42.security. Which means reducing unemployment and marriages of

:50:43. > :50:45.convenience. Is this a step forward for our own immigration and security

:50:46. > :50:54.interests? I think my honourable friend makes an important point. If

:50:55. > :51:00.you read section D of the main document, it is refreshing on how

:51:01. > :51:05.many instances it is possible for the control of migration and for the

:51:06. > :51:13.limitation of free movement. It bears for careful reading. Can I

:51:14. > :51:18.welcome the Prime Minister's statement so far and in particular

:51:19. > :51:21.the fact, for the first time in my lifetime Prime Minister is doing a

:51:22. > :51:25.deal in Europe and coming back to this country to give the British

:51:26. > :51:30.people a say on it and not just parliament. Would he reassure me,

:51:31. > :51:34.even if we do about to remain on the European Union on the basis of this

:51:35. > :51:37.deal, we will still have a vision Europe should be doing less and

:51:38. > :51:46.doing it better? I absolutely agree with that. The idea of Europe when

:51:47. > :51:53.necessary. There will be people who will say, maybe these issues, we

:51:54. > :51:56.have addressed issues of concern to the British people, but there is

:51:57. > :52:02.more to be done. It is a perfectly acceptable view. The more to be done

:52:03. > :52:06.should be done inside the EU, rather than as slamming the door and trying

:52:07. > :52:11.to do it from outside. It is now clear from the renegotiation that

:52:12. > :52:15.Britain can its position within Europe by continuing to benefit from

:52:16. > :52:18.influence over and market of 500 million people, while maintaining

:52:19. > :52:24.our borders and preventing abuse of free movement. May I ask the Prime

:52:25. > :52:25.Minister if he is as encouraged as I am by the positive support that has

:52:26. > :52:34.come from business across the piece? Is important that business raises

:52:35. > :52:41.its voice, especially regarding jobs and investment. We need to

:52:42. > :52:44.demonstrate that this negotiation and its outcome, can actually lead

:52:45. > :52:48.to a strong and more secure economy, not just for the sake of business,

:52:49. > :52:54.but the sake of people that want security. I congratulate my right

:52:55. > :52:59.honourable friend on his statement. Is he aware that 90% of FTSE 100

:53:00. > :53:04.chairman would vote to remain in the European Union? Does he think this

:53:05. > :53:08.is because they are part of project fear or is it because they run our

:53:09. > :53:12.very largest companies in the real world and they know a vote to leave

:53:13. > :53:16.is a vote for economic uncertainty and a vote to remain with the

:53:17. > :53:19.protections we will have in terms of the single market and our currency

:53:20. > :53:24.is a vote for our economy and to go from strength to strength? It is

:53:25. > :53:28.important that we hear the voice of business large and small and I

:53:29. > :53:32.encourage them to speak out. They have an important contribution to

:53:33. > :53:35.make to the debate and the more people that can give concrete

:53:36. > :53:39.examples of how access to this market matters and how access to the

:53:40. > :53:45.rules of this market matters, that is the best thing. I've thanked the

:53:46. > :53:51.Prime Minister for his efforts to secure the best deal available. -- I

:53:52. > :53:54.thank. The newspaper reports suggest that the changes needed to introduce

:53:55. > :53:59.the emergency brake would require approval from the European

:54:00. > :54:03.Parliament. Has he had an opportunity to assess the levels of

:54:04. > :54:09.support from MEPs for these changes? You are right. It is a great advance

:54:10. > :54:13.that the European Commission has said Britain qualifies for this M

:54:14. > :54:18.break, if it existing now, it would be brought in straightaway --

:54:19. > :54:22.qualifies for this emergency brake. I think the head of the largest

:54:23. > :54:31.group at the European Parliament thinks this could be sorted out in a

:54:32. > :54:33.matter of months. The German captain of the ship which is the European

:54:34. > :54:38.Union has deliberately steered it into a migration iceberg, with all

:54:39. > :54:42.the watertight doors open. Rather than rearranging the deck chairs,

:54:43. > :54:46.would it not be better to direct the British people to the available

:54:47. > :54:51.lifeboat while the band is still playing before the inevitable

:54:52. > :54:59.happens? The analogy was getting quite complex, but I don't agree

:55:00. > :55:04.with that. If we were not outside Schengen our friend would have a

:55:05. > :55:07.very fair point, but we are in this situation of being able to have the

:55:08. > :55:12.best of both worlds, we will keep our borders and not let in foreign

:55:13. > :55:16.nationals that don't have a right to be here, something which is

:55:17. > :55:19.strengthened by this agreement, but let's keep the free movement so

:55:20. > :55:25.British people can live and work in other European countries. I think

:55:26. > :55:30.that is the best of both worlds. If I can press the Prime Minister

:55:31. > :55:35.further about the emergency brake, it sounded so hopeful a few weeks

:55:36. > :55:42.ago, and the Honourable friend from Gainsborough disk drive backstreet

:55:43. > :55:48.drivers. -- Gainsborough described. But it seems to mean that when I

:55:49. > :55:51.hazard is saying, an accident will surely happen, would my friend agree

:55:52. > :55:56.that it is far better to have independent control of the emergency

:55:57. > :56:04.brake, the clutch, the Excel rate and indeed the steering wheel? --

:56:05. > :56:08.when a hazard is seen. The European Commission statement is very clear,

:56:09. > :56:11.it considers the information provided to it by the United

:56:12. > :56:14.Kingdom, and that shows the exceptional situation exists in the

:56:15. > :56:22.United Kingdom today, so that would enable us to pull the emergency

:56:23. > :56:25.brake, but there is another consideration, those thinking that

:56:26. > :56:29.we would be better off outside the European Union have to think about.

:56:30. > :56:33.Most of those countries outside the EU that want a close leisure ship

:56:34. > :56:37.with it, when they ask for free access to the single market, the

:56:38. > :56:44.first and is that they should also be the free movement of people, that

:56:45. > :56:48.is the case with Norway, for instance -- they want a close

:56:49. > :56:51.relationship. This is a deal from within, and even on this issue I

:56:52. > :56:57.think this would be better than a deal from without. In his statement

:56:58. > :57:01.the Prime Minister outlines the work we've done to tackle migration from

:57:02. > :57:06.outside the EU, but what conversation as he had with other

:57:07. > :57:09.leaders about what they need to do to tackle the EU

:57:10. > :57:16.migration crisis question not many of my constituents are very

:57:17. > :57:21.concerned about this -- migration crisis? This is a crucial question

:57:22. > :57:27.which needs a proper answer, because the arrival of these people into

:57:28. > :57:32.Europe does concern people, and first we don't had to allow into our

:57:33. > :57:37.country foreign nationals, resident in other states, that is why we keep

:57:38. > :57:41.our border controls. If we take the situation in Germany, in order to

:57:42. > :57:45.get German citizenship, that can take as much as ten yes. That is the

:57:46. > :57:52.product of a lot of work and tests and everything else -- ten years. We

:57:53. > :57:56.have got to keep our Schengen no borders agreement and we should also

:57:57. > :58:00.continue to exclude people if they are not European Union citizens and

:58:01. > :58:03.they don't have a Visa, and the changes here that mean that we can

:58:04. > :58:07.crack down on the forces and the criminals and the sham marriages,

:58:08. > :58:10.and those who are trying to get round our immigration controls puts

:58:11. > :58:20.us in a better place to deal with the pressures of the future. It has

:58:21. > :58:24.been a long wait, but the voice of the Humber will not be silenced. As

:58:25. > :58:31.the Prime Minister said last week -- humbled. The Prime Minister said

:58:32. > :58:33.that the British people are proud of their democratic institutions, but

:58:34. > :58:37.when they see British ministers having to go cap in hand to Brussels

:58:38. > :58:41.to determine who receives benefits and who is allowed into the country,

:58:42. > :58:47.that pride is somewhat diminished. Could I urge him in his final

:58:48. > :58:52.negotiations to remain robust and achieve even more and although I'm

:58:53. > :58:58.afraid Hewelt persuade me, you might persuade a few doubting people in

:58:59. > :59:03.Cleethorpes -- I'm afraid Hewelt persuade me. The voice of the humble

:59:04. > :59:08.could help me with that, if he wanted to. We are a member of a

:59:09. > :59:12.number of national organisations, some of which involve us having

:59:13. > :59:17.obligations towards them. We have exceeded some of our sovereignty to

:59:18. > :59:23.Nato, but we don't see that as a cap in hand issue. That is a cornerstone

:59:24. > :59:26.of our security. What I'm trying to secure with Europe is that we are in

:59:27. > :59:36.the things we want to be in and out of the things we don't want to be

:59:37. > :59:42.in, and if that is not -- if that is the case, we are able to get things

:59:43. > :59:46.done for the people who put us in. Always very keen to hear the

:59:47. > :59:55.Honourable member, but he only toppled into the chamber some way

:59:56. > :59:58.into the statement, as his grin suggests, and we will hear from him

:59:59. > :00:04.on a subsequent occasion. Can we thank the Prime Minister for his

:00:05. > :00:09.patience and his courtesy and I would like to thank all colleagues

:00:10. > :00:13.for taking part. There will be many opportunities to debate these

:00:14. > :00:21.important matters, but thanks where it is due. We have come to the ten

:00:22. > :00:30.minute rule motion, which you have been waiting for. As I'm sure all

:00:31. > :00:36.Honourable members will agree, it is our job in this house to make sure

:00:37. > :00:40.that the citizens we represent can truly exercise their democratic

:00:41. > :00:44.rights, but as we speak British citizens in this country are being

:00:45. > :00:48.marginalised and excluded from the democratic process and the problem

:00:49. > :00:55.is less getting people to sign up, and more about maintaining people's

:00:56. > :00:58.registration. The people who are being excluded from the process are

:00:59. > :01:03.exactly the people we need to be prioritising. According to recent

:01:04. > :01:06.trends, we are witnessing further marginalisation of already

:01:07. > :01:10.marginalised groups, including those from poorer backgrounds, those who

:01:11. > :01:16.are disabled and those from ethnic minorities. Research published

:01:17. > :01:20.yesterday shows that pensioners in the shires who own their own homes

:01:21. > :01:26.have a 90% chance of being on the electoral register, but at the same

:01:27. > :01:29.time a young man from an ethnic minority background in private

:01:30. > :01:35.rented accommodation in a city, has less than 10% chance of being

:01:36. > :01:42.registered. Meanwhile the Prime Minister has launched an important

:01:43. > :01:46.drive against" over, unconscious or institutional racial discrimination

:01:47. > :01:51.in university admissions, the justice system and the police", but

:01:52. > :01:54.the fact that people from ethnic minorities are far less likely to be

:01:55. > :01:58.registered, and to exercise their democratic rights undermines the

:01:59. > :02:05.government's commitment. When it comes to electoral registration the

:02:06. > :02:08.picture is bleak. I celebrate the work of my friend from Ashfield, for

:02:09. > :02:13.raising the issue of voters dropping off the register, since the

:02:14. > :02:19.introduction of individual registration. Since the introduction

:02:20. > :02:24.a staggering 800,000 people have dropped off the register, that is

:02:25. > :02:31.1.8% nationwide. To put these figures into context, Liverpool has

:02:32. > :02:39.seen a drop in is eligible register of 14,000, Birmingham, 17,000,

:02:40. > :02:43.Lewisham, 6000. These are all areas which have seen an increase in

:02:44. > :02:46.population. The situation is even worse in areas where the population

:02:47. > :02:52.is transient, such as university towns. Canterbury has seen a 13%

:02:53. > :02:57.drop in those registered to vote, Cambridge has dropped by 11%,

:02:58. > :03:02.meaning the electorate is now smaller than it was in 2011. These

:03:03. > :03:07.jobs are the result of the absurdities of the current system.

:03:08. > :03:11.-- drops. Imagine if every time you started a new job you needed to

:03:12. > :03:16.apply for a new national insurance number and needed to prove to the

:03:17. > :03:20.HMRC again and again that you were eligible to pay tax and national

:03:21. > :03:23.insurance. The process would be cumbersome and costly and

:03:24. > :03:29.repetitive, just as the process of this is. In sum, these developers

:03:30. > :03:33.mean that British citizens, especially those who are on the

:03:34. > :03:39.sidelines, are being disenfranchised -- these developments. This also

:03:40. > :03:44.means that as the pool of potential voters decreases, our political

:03:45. > :03:48.status quo becomes more limited. If the government is serious about

:03:49. > :03:59.combating social exclusion, it urgently needs to review the dire

:04:00. > :04:02.situation. Disenfranchisement is marginalising the already

:04:03. > :04:06.marginalised. If you are not on the register, you won't have access to

:04:07. > :04:10.mainstream loans and you might not be able to get a mortgage. You also

:04:11. > :04:16.can't serve on a jury and be part of our justice process. More

:04:17. > :04:18.fundamentally of all, if you are not on the electoral register, you can't

:04:19. > :04:23.participate in the democratic process. Our present a lecture at

:04:24. > :04:27.system of electoral registration is fundamentally flawed, and it is not

:04:28. > :04:36.cheap -- our present electoral system. But it does not have to be

:04:37. > :04:41.this way. Automatic registration provides the opportunity to reduce

:04:42. > :04:47.costs and improve Administration and cut down on the Roxy and enable

:04:48. > :04:53.everyone to access their right to in franchise -- cut down on

:04:54. > :04:57.bureaucracy. This places the responsibility on the state to do

:04:58. > :05:01.everything in its power to make sure that the electoral database is full

:05:02. > :05:05.and complete. It imposes a duty on the government and public bodies to

:05:06. > :05:09.work better together, and it proposes to make the system truly

:05:10. > :05:12.convenient for the citizens by integrating national and local

:05:13. > :05:18.datasets and this will mean that when individuals address details

:05:19. > :05:22.will be automatically updated according to trusted datasets. The

:05:23. > :05:29.datasets will collate information at each point a citizen interacts with

:05:30. > :05:33.the state, whether when they pay tax or receive benefits, use the NHS or

:05:34. > :05:38.claim a pension. The walls used to be sacrosanct between these

:05:39. > :05:43.datasets, but they are falling away as the government prioritises

:05:44. > :05:46.security. Housing benefit departments already use the

:05:47. > :05:51.electoral register to find households claiming the 25% single

:05:52. > :05:56.person council tax discount. But have more than one voter registered.

:05:57. > :05:58.This demonstrates the huge potential wing government departments and

:05:59. > :06:08.public bodies communicate with each other. -- when. This would improve

:06:09. > :06:12.registration, these reforms, and are very similar model operates in

:06:13. > :06:18.Australia with huge success. The state of Victoria has a population

:06:19. > :06:22.of 3.5 million people and has a 95% accuracy in its registration

:06:23. > :06:25.process. It does this at extremely low cost, employing just five

:06:26. > :06:30.members of staff who maintain the rolling register. Rolling out this

:06:31. > :06:35.reform in the UK is timely for so many reasons. Greater Manchester

:06:36. > :06:38.will submit to the Cabinet Office next week, its plans to pioneer the

:06:39. > :06:44.system of automatic electoral registration. Its proposals for a

:06:45. > :06:47.pilot scheme, and I sincerely hope that the government will support

:06:48. > :06:53.these plans, and I will introduce the primary legislation which is

:06:54. > :06:58.needed to make sure the pilot can go ahead -- and they will. I'm sure

:06:59. > :07:02.members will be aware that this week is National voter registration

:07:03. > :07:05.drive, and last year 's drives almost half a million people

:07:06. > :07:10.registered to vote, making it the most accessible voter registration

:07:11. > :07:15.campaign ever. I hope the results this week will match that

:07:16. > :07:20.achievement. But in the longer run, voter registration should not be the

:07:21. > :07:24.responsibility of charities and NGOs, it should be down to the state

:07:25. > :07:27.to do all it can to make sure that everyone, especially those who are

:07:28. > :07:31.most marginalised, can access their democratic rights. I hope honourable

:07:32. > :07:36.members will consider this a nonpartisan issue, and will agree

:07:37. > :07:43.that it is in all our interests to get more people signed up. -- all

:07:44. > :07:46.agree. Then we can get on with our job to try and persuade and enthuse

:07:47. > :07:50.voters that we are worthy of their votes. At a time when social

:07:51. > :07:57.exclusion is getting worse, voter turnout is declining, and this has

:07:58. > :08:00.caused registration to do play, automatic voter registration has

:08:01. > :08:03.never been more important, voting is the backbone of this house and is

:08:04. > :08:08.one of the most important interactions between the citizen and

:08:09. > :08:11.the democratic state, it is a fundamental symbol of engagement,

:08:12. > :08:16.signifies that you are not on the margins of society, but part of the

:08:17. > :08:20.majority. We can no longer accept a system that excludes and

:08:21. > :08:24.marginalises potential voters, not least because they are exactly the

:08:25. > :08:29.groups that we need to engage with two and social exclusion. I don't

:08:30. > :08:32.think it is a controversial thing to argue that voting is not just for

:08:33. > :08:37.the elite, it is something we should all be able to access. That is why,

:08:38. > :08:40.for the sake of our democracy, and of social cohesion, I hope the

:08:41. > :08:44.government will be supporting my suggestions and will make

:08:45. > :08:52.registering to vote more, not less, way of life.

:08:53. > :08:59.The question is the honourable member have leave to bring in the

:09:00. > :09:07.Bill. As many as are of the opinion say "aye". To the contrary, "no".

:09:08. > :10:12.The eyes to the right,. He will bring in the Bill?

:10:13. > :10:22.Automatic electoral reading Bill. What day. Friday the 5th of

:10:23. > :10:26.February. We now come to the motion from the Leader of the Opposition on

:10:27. > :10:34.tax avoidance and multinational companies. Mr John McDonnell. I wish

:10:35. > :10:40.to move the motion set out on the order paper in my name and that of

:10:41. > :10:45.several other friends. Can I welcome the minister responding, totally

:10:46. > :10:52.sympathise with his position having been put in this position by the

:10:53. > :10:56.Shadow Chancellor. I understand the Chancellor is in Rome today, can I

:10:57. > :11:06.say at this stage it is unfortunate to say the least that securing a

:11:07. > :11:11.firm a agreement on tax avoidance could be a missed opportunity but

:11:12. > :11:16.this government. We have called this debate because of the last 12 days,

:11:17. > :11:21.we have witnessed the most supine capitulation to corporate interests

:11:22. > :11:27.write any British government in the recent history of this country. It

:11:28. > :11:32.has caused immense anger within our community, from individual

:11:33. > :11:34.taxpayers, from businesses small and large, from Independent commentators

:11:35. > :11:41.and from across the political spectrum. Just at the time when many

:11:42. > :11:44.of our constituents were filling in their tax returns and paying their

:11:45. > :11:52.taxes, they see what the government was allowing Google to get away

:11:53. > :11:58.with. This is a time-limited debate and I will try and press on as quick

:11:59. > :12:01.as I can. Members will have the opportunity to engage. On the Friday

:12:02. > :12:07.before last, Google announced late in the day by press release, the

:12:08. > :12:14.company's tax deal with HMRC. It celebrated a deal comprising of

:12:15. > :12:22.payments of ?130 million in respect of taxes from 2005 up to 2015. In

:12:23. > :12:24.the early hours of the morning, the Chancellor was in an equally

:12:25. > :12:34.celebratory mood and tweeted this was a victory, a major success. The

:12:35. > :12:39.Google deal and that... I will in due course. The Chancellor's

:12:40. > :12:46.exaltation of the deal were received with incredulity of independent tax

:12:47. > :12:51.analysts. The Chancellor and HMRC were keen to publicly parade the

:12:52. > :12:57.deal, but when challenged to release the detail, they hid behind

:12:58. > :13:00.confidential conditions. What assessment does the Shadow

:13:01. > :13:05.Chancellor make of the Labour government, who were in charge of

:13:06. > :13:08.taxation during part of that period? I am grateful for the intervention,

:13:09. > :13:13.the honourable member knows I was not the most enamoured of the Labour

:13:14. > :13:16.government's track record during that period. It was a Labour

:13:17. > :13:21.government that started this enquiry. His government took six

:13:22. > :13:25.years to complete it. If you look at the recent estimate why the

:13:26. > :13:29.Financial Times, the measures that were introduced by the Labour

:13:30. > :13:37.government, the Labour government, will reap in ten times the amount of

:13:38. > :13:42.tax this government has introduced. I am grateful to my right honourable

:13:43. > :13:46.friend, but won't many of our constituents find it difficult to

:13:47. > :13:52.understand the fact this information is largely in the public domain? We

:13:53. > :13:56.know the profits and the assets and the liabilities of Google in the

:13:57. > :14:00.United Kingdom, because those finances are public. We also know

:14:01. > :14:09.how much tax is being paid. Does that lead us to the conclusion the

:14:10. > :14:16.tax rate is 2.77% and not 20%? Let me come on to that point. I didn't

:14:17. > :14:22.take long for independent analysis to show what a derisory sum the

:14:23. > :14:28.Google tax payment was. I said derisory, not just my description

:14:29. > :14:35.but used by many others. Google had a UK turnover of up approximately

:14:36. > :14:41.four Oleon in 2014, 20 15. If profits are similar across the whole

:14:42. > :14:50.group, 25% return, it implies one alien pounds worth of profits. If

:14:51. > :14:53.the standard 20% corporation tax was levied, not the 200 in due course,

:14:54. > :15:00.not the 200 million paid by Google for the decade. Independent

:15:01. > :15:08.assessors estimated the Google tax rate for the last decade of 3%. I

:15:09. > :15:11.thank him for giving way. Companies in my constituency are extremely

:15:12. > :15:14.successful at selling products around the world and based on the

:15:15. > :15:18.intellectual rapidly developed in the UK. Does the Shadow Chancellor

:15:19. > :15:23.think the profits from that intellectual rapidly should be taxed

:15:24. > :15:29.in the company where those products are sold, or here in Britain? The

:15:30. > :15:33.economic activity definition has to be examined when rockets are

:15:34. > :15:41.assessed. It is a valid and reasonable point. Let me press on.

:15:42. > :15:46.It is no wonder local, small businesses and taxpayers feel so

:15:47. > :15:52.strongly that this is grotesquely unfair. They have not been allowed

:15:53. > :15:59.to ignore the tax demands for a decade then negotiate a sweetheart

:16:00. > :16:03.deal at mater's rates. It also shows who counts with this government,

:16:04. > :16:14.that in the month they let Google Paea poultry sum in back tax, they

:16:15. > :16:18.lose in court over the bedroom tax and then they appeal the decision so

:16:19. > :16:23.they can persecute some of the most vulnerable and poorest people in the

:16:24. > :16:28.land over a relatively insignificant sum. It demonstrates to us at the

:16:29. > :16:35.start up site down and callous sense of justice and fairness. I thank him

:16:36. > :16:41.for giving way. Does he agree with me what compounds that sense of

:16:42. > :16:46.unfairness constituents will feel, the tax gap has been estimated by

:16:47. > :16:52.many to be over 100 billion pounds and this government is cutting HMRC

:16:53. > :16:55.offices and at the weekend announced compulsory redundancy for tax

:16:56. > :17:03.collectors. How can we narrowed the tax gap when that is happening?

:17:04. > :17:09.Under Labour, hedge fund managers were paying routinely rate of tax

:17:10. > :17:16.band the cleaners because Labour were a soft touch on tax. Isn't this

:17:17. > :17:20.political opportunism on stilts? Can I say, I am not sure if the

:17:21. > :17:26.honourable gentleman is listening, but my critique of the last Labour

:17:27. > :17:30.government, having convened the tax Justice network in this building,

:17:31. > :17:35.campaigned for 18 years. I have to say over the last government, the

:17:36. > :17:39.Financial Times assessment is the measures introduced by the Labour

:17:40. > :17:44.government will reap in ten times as much as anything introduced by this

:17:45. > :17:48.government. Let me press on. Last Monday, just to get some answers by

:17:49. > :17:53.the Google deal I tabled an urgent question to the Chancellor and I'm

:17:54. > :18:00.grateful Mr Speaker granted the question. Typically the Chancellor

:18:01. > :18:05.failed to turn up. By that time Number Ten was distancing itself

:18:06. > :18:09.from the Chancellor. Google deal had gone, within 72 hours, from a major

:18:10. > :18:14.success to merely a step forward, to Number Ten. I see this weekend, the

:18:15. > :18:18.Business Secretary was describing the deal with masterly

:18:19. > :18:24.understatement as not a glorious moment. Yesterday, Ruth Davidson,

:18:25. > :18:29.the leader of the Scottish Conservatives said, it doesn't feel

:18:30. > :18:36.fair that in our hearts I feel we all know it isn't fair. I agree,

:18:37. > :18:42.wholeheartedly. During the urgent discussion last Monday, the Minister

:18:43. > :18:45.was asked by the member for Kingston upon Hull North, whether he knew

:18:46. > :18:52.what the rate of tax was Google was paying. He said bluntly, no. We had

:18:53. > :19:00.the assertion that the HMRC calculation of back tasks set on

:19:01. > :19:04.levied on an assessment of economic activity. This implies there must be

:19:05. > :19:09.very little economic activity happening in Google UK. This

:19:10. > :19:16.argument will a bit thin... I will in due course, but it was pointed

:19:17. > :19:21.out by Google employs 2300 staff in the UK with average earnings of

:19:22. > :19:26.?160,000, is building a new headquarters on top of the two it

:19:27. > :19:30.already has. Can I join with the Shadow Chancellor in demanding more

:19:31. > :19:34.transparency question I have had contact from my constituents who are

:19:35. > :19:38.concerned what is happening is the government are creating a loophole,

:19:39. > :19:43.especially for Google and nobody else. I think we deserve, in this

:19:44. > :19:48.House, and in this country, full transparency on this deal. I will

:19:49. > :19:54.come onto the recommendations for future action, which covers that

:19:55. > :20:00.point. Let me press on a little bit further. As last week wore on, there

:20:01. > :20:04.was a growing sense of outrage at the Google sweetheart deal and many

:20:05. > :20:10.felt betrayed by the Chancellor. We supported the Chancellor with the

:20:11. > :20:13.introduction of the diverted profit tax legislation, to tackle firms

:20:14. > :20:18.using complex profit shifting schemes to avoid tax. We supported

:20:19. > :20:23.him. He was referred to as the Google tax. We learned last week

:20:24. > :20:29.that Google will not be paying a penny under this legislation. We

:20:30. > :20:31.also supported the Chancellor in seeking international agreements on

:20:32. > :20:38.tax avoidance. But we discovered at the weekend that Conservative MEPs

:20:39. > :20:41.had been directed by the Chancellor on six occasions at least, to vote

:20:42. > :20:46.against the very tax avoidance measures being introduced by the EU,

:20:47. > :20:53.that the Chancellor told us he was supposedly promoting. I know the

:20:54. > :20:56.Shadow Chancellor likes to seek consensus where he can and I am

:20:57. > :21:00.listening to what he says. I have aimed doing some totting up and

:21:01. > :21:05.there are about 40 changes to tax laws since this government has been

:21:06. > :21:10.in office, which has raised 12 billion pounds since 2010. For the

:21:11. > :21:14.record, would he welcomed that? Of course, I have supported the

:21:15. > :21:19.Chancellor on each piece of legislation he has brought forward

:21:20. > :21:23.to tackle avoidance and tax evasion. This deal flies in the face the

:21:24. > :21:28.honourable gentleman and I have been supporting in this chamber, it flies

:21:29. > :21:37.in the face of it. I thank him for giving way. Last year, Google 408

:21:38. > :21:40.billion pounds of payments to Bermuda. Does he believe the British

:21:41. > :21:44.government should be doing more to crack down on tax havens,

:21:45. > :21:49.particularly those that are British Overseas Territories? If my

:21:50. > :21:52.honourable friend will wait a few minutes, I will address the Bermuda

:21:53. > :21:59.question and she will see how shocking it actually is. It now

:22:00. > :22:02.appears the Chancellor actually, I believe, is missing an opportunity

:22:03. > :22:05.in the recent EU negotiations to secure a robust international

:22:06. > :22:16.agreements to tackle tax avoidance and tax evasion... If I could just

:22:17. > :22:21.press on. That across the House, we have been calling for. Can I say

:22:22. > :22:24.also, I supported and we all supported the changes to public

:22:25. > :22:29.procurement rules that enabled the government to prevent public

:22:30. > :22:32.contracts being awarded to companies, found to be engaged in

:22:33. > :22:40.tax avoidance schemes. Let me finish this point...

:22:41. > :22:45.Staggeringly, it is understood that no company has been denied a

:22:46. > :22:50.contract on these grounds and even though the Google tax affairs were

:22:51. > :22:58.under lengthy investigation by MH RC, Dutch by HMRC, they were awarded

:22:59. > :23:04.a contract to supply services to HMRC! The UK has been at the

:23:05. > :23:12.forefront of the profit shifting initiative and Richard Murphy, who

:23:13. > :23:17.describes themselves as the author of Corbynomics, says that he was

:23:18. > :23:22.pleased and surprised by progress made by the government since 2010.

:23:23. > :23:25.As a porter the government in this action, this flies in the face of

:23:26. > :23:29.that action and undermines the agreements we are trying to make --

:23:30. > :23:39.I support the government in this action. We also heard from Mr Jones,

:23:40. > :23:47.the Google whistle-blower. In his opinion, HMRC had ignored Google's

:23:48. > :23:50.attempts to avoid paying tax. We all accept that the existence of tax

:23:51. > :23:54.savings present an ongoing challenge to national governments. So we have

:23:55. > :23:58.all supported international agreements on tax collection. The UK

:23:59. > :24:04.is a signatory to some of these. It has agreed in successive steps to

:24:05. > :24:08.abide by the erosion of the profit shifting programme under the

:24:09. > :24:15.auspices of HMRC. We'll support that. Let me press on, time is

:24:16. > :24:21.short. 30 OECD partnered countries, in signing up to the agreement, we

:24:22. > :24:25.support that. This is the kind of international co-operation, albeit

:24:26. > :24:27.limited that will help close loopholes and ultimately close tax

:24:28. > :24:34.havens. The kind of agreement we have back to yours, which was aboard

:24:35. > :24:37.the Chancellor in undertaking. However last week by allowing

:24:38. > :24:42.special treatment of one company, the government was driving a coach

:24:43. > :24:46.and horses through this entire international approach. As the EU's

:24:47. > :24:51.accommodation commissioner suggested, this could amount to an

:24:52. > :24:56.unlawful state aid. The UK is becoming debated across Europe as a

:24:57. > :25:00.tax haven. It risks establishing a race to the bottom in which every

:25:01. > :25:05.country out bids each other to offer the lowest possible taxation. We

:25:06. > :25:08.have written to the competition commissioner to request a formal

:25:09. > :25:19.investigation of the deal. Bonrepaux lady? Does the honourable gentleman

:25:20. > :25:21.accept that more has been done by this government than the previous

:25:22. > :25:25.one to close loopholes and if he says he did not agree with the last

:25:26. > :25:30.Labour government will he say what he did to oppose those measures and

:25:31. > :25:37.to raise these points when he was in Parliament? I know the honourable

:25:38. > :25:41.lady was not here, she should check my voting record through the 18

:25:42. > :25:45.years I've been in this House. I don't want to keep repeating this.

:25:46. > :25:52.Jon Hamm wanted both governments to go further. On an independent

:25:53. > :26:02.assessment -- but I wanted both governments to go further. Even then

:26:03. > :26:06.I wanted to go further but at least I accept the independent assessment

:26:07. > :26:11.made. Now can I buy Sun because time is getting on. I have written to the

:26:12. > :26:15.competition Commissioner because I want to request a formal

:26:16. > :26:18.investigation of this deal. There was a flicker of life in the

:26:19. > :26:22.Chancellor a few days ago and in the Financial Times on Monday he let it

:26:23. > :26:26.be known that he might favour country by country brought in for

:26:27. > :26:31.multinational corporations. Tax experts and I have long argued that

:26:32. > :26:34.this is a vital step towards transparency and therefore towards

:26:35. > :26:39.their collection. By revealing in its accounts in which tax

:26:40. > :26:43.jurisdiction revenues were being burned a proper rate of tax can be

:26:44. > :26:50.applied to multinationals. If the Chancellor now supports country by

:26:51. > :26:53.country reporting, I welcome it. The impression, though, was given that

:26:54. > :26:58.even with that international agreement, the government would act.

:26:59. > :27:04.Is this the case was this just a publicity stunt that has now been

:27:05. > :27:09.dropped? And the Andrew Marr show on Sunday my referred to Bermuda, and

:27:10. > :27:12.the Andrew Marr show on Sunday is senior Google representative

:27:13. > :27:17.revealed the company has ?30 billion worth of of profits resting in the

:27:18. > :27:22.mood, a British Overseas Territory. This is to avoid US tax rates. We

:27:23. > :27:28.now know that the Chancellor has been lobbying the EU and instructing

:27:29. > :27:34.his MPs to vote against anti-avoidance measures against

:27:35. > :27:38.Bermuda. A disgrace. It was also revealed last week the fact that

:27:39. > :27:44.government ministers met with Google 25 times over the last 18 months. I

:27:45. > :27:51.see that the Prime Minister himself has spoken not once but twice at the

:27:52. > :27:55.Google conference. If ministers are to meet anyone at my advice is that

:27:56. > :27:59.they should meet with the trade union representatives of HMRC staff.

:28:00. > :28:04.After almost half the workforce laid off and offices closed around the

:28:05. > :28:09.country it is known that morale is at rock bottom, especially with the

:28:10. > :28:13.loss of experienced expert staff. There has been a reference, Madam

:28:14. > :28:18.Deputy Speaker, to declaring an interest. I have no interest. I

:28:19. > :28:23.think it's a reference to a trade union group, they do not fund the

:28:24. > :28:26.Labour Party and they do not fund my constituency, there is no interest

:28:27. > :28:32.to be declared. We cannot allow the government to go on like this. Trust

:28:33. > :28:38.and confidence in our tax system is being undermined. Every pound in tax

:28:39. > :28:44.avoided by these large corporations is also a pound taken from the

:28:45. > :28:49.pockets of honest taxpayers. Also a pound not spent on our schools, our

:28:50. > :28:54.energise, and our police. We need a real tax reform agenda based upon

:28:55. > :29:01.the complete openness and transparency. First, that means, as

:29:02. > :29:07.a start, the publication of the details of this deal in full. So we

:29:08. > :29:11.can judge whether it is fair enough and our constituents can judge

:29:12. > :29:16.whether it is fair enough. Second we need real country by country

:29:17. > :29:21.reporting of a country's activities -- a company's activities. Not just

:29:22. > :29:29.as it would exchange of information between tax authorities but full

:29:30. > :29:33.information. I give way. I am grateful to the honourable gentleman

:29:34. > :29:37.forgiving way, I hope he might talk about a revolutionary change because

:29:38. > :29:41.the ranks of corporate lawyers put up against tax jurisdictions is an

:29:42. > :29:46.any from battle, perhaps we need radical thinking. The honourable

:29:47. > :29:50.gentleman has taken an interest in this for years and been in debates

:29:51. > :29:55.of me and I do agree that we need a more radical approach. I think this

:29:56. > :29:59.opens up a wider debate. We need real country by country reporting of

:30:00. > :30:03.a company's activities, not simply a secret exchange of information

:30:04. > :30:08.between tax authorities but full publications we can judge. Then an

:30:09. > :30:13.end to mates rates, sweetheart deals with major corporations. Tax rates

:30:14. > :30:18.should be applied fairly whatever the size of the company. We need

:30:19. > :30:23.full transparency in the relationship between ministers and

:30:24. > :30:26.companies. So I wanted the publication of oral ministerial

:30:27. > :30:31.company meetings. Fifth, we need more action to curb the tax

:30:32. > :30:35.avoidance industry. Action should be taken against advisers when the tax

:30:36. > :30:41.avoidance schemes that they designed are found unlawful by tax tribunal

:30:42. > :30:45.'s and courts. The same advisers advise Her Majesty's Treasury and

:30:46. > :30:51.helped write this country's tax laws. This is not healthy and it is

:30:52. > :30:55.not acceptable. We clearly need independent scrutiny of HMRC. And

:30:56. > :31:01.the implementation of taxation policy overall. Let us on a

:31:02. > :31:04.cross-party basis now explore the establishment of a cross-party

:31:05. > :31:08.committee on the lines of our security and intelligence committee

:31:09. > :31:11.to perform this role. Finally we need an end to the

:31:12. > :31:17.counter-productive stuffing cuts and office closures at HMRC. Madam

:31:18. > :31:23.Deputy Speaker, for most of my time in Parliament I've campaigned for a

:31:24. > :31:26.fair tax system. Of course companies like Google make a significant

:31:27. > :31:30.contribution to research and development in the employment they

:31:31. > :31:34.provide and I welcome that but we expect all companies to play fair

:31:35. > :31:37.when it comes to tax responsibilities. I cannot accept

:31:38. > :31:42.the government 's amendment because it fails to support key demands for

:31:43. > :31:46.openness. It removes Labour's central demand for publication of

:31:47. > :31:49.the Google deal and the adoption of full public country by country

:31:50. > :31:53.boarding. If anything is good to come out of this sordid deal that

:31:54. > :31:59.the government cut with Google I urge members of this house to use

:32:00. > :32:03.this opportunity to secure a fair and open system of taxation for this

:32:04. > :32:12.country and stop this process by backing our motion today. The

:32:13. > :32:16.question is as on the order paper. I have to inform the House that Mr

:32:17. > :32:22.Speaker has selected the amendment in the name of the Prime Minister.

:32:23. > :32:26.Just before I called the honourable gentleman to move the amendment, I

:32:27. > :32:30.should tell House that there are a great many people will have

:32:31. > :32:36.indicated that they wish to catch my eye this afternoon, more than 20

:32:37. > :32:41.honourable members wish to speak. This debate will last for

:32:42. > :32:44.considerably less than two hours. There will be a time limit of three

:32:45. > :32:50.minutes initially and backbench speeches. There is no point of

:32:51. > :32:55.people complaining, that is the amount of time there is. There will

:32:56. > :33:01.be three minutes and even then not everyone who wishes to be called to

:33:02. > :33:05.speak will be called to speak. And I say, very importantly to the House,

:33:06. > :33:09.that people who have intervened and taken part in the debate must remain

:33:10. > :33:15.in this chamber for the whole of the debate. The occasional five minutes

:33:16. > :33:18.is fine but they must effectively remain in the chamber for the whole

:33:19. > :33:22.of the debate as they are taking our time that other people will then not

:33:23. > :33:27.have or have sat through the whole debate. This has nothing to do with

:33:28. > :33:35.old-fashioned conventions, it is simple courtesy of one member of

:33:36. > :33:36.Parliament to another. I called to move the government amendment, Mr

:33:37. > :33:46.David Gauke. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, it

:33:47. > :33:49.is a great pleasure to move the government's amendment. There is

:33:50. > :33:54.much we have heard from the party opposite to date on this subject

:33:55. > :33:58.that is wrong, confused, and to put it kindly, oblivious to the record

:33:59. > :34:04.of the last Labour government. Jon Hamm before addressing those points

:34:05. > :34:07.I hope to strike a note of consensus -- but before addressing those

:34:08. > :34:12.points. Both sides of this House believe that all companies should

:34:13. > :34:19.pay the taxes due under the law. They all believe that companies

:34:20. > :34:23.should refrain from contrived behaviour to reduce tax liabilities

:34:24. > :34:28.and all taxpayers should be treated impartially. This is why our record

:34:29. > :34:33.is one of taking domestic and international action to tackle tax

:34:34. > :34:38.avoidance. I will set out details of that action, Madam Debord is bigger

:34:39. > :34:42.but first I want to address another issue. The approach from the Shadow

:34:43. > :34:47.Chancellor, the party opposite, has generated more heat than light and

:34:48. > :34:51.often reveals a complete misunderstanding of how the

:34:52. > :34:58.corporation tax system works. Let me take this opportunity to explain to

:34:59. > :35:01.the House how it does work. The Independent Institute for Fiscal

:35:02. > :35:06.Studies in a paper they published last week puts it very well. I

:35:07. > :35:12.quote. The current tax rules are not designed to tax the profits from UK

:35:13. > :35:17.sales. There are certainly not designed to tax either revenue or

:35:18. > :35:21.sales generated in the UK. They are instead designed to tax that part of

:35:22. > :35:27.a firm's profit that arises from valley created in the UK. That's the

:35:28. > :35:34.principle underlying all corporate tax regimes across the OECD. I make

:35:35. > :35:37.that point because it is fundamental to understanding the tax we are

:35:38. > :35:41.entitled to receive from multinational companies, and it is

:35:42. > :35:46.not a point that the Shadow Chancellor appears to have grasped.

:35:47. > :35:49.Let me give an example of why this matters. It is similar to the point

:35:50. > :35:55.made by my honourable friend the Member for Dudley South. I will make

:35:56. > :35:59.this point and then certainly give way to the Shadow Chancellor. The UK

:36:00. > :36:03.is to one of the most successful video games sectors in the world.

:36:04. > :36:07.Would it be fair for a firm to design a game here, develop it here,

:36:08. > :36:12.take the risks here and then go on to sell and overseas and then have

:36:13. > :36:16.to pay corporation tax on all of that activity in the country in

:36:17. > :36:22.which they make the final sale, not in the UK? The current international

:36:23. > :36:28.tax arrangements are clear that these profits are taxed in the UK,

:36:29. > :36:33.place of economic activity, rather than in the place with a sales are

:36:34. > :36:37.made. That is the internationally agreed and applied concept of

:36:38. > :36:44.corporation tax. That is the law that HMRC applies. And quoting

:36:45. > :36:49.numbers to do with revenues, or profits from sales as opposed to

:36:50. > :36:54.activities, demonstrates a lack of understanding of how the tax system

:36:55. > :36:58.works, well, and this is worse, and understanding of the way that the

:36:59. > :37:00.tax system works Jon Hamm hope that those following the debates do not.

:37:01. > :37:12.I will give Is the minister saying Google

:37:13. > :37:17.employs 3200 staff in this country on an average salary of ?160,000 and

:37:18. > :37:21.they cannot be defined as economic activity or add any value, what are

:37:22. > :37:27.they doing? Playing cards all the time? Are they not a sizeable

:37:28. > :37:32.proportion of the Google workforce? The point I am making is the Shadow

:37:33. > :37:36.Chancellor goes around quoting numbers based on profits for sales,

:37:37. > :37:41.to be fair he went through the methodology carefully in the House

:37:42. > :37:44.today. But it is a methodology that appears to be based on a

:37:45. > :37:55.misunderstanding of how the tax system works. I will give way. I

:37:56. > :37:59.don't have a misunderstanding of how corporation tax is applied, but

:38:00. > :38:03.without the information from HMRC and publication of the deal, it is

:38:04. > :38:08.difficult to know exactly much tax they should be paying, which is why

:38:09. > :38:13.we are seeking answers. Also, with eight billion dollars of royalty

:38:14. > :38:15.payments to Bermuda, does the honourable gentleman really think

:38:16. > :38:24.that is where the economic activity and value is being added? I will

:38:25. > :38:28.come to the issue of transparency in a moment. I will deal with that

:38:29. > :38:33.directly. In terms of the issue of how our international tax system

:38:34. > :38:37.works, having explained it is based on economic activity, I would say it

:38:38. > :38:42.is an international tax system that needs to be brought into the modern

:38:43. > :38:49.world. That is the reason why the UK has led the way on the profit

:38:50. > :38:54.shifting process. We should be aware also there are particular issues

:38:55. > :38:59.with the US tax system that is failing to tax international

:39:00. > :39:05.property developed in the US in the way that it should do. I have given

:39:06. > :39:09.the example of video games companies. I recognise there are

:39:10. > :39:15.cases that are more complex, where it is not so easy to identify where

:39:16. > :39:19.the economic activity takes place. There is an issue about how

:39:20. > :39:22.multinational companies allocate their profits and where they

:39:23. > :39:27.identify the economic activity taking place. There is a need to

:39:28. > :39:34.address that point. And that is why we need to have tax rules that

:39:35. > :39:38.genuinely reflect where economic activity is taking place and ensure

:39:39. > :39:46.profits are aligned with that. It is a different matter from making the

:39:47. > :39:49.claims about profits from sales and then saying, well, those sales

:39:50. > :39:53.profits have to be where the sales take place. That is the

:39:54. > :39:59.misunderstanding I wish to address. Good evening he is right, sometimes

:40:00. > :40:05.these issues are complicated but there are loopholes that are

:40:06. > :40:11.complicated. Can he explain some of the loopholes opened by the previous

:40:12. > :40:15.Labour government? There is a whole host I could draw attention to. In

:40:16. > :40:27.the interest of time, I will not run through the lengthy list, it is here

:40:28. > :40:33.actually. There is quite a number of cases where 40 cases I can identify

:40:34. > :40:38.straightaway, where there where loopholes available and that is why

:40:39. > :40:43.we have tried to address it. But I would particularly make a point, and

:40:44. > :40:47.I will come back to this in detail in a moment, the diverted profits

:40:48. > :40:53.tax was brought in. I will deal with the details on that. It is designed

:40:54. > :40:57.to ensure that where companies divert their profits away from the

:40:58. > :41:04.UK, where the economic activity is happening in the UK, we get some of

:41:05. > :41:08.the tax yield. The difficulty with the economic activity test he talks

:41:09. > :41:13.about, is it is intrinsically judgmental. But gives us many of the

:41:14. > :41:20.issues we tried to grapple with. It came in in the 1920s, before the

:41:21. > :41:25.Internet. Might it not be a way forward we move more to taxing sales

:41:26. > :41:30.and if necessary, dividends and less on corporation tax which takes these

:41:31. > :41:35.judgments away? The first point to make is we have got a debate today

:41:36. > :41:40.on the operation of the tax law as it currently stands, not as some

:41:41. > :41:45.people might think it should be. To be fair to HMRC they can only

:41:46. > :41:49.collect tax on the law as it stands and not how people want it to be. In

:41:50. > :41:53.terms of reform of this area, I think there is no reason why we

:41:54. > :42:00.should not be these matters. I would just make the point, if it is a move

:42:01. > :42:04.towards profits on the basis of sales, and there is a perfectly

:42:05. > :42:11.respectable case for reform in that direction, I would be worried about

:42:12. > :42:15.the impact on the UK's creative sector, the scientific centre. I

:42:16. > :42:18.have mentioned the video games sector, we could look at

:42:19. > :42:22.pharmaceuticals and there are a number of areas where the UK could

:42:23. > :42:25.be losing out and businesses in our constituencies would lose out in

:42:26. > :42:31.those circumstances. I would just be a bit wary about that. Can I bring

:42:32. > :42:33.the honourable gentleman back to the fundamental point about

:42:34. > :42:37.transparency? It would make this debate more useful and easy if he

:42:38. > :42:44.would publish the details of this deal in full, so we can be sure

:42:45. > :42:50.we're not talking about eightrates and talking about a special tax

:42:51. > :42:53.loophole for Google? I will come to the issue of transparency, but let's

:42:54. > :42:57.talk about the record of this government in terms of changing

:42:58. > :43:01.domestic law and leading the way in updating the international tax

:43:02. > :43:05.system. This is the government that has led internationally on the G20

:43:06. > :43:12.and the OECD profit shifting project, making the international

:43:13. > :43:14.tax rules fit the 21st-century. The Prime Minister and the Chancellor of

:43:15. > :43:18.the Exchequer, in particular, took on highly prominent roles in

:43:19. > :43:24.initiating discussions and taking it through the G20 and the OECD. It

:43:25. > :43:30.will level the playing field, give tax authorities more effective tools

:43:31. > :43:33.to tackle aggressive tax planning and better aligned taxable profits

:43:34. > :43:38.with the location of economic activities and value creation. Can I

:43:39. > :43:42.make more progress? This is a major step forward in addressing the

:43:43. > :43:45.underlying causes of aggressive tax avoidance. We have been at the

:43:46. > :43:50.forefront of implementing this agenda, acting swiftly to change the

:43:51. > :43:54.rules on hybrid mismatches and country by country reporting.

:43:55. > :43:58.Because we consider it important not to rely on international rules, we

:43:59. > :44:02.have legislated domestically to introduce a world leading measure to

:44:03. > :44:05.address the contrived a shifting of profit from this country, the

:44:06. > :44:15.diverted profits tax. Let me make this point... The diverted profits

:44:16. > :44:20.tax targets companies who divert profits from the UK, principally

:44:21. > :44:24.those with substantial activities in the UK who are trying to avoid

:44:25. > :44:28.creating a UK permanent establishment. Under these rules,

:44:29. > :44:31.the companies either declare the correct amount of profits in the UK

:44:32. > :44:36.and pay the full amount of corporation tax on them, or risk

:44:37. > :44:42.being charged a higher amount of diverted profits taxed at a rate of

:44:43. > :44:48.25%. By the end of this Parliament, diverted profits tax will raise 1.3

:44:49. > :44:55.billion pounds, both directly and as a result of associated behavioural

:44:56. > :44:58.changes. Already we are seeing the diverted profits tax having that

:44:59. > :45:00.effect and we will see multinationals paying more

:45:01. > :45:09.corporation tax as a result. I will give way.. The diverted traffic tax

:45:10. > :45:13.was related to as the Google tax. Under the related deal, Google will

:45:14. > :45:20.not pay a penny, is he right about that? The purpose of the diverted

:45:21. > :45:24.profits tax is to deter companies from divert in the profits. We don't

:45:25. > :45:31.want companies to divert their profits. The purpose of the diverted

:45:32. > :45:35.traffic tax which came into effect in April, is to ensure that

:45:36. > :45:40.companies stop divert in their profits and pay corporation tax like

:45:41. > :45:46.everybody else. I cannot talk about the Google case, other than

:45:47. > :45:54.information that is in the public domain. But, the point being, if it

:45:55. > :45:59.is effective in driving companies to stop divert in their profits, then

:46:00. > :46:07.it is a success. Good evening I thank the Minister. He refers to the

:46:08. > :46:11.government over the last government, but hasn't talked about the changes

:46:12. > :46:17.which favoured a number of companies at the expense of the exchequer here

:46:18. > :46:25.and in net terms of the much greater expense of the exchequer is in

:46:26. > :46:27.developing countries. We are now in a position where businesses are

:46:28. > :46:33.looking to locate their headquarters in the UK. It is something I am

:46:34. > :46:39.pleased about. The Minister is making an important point about the

:46:40. > :46:41.diverted profits tax. It is something we all recognise that this

:46:42. > :46:45.important development was brought in by this development. It is not

:46:46. > :46:52.correct to say the Labour Party supported the diverted traffic tax.

:46:53. > :46:59.A year ago, the Labour Party's position said it wasn't wise to

:47:00. > :47:03.bring in the diverted profits tax until something else was completed.

:47:04. > :47:07.How do we take the advice of the Shadow Chancellor, there would be no

:47:08. > :47:12.diverted profits tax. The point being made by the party opposite

:47:13. > :47:17.would be irrelevant. I am grateful to my honourable friend, he reminds

:47:18. > :47:22.the House of an important point. What I would say, when we brought in

:47:23. > :47:27.the diverted profits tax, it was clear the intention was to ensure we

:47:28. > :47:30.got more money being paid in corporation tax and we want to stop

:47:31. > :47:34.companies by averting the profits out of the UK and we are leading the

:47:35. > :47:38.way in bringing forward legislation on this. Let me address the point

:47:39. > :47:43.that was raised by the Shadow Chancellor about resources for her

:47:44. > :47:48.HMRC. We have invested heavily in HMRC's ability to strengthen the

:47:49. > :47:52.anti-evasion and compliance activity, including two extra

:47:53. > :47:56.funding and hiring professionals, whose area of expertise is

:47:57. > :48:00.multinational companies. For example, contrary to the impression

:48:01. > :48:05.the Shadow Chancellor gives, the number of people working in HMRC's

:48:06. > :48:11.large business directorate has gone up since it was formed in 2014 from

:48:12. > :48:17.2000 to 2600 people. We believe in competitive taxes, that is why we

:48:18. > :48:20.have got our rate of corporation tax so it is the lowest in the G-7, but

:48:21. > :48:25.we also believe in making sure those taxes are paid. Let me address the

:48:26. > :48:31.issue of transparency and number of have raised. Taxpayer

:48:32. > :48:36.confidentiality is a fundamentally important principle of our tax

:48:37. > :48:42.system, as it is in the tax systems of every other major economy. I hear

:48:43. > :48:48.complaints HMRC are not disclosing full details of the settlement. HMRC

:48:49. > :48:53.are prevented by law from disclosing taxpayer information. But the

:48:54. > :48:59.resolution of tax disputes is however, subject to full external

:49:00. > :49:02.scrutiny by the independent National Audit Office. The independent

:49:03. > :49:08.National Audit Office has reviewed how tax enquiries are concluded by

:49:09. > :49:14.HMRC. In 2012 it appointed a retired High Court judge to investigate

:49:15. > :49:18.HMRC's large as the settlement process. He concluded all

:49:19. > :49:23.settlements he scrutinised were reasonable and the overall outcome

:49:24. > :49:28.for the exchequer was good. I will give way, but I wish those who are

:49:29. > :49:34.keen to accuse HMRC and the staff of sweetheart deals, were also quite

:49:35. > :49:38.keen to look at what happens when independent scrutiny occurs to see

:49:39. > :49:50.that in fact, there are no sweetheart deals. HMRC... I will

:49:51. > :49:55.wake. I am grateful to the Minister, who is doing his best in a difficult

:49:56. > :49:59.situation. However, it is not the case ministers are barred by law

:50:00. > :50:06.from publishing the minutes of meetings which they have. Could he

:50:07. > :50:15.now publish the minutes of all the 25 meetings which ministers have had

:50:16. > :50:18.with Google? We have a very open and transparent arrangements in terms of

:50:19. > :50:25.disclosure of meetings. But I can be very, very clear on this, when it

:50:26. > :50:33.comes to determining the tax liability of a company like Google,

:50:34. > :50:37.or indeed any other taxpayer in this country, there is no ministerial

:50:38. > :50:42.involvement. HMRC are entirely operationally independent. There is

:50:43. > :50:47.no ministerial interference or any suggestion they would be in these

:50:48. > :50:54.areas. This is a matter, when it comes to determining the tax bill of

:50:55. > :51:02.any taxpayer, it is a matter of HMRC enforcing the law and not for

:51:03. > :51:05.ministerial involvement. HMRC introduced new governance

:51:06. > :51:09.arrangements for tax disputes in 2012 to provide even greater

:51:10. > :51:12.transparency, scrutiny and accountability, including the

:51:13. > :51:15.appointment of attacks assurance Commissioner, to ensure clear

:51:16. > :51:20.separation between those who negotiate and those who approves

:51:21. > :51:23.settlements. This tax assurance Commissioner oversees the process

:51:24. > :51:29.and publishes an annual report on his word. Let me be absolutely

:51:30. > :51:35.clear, there are no sweetheart deals, no special treatment for

:51:36. > :51:39.large businesses. HMRC only resolve disputes by agreements, if the

:51:40. > :51:43.business agrees to pay the full amount of tax, penalties and

:51:44. > :51:49.interest. Otherwise it is a matter for the courts, an arena HMRC has a

:51:50. > :51:58.strong track record of fighting and winning. I will give way. I thank

:51:59. > :52:01.him forgiving way. If it is so independent and ministers are so far

:52:02. > :52:07.removed from this process, how can he give us the assurance and how can

:52:08. > :52:14.the Chancellor hailed that the deal was such a major success? We have in

:52:15. > :52:20.place strong governance. We have in place a situation where the NGO has

:52:21. > :52:23.looked in the past at settlement went accusations have been made of

:52:24. > :52:29.sweetheart deals and they have been dismissed. It is very clear HMRC's

:52:30. > :52:36.remit is to get the tax due under the law. No one, at any point, has

:52:37. > :52:40.produced any shred of evidence to suggest otherwise, other than just

:52:41. > :52:47.prejudice they can insult HMRC staff, whatever.

:52:48. > :52:54.Madam Deputy Speaker, let me give way to my honourable friend. Would

:52:55. > :52:59.the Minister agree that this is welcome because we collected ?130

:53:00. > :53:05.million in tax from Google when the side opposite collected nothing. It

:53:06. > :53:08.does seem to be the case that nothing was collected in that case.

:53:09. > :53:16.I need to press an Madam Deputy Speaker. Tax avoidance is a global

:53:17. > :53:19.issue requiring global solutions. Food for partnerships with other

:53:20. > :53:23.countries on these matters are partly why this government has been

:53:24. > :53:30.at the forefront of efforts to increase tax Baron Seri C -- tracks

:53:31. > :53:33.transparency which we pledged in the manifesto to review the

:53:34. > :53:37.implementation of the new international country by country tax

:53:38. > :53:40.reporting rules and consider the case for making this information

:53:41. > :53:45.publicly available on a multilateral basis. This government is dedicated

:53:46. > :53:50.to increasing tax transparency and has already taken action. Last week

:53:51. > :53:53.the UK signed an agreement with 30 other tax administrations to share

:53:54. > :53:59.country by country reports from next year, we want agreements so that

:54:00. > :54:01.information can be made public as spelt out in our manifesto and we

:54:02. > :54:06.will continue to lead any multilateral debates on tax

:54:07. > :54:13.transparency as we have in so many areas of international tax

:54:14. > :54:17.avoidance. Madam Deputy Speaker, reforming international and domestic

:54:18. > :54:21.rules, investing in the capacity of HMRC, leading the way on global

:54:22. > :54:25.transparency, action taken by this government, action is sadly lacking

:54:26. > :54:30.from the 13 years of Labour. Madam Deputy Speaker, the result of this

:54:31. > :54:35.action is an extra hundred and ?30 million to the Treasury from Google,

:54:36. > :54:39.on top of the tax paid, an amount which under Labour was next to

:54:40. > :54:46.nothing. Testament to the importance given to tackling the tax risks from

:54:47. > :54:49.multinational enterprises. Last month's announcement represents an

:54:50. > :54:53.important result of these actions and I can assure honourable members

:54:54. > :54:57.that we will continue to work as a gender in the coming years, giving

:54:58. > :55:01.the Exchequer more money to fund public services that we rely on and

:55:02. > :55:14.I urge this House to support the government's amendment. Thank you Mr

:55:15. > :55:18.Deputy Speaker. This is a very important to debate for all of the

:55:19. > :55:22.people who have commented outside this House, weather is great

:55:23. > :55:26.concern. Yet it also has to be admitted that this is a complex

:55:27. > :55:31.matter, one that may require in the longer run fundamental reform and

:55:32. > :55:40.international corporation, there are no easy fixes. Of course Google,

:55:41. > :55:44.this deal needs to be scrutinised for the sake of all those who are

:55:45. > :55:50.concerned that this might be described as a sweetheart deal. This

:55:51. > :55:54.is why I fully is aborted my SNP colleague the honourable member for

:55:55. > :55:59.Dundee East in taking the initiative in this issue and being the first

:56:00. > :56:04.person to write to the independent commission and seek an independent

:56:05. > :56:07.examination. Of course there is a lack of transparency in the deal but

:56:08. > :56:11.of course these are difficult matters and we may have to look at

:56:12. > :56:19.changing some of the rules regarding fat in the longer run. -- regarding

:56:20. > :56:23.that. The recent agreement between Google and HMRC is too many people

:56:24. > :56:28.very obscure and opaque and gives the appearance of being very

:56:29. > :56:34.generous to a large multinational corporation. It contrasts sharply

:56:35. > :56:37.with the experience of many local small and medium-sized businesses

:56:38. > :56:41.and I will be astonished if I am the only member in this House that is

:56:42. > :56:46.not received comment from innumerable small businesses about

:56:47. > :56:54.the unfairness that they perceive that this deal has brought to bear.

:56:55. > :56:58.If I could be allowed to quote from two businesses in my own

:56:59. > :57:04.constituency, it is galling that my business pays its taxes on time and

:57:05. > :57:09.in full yet huge corporations like Google do not, and seem to be able

:57:10. > :57:16.to avoid doing so figures. Services Jim Cruickshank -- so says Jim

:57:17. > :57:20.Cruickshank of a glazing company. And secondly, it seems that there

:57:21. > :57:26.are stringent rules for small domestic businesses but much easier

:57:27. > :57:29.time for larger companies. This often gives unfair competitive

:57:30. > :57:36.advantages to the large companies, says Stuart Manley of Kirkaldy. And

:57:37. > :57:40.that too is a concern for many of our domestic businesses, many of

:57:41. > :57:45.these largest corporations, because of the tax affairs and the

:57:46. > :57:51.complexity and the way in which they are able to work in many cases,

:57:52. > :57:53.legitimately in the system, find themselves having a major

:57:54. > :57:59.competitive advantage against domestic businesses. I am grateful

:58:00. > :58:06.for the honourable gentleman forgiving way. It does not contrast

:58:07. > :58:09.with the way that S M Es in the UK feel they have been treated with the

:58:10. > :58:13.impression that there is one tax law for them and another for large

:58:14. > :58:18.multinational companies. It also contrasts the British approach with

:58:19. > :58:22.the way that some of our European colleagues are approaching the same

:58:23. > :58:29.issues and who are holding out for a much better deal for their tax

:58:30. > :58:32.payers. Many people throughout Britain will feel that the

:58:33. > :58:35.honourable member has made a very fair point. Which is why I have

:58:36. > :58:42.argued that we must do something to have a proper investigation and by

:58:43. > :58:49.perhaps in the longer run we need to do something about transparency,

:58:50. > :58:55.otherwise it is difficult for us to bring to bear a proper critique

:58:56. > :58:59.unless you get that clarity. This is not a new phenomenon. I first became

:59:00. > :59:12.aware of concerns about this issue regarding multinationals back in

:59:13. > :59:18.1970s I briefly worked for IBM. I am aware two of concerns that predate

:59:19. > :59:22.that, so this has not been going on for a couple of years, this has been

:59:23. > :59:27.an issue for decades that governments have not been able to

:59:28. > :59:35.satisfactorily resolve. Emphasising its complexity. It is an issue that

:59:36. > :59:38.has been around for a long time regardless of whether in this

:59:39. > :59:41.country that has been a Conservative or a Labour government and

:59:42. > :59:45.regardless of the government in many other countries. Back in the early

:59:46. > :59:51.1970s I remember that the concerns then were about what is called

:59:52. > :59:55.transfer pricing where in one company could buy a handle from the

:59:56. > :00:00.parent company in another country and charge an exorbitant fee for it

:00:01. > :00:05.and that allowed them to easily transfer profits from one area to

:00:06. > :00:10.another. Now I am the first to admit that since the 1970s there have been

:00:11. > :00:16.moves to tighten up on many of these matters but it remains a fundamental

:00:17. > :00:23.problem to this day. And corporation tax does seem to be a tax that is

:00:24. > :00:26.very susceptible to avoidance by multinational corporations because

:00:27. > :00:35.of the way that they are quite legally able to operate. Speaking of

:00:36. > :00:40.transfer pricing the Public Accounts Committee found, Mr Debord is

:00:41. > :00:43.bigger, that the HMRC as a whole had only 65 specialists in transfer

:00:44. > :00:49.pricing which was the same as each of the big four accounting firms.

:00:50. > :00:53.Does he welcomed this government's introduction of more transfer

:00:54. > :00:58.pricing specialists into HMRC? Punch Mike those people who wish to speak,

:00:59. > :01:02.without intervening, they if they go to the bottom of the list because

:01:03. > :01:06.they have almost used up their time. Roger Mullin. I think the honourable

:01:07. > :01:12.member for his intervention. I was not aware of only 65 involved in

:01:13. > :01:16.transfer pricing which does seem to me remarkably little given the

:01:17. > :01:23.challenge that it has faced. So I would welcome anything that is done

:01:24. > :01:28.to strengthen that. Times have been changing. Back in the 1970s it was

:01:29. > :01:31.never envisaged that huge multinational corporations could

:01:32. > :01:37.quickly rise and operate in the world of the Internet. The tax

:01:38. > :01:43.system built up over many years, one honourable member mentioned from the

:01:44. > :01:47.1920s, is singularly unable to deal with some of the types of

:01:48. > :01:52.corporations like Facebook and Google that we have today. And the

:01:53. > :01:58.world also has changed, in other regards. I am old enough to remember

:01:59. > :02:04.when I used to be able to go into a cafe and just ask for a copy! Surely

:02:05. > :02:10.not! LAUGHTER

:02:11. > :02:16.No air in delight it is that I know about cappuccinos and other things!

:02:17. > :02:21.-- now I'm delighted to disable and I know about them! Including in my

:02:22. > :02:27.constituency! Am delighted to say that I know about them. But I have

:02:28. > :02:33.to say, the days of Starbucks were not present many years ago. The days

:02:34. > :02:39.of internationalising what seemed simple products is something that is

:02:40. > :02:45.a comparatively new phenomenon. And we must not lose sight that that

:02:46. > :02:51.much more traditional companies who engage in practices which may be

:02:52. > :02:55.legal yet create major challenges for international corporations. For

:02:56. > :03:00.example if I were to ask a question in the local pub quiz which I rarely

:03:01. > :03:05.frequent, of course... Because and linking copy! What would you

:03:06. > :03:09.consider to be the biggest charity in the world -- because of course

:03:10. > :03:13.I'm drinking coffee. Many people would say it would be the Bill Gates

:03:14. > :03:19.foundation, the economist has estimated that is worth about ?37

:03:20. > :03:26.billion. Few would be able to say, as the Economist pointed out some

:03:27. > :03:35.years ago, it is a charitable body whose aims include the advancement

:03:36. > :03:46.of architecture and interior design. This charitable foundation owns Inge

:03:47. > :03:54.Holding and they owned the IKEA group. This setup, much more complex

:03:55. > :03:59.than I just described, moves money across territories such as the

:04:00. > :04:03.Netherlands, Luxembourg, into sets in and and so on, and the money is

:04:04. > :04:14.not even trapped within that foundation. The IKEA trademark is

:04:15. > :04:21.owned by another private company. Inter-IKEA Systems. So just to

:04:22. > :04:26.operate IKEA stores, the charity hast to meet substantial yearly

:04:27. > :04:35.payments and eventually this trail is thought to lead back to the

:04:36. > :04:39.owning family. When you have such complexity come even more complex

:04:40. > :04:44.than I have tried to summarise, we can see that type of international

:04:45. > :04:47.challenge and why the current tax regime is not well equipped to cope

:04:48. > :04:54.and why we need fundamental reform. And there are other examples. Let me

:04:55. > :05:04.give you another glimpse of a tactic used by offshore companies. There

:05:05. > :05:08.are approximately 19,000 registered businesses at one single address in

:05:09. > :05:15.the Cayman Islands. That must be a pretty big house!

:05:16. > :05:23.LAUGHTER Full of IKEA furniture! Indeed, it

:05:24. > :05:28.has been claimed by Oxfam, I haven't checked this, so I can only say it

:05:29. > :05:35.has been claimed by Oxfam, that 98 of the FTSE 100 companies have

:05:36. > :05:39.subsidiaries in tax havens. And there's a wider ethical question.

:05:40. > :05:44.This is not merely about how international corporations may pay

:05:45. > :05:49.tax. Some countries are much more vulnerable than the UK. And there

:05:50. > :05:56.are particular concerns which the honourable member is already raised

:05:57. > :06:05.in the developing world, some 30% of Africa's Wealth is held offshore.

:06:06. > :06:11.Research has found that developing countries lose ?200 billion a year

:06:12. > :06:17.from tax avoidance, more than they get in all forms of foreign aid. And

:06:18. > :06:24.the UK itself needs to take a lead and hopefully we will see that when

:06:25. > :06:28.the Prime Minister holds the anti-corruption Summit in May 2016

:06:29. > :06:33.because the UK remains at the centre of some global networks. I'm

:06:34. > :06:37.grateful to the honourable gentleman for giving way. Does he also think

:06:38. > :06:42.given it is three years since the Prime Minister promised to clamp

:06:43. > :06:47.down on tax evasions and publish the organisations people, UK-based

:06:48. > :06:51.companies in these overseas territories, that he should fulfil

:06:52. > :06:58.his obligations? A manifesto commitment he has failed to fulfil.

:06:59. > :07:03.I agree with the honourable member, but hopefully he will fulfil that at

:07:04. > :07:08.the conference he will chair shortly. We shall wait and see. I

:07:09. > :07:13.shall conclude with another example close to the heart of the Scottish

:07:14. > :07:21.people. And that is our historic links in them allow me. We launched

:07:22. > :07:27.a new campaign this week calling for the UK to offer to negotiate a

:07:28. > :07:34.fairer tax treaty with Malawi. We have got some strong and important

:07:35. > :07:42.links in every constituency, in Scotland we have links with Malawi.

:07:43. > :07:46.The tax treaty was signed in 1955 under British colonial rule and

:07:47. > :07:53.limits the ability of the government of Malawi to collect tax revenues

:07:54. > :07:59.from UK firms operating there. Preventing it from raising money

:08:00. > :08:05.that poor country desperately needs. It is right there should be a

:08:06. > :08:08.thorough investigation into the Google settlement. It is right we

:08:09. > :08:14.should press for greater transparency. But it is also right

:08:15. > :08:20.we should now press the UK to take an international lead in addressing

:08:21. > :08:25.the corrupt tax avoidance practices of the many and not just the few.

:08:26. > :08:35.Getting our own House in order would be a fine start. I shall do my best

:08:36. > :08:42.to make the most of the three minutes available to me. This is a

:08:43. > :08:45.complicated area. Whilst we seem to have two approaches on either side

:08:46. > :08:50.of the House, the Shadow Chancellor was very rational in his approach

:08:51. > :08:56.and I recognise how strongly there are feelings around this topic. When

:08:57. > :09:03.you look at the approach from the Minister, it was a very measured and

:09:04. > :09:07.detailed approach. Unfortunately, the tax system has to be approached

:09:08. > :09:14.from a methodical and detailed way and cannot be emotional. I can

:09:15. > :09:17.understand the strength of those motions and I understand how people

:09:18. > :09:19.feel some of these large international companies don't pay

:09:20. > :09:25.the fairway. But we are blessed with the global taxation system

:09:26. > :09:30.agreement, whereby you actually pay, not on the profit that you make in

:09:31. > :09:39.that country, but where you add the value, where you create the IP of

:09:40. > :09:46.those subjects, if you like. I turn to the SNP spokesman who talked

:09:47. > :09:50.about the kill caddy from shop, clearly excellent produce from his

:09:51. > :09:56.shop, but if he were to export his poor pies to parity would expect to

:09:57. > :09:59.pay the profit on that caught pike in Scotland and not in Paris. That

:10:00. > :10:07.is the way this country has benefited a great deal. If we look

:10:08. > :10:11.at my own constituency, it has Rolls-Royce, fantastic international

:10:12. > :10:16.company where they create a world leading jet engines. A use

:10:17. > :10:20.manufacturers and subsidiaries all over the world, but those dividends

:10:21. > :10:23.and the profit of that company should be paid to the UK taxpayer

:10:24. > :10:27.and not to other countries in the world. The Minister already made

:10:28. > :10:38.reference to the video games industry. In Nottinghamshire we were

:10:39. > :10:46.create the -- blessed with Boots who created new offence and the profits

:10:47. > :10:52.for those drugs should stay in this country. I was lucky enough to go

:10:53. > :10:57.and see the latest James Bond movie, created at Pinewood Studios in the

:10:58. > :11:03.UK. The profits from those movies, the tax should be paid in this

:11:04. > :11:07.country and not all over the world. I turn to the opposition and say

:11:08. > :11:13.what happened under the regime, frankly no tax was gained from

:11:14. > :11:17.Google. I am running out of time, but we need to recognise it is more

:11:18. > :11:20.important to get some of those profits, rather than all of nothing

:11:21. > :11:30.if they are exported to other countries. Thank you.

:11:31. > :11:38.I think the most bizarre feature of the row over the last ten days is

:11:39. > :11:43.both Google and the Chancellor but they had landed a PR coup. Frankly I

:11:44. > :11:47.think the arrogance of Google and the hopelessness of our government

:11:48. > :11:51.takes some beating. Look at Google's results announced this week, they

:11:52. > :11:57.claim to be the world's most valuable company. A claim with pride

:11:58. > :12:03.they have put the tax rate from 18% down to 5%. If you look at the man

:12:04. > :12:10.of the top, the man who is very proud of the tax structure, it is

:12:11. > :12:13.called capitalism, in 2014 alone he was paid ?76 million and that is the

:12:14. > :12:17.equivalent of well over half of what Google paid the British public for

:12:18. > :12:27.all of the money they made out of the British public over ten years.

:12:28. > :12:31.Would she agree with me, or is she concerned, the Google agreement

:12:32. > :12:36.could present a threat to future tax revenues by setting a very dangerous

:12:37. > :12:42.resident? I agree with that entirely and the Minister talked about work

:12:43. > :12:47.that was done by the Public Accounts Committee, the law is not a complete

:12:48. > :12:52.ass. I don't believe that. When they looked at ten cases, I will be

:12:53. > :12:56.corrected if I'm wrong, they found three where the HMRC had not abided

:12:57. > :13:05.by its own rules. Every time something like this happens, it

:13:06. > :13:09.damages British jobs and British business and we have the Goldman

:13:10. > :13:14.Sachs example where a sweetheart deal was definitely entered into,

:13:15. > :13:21.one we have proof of. It was five cases and in every single case, Sir

:13:22. > :13:24.Andrew Parker concluded it was reasonable and the overall result

:13:25. > :13:29.for the Exchequer was good. Those are the facts. With the greatest

:13:30. > :13:35.respect, they are not the facts, the judge looked at five cases, the NAO

:13:36. > :13:40.look at ten cases and found in three of those big HMRC had not abided by

:13:41. > :13:43.its own rules. I think the reason his Chancellor and the team don't

:13:44. > :13:49.get it, is because of the people they talk to about tax. There is a

:13:50. > :13:54.small army of tax professionals and multinational companies who are the

:13:55. > :13:59.only people with whom they conversed. I have to say to the

:14:00. > :14:03.Minister, there is a difference between good working relationships,

:14:04. > :14:05.which I applaud, and undue preference and preferential

:14:06. > :14:11.treatment, which I don't. There is the good thing about talking to

:14:12. > :14:15.stakeholders, there is the bad thing about being captured by

:14:16. > :14:19.stakeholders. We have to look at the evidence, not just the 25 meetings

:14:20. > :14:26.held with Google, but the professional tax Forum, the members

:14:27. > :14:30.are KPMG, Ernst and Young, nobody, nobody from any of the tax

:14:31. > :14:34.campaigning organisations, nobody from any of the charities and no

:14:35. > :14:39.academic with a different view. If we look at Ernst and Young, they

:14:40. > :14:45.made ?250 million over recent years in advising Google, apple, Facebook

:14:46. > :14:51.and others. We look at what the Minister has done. He appointed

:14:52. > :14:58.David Heaton from Baker Tilly which was supposed to look at closing the

:14:59. > :15:04.loopholes. That particular gentleman was captured on video describing,

:15:05. > :15:10.and I quote," ways to keep the money out of the Chancellor's grubby

:15:11. > :15:14.hands". If we look at what happened at Dave Hartnett within six months

:15:15. > :15:18.of going to work at HMRC and with any year of going to work at

:15:19. > :15:22.Deloitte. And also the Commissioner on taxation who wrote in the

:15:23. > :15:27.Financial Times, taxation is legalised extortion. This is a small

:15:28. > :15:33.bunch of people who all have the same interest and do not have the

:15:34. > :15:36.widest interests at heart. The government says it wants companies

:15:37. > :15:42.to paid drop attacks, but the government is obsessed with tax

:15:43. > :15:45.competition. That means that far from tackling tax havens, it is

:15:46. > :15:51.trying to make the UK and alternative best tax haven in the

:15:52. > :15:55.world. You only have to look at the changes this government brought

:15:56. > :16:01.through uncontrolled foreign company rules, Europa one or even the

:16:02. > :16:06.infamous tax relief, those three examples to see it is right. We

:16:07. > :16:09.don't know if the Google settlement was fair, because under the existing

:16:10. > :16:17.law, the Minister is right, we cannot see it. I do not accept HMRC

:16:18. > :16:21.properly challenged Google on the evidence of the Public Accounts

:16:22. > :16:26.Committee collected, which demonstrated there was economic

:16:27. > :16:28.activity here in the UK. I personally don't think the

:16:29. > :16:36.whistle-blowers were properly listen to. Google do sell here, they do

:16:37. > :16:42.complete sales here, they do to economic activity here. What is that

:16:43. > :16:47.massive complex in King's Cross for if it is not to undertake economic

:16:48. > :16:52.activity? The Minister has lost the argument on transparency and he

:16:53. > :16:57.should cave in gracefully and open the books month a national

:16:58. > :17:03.company... Order, order. Nigel Huddleston. May I first draw members

:17:04. > :17:12.attention to the register of interests by declaring drier to the

:17:13. > :17:17.2015 general election, I worked for Google. I must make it very clear I

:17:18. > :17:22.am not a spokesperson for Google, I did make, in my maiden speech, made

:17:23. > :17:29.it clear I do wish to be an advocate for the Internet and digital set is

:17:30. > :17:32.in the UK, which at 12.4% of GDP, is the largest of any Internet sector

:17:33. > :17:36.in the world, greater than Germany, France and double the size of the

:17:37. > :17:40.US. But the point of whether Google or any of these Internet companies

:17:41. > :17:45.pays its fair share of tax is a reasonable one? Google does many

:17:46. > :17:49.things, deciding on tax law is not one of them. That is very squarely

:17:50. > :17:54.the responsibility of this place. We make those decisions in here. If we

:17:55. > :18:00.want to change the laws, it is our responsibility. Corporation tax,

:18:01. > :18:07.like income tax, is not a voluntary tax. You pay what you owe, no more,

:18:08. > :18:11.no less, according to the law. HMRC do a very good job at implementing

:18:12. > :18:15.that law and the difficult circumstances. In particular the

:18:16. > :18:18.companies that are complex, that deal internationally where it is

:18:19. > :18:22.difficult to hold intangible products, where there is

:18:23. > :18:25.international poverty and transfer pricing involved and customers are

:18:26. > :18:33.served from multiple territories. What really really need to do, as

:18:34. > :18:35.Mike honourable friend made a valid point, is update the international

:18:36. > :18:39.trade laws because international trade is as likely to be conducted

:18:40. > :18:44.with the push of a button as being shipped in canisters and widgets

:18:45. > :18:47.from country to country. Our tax laws, some of them are as old as the

:18:48. > :18:53.1920s. While this government is trying to make progress and has

:18:54. > :18:58.closed many loopholes, we have a lot more to do. Nothing should be taken

:18:59. > :19:02.out of consideration. We should consider whether corporation tax in

:19:03. > :19:08.its current form is still fit for purpose and the valid comments about

:19:09. > :19:11.establishing international property in international tax havens, whether

:19:12. > :19:18.it is valid or not, is a fair one to investigate. I have one final thing

:19:19. > :19:26.to say. We must remember Google was only founded in 1998, it makes it a

:19:27. > :19:29.teenager. Like many of the other major Internet companies, they are

:19:30. > :19:35.teenagers. Teenagers make mistakes and they need guiding. It is up to

:19:36. > :19:38.us and the responsibility of a responsible parents, to make sure we

:19:39. > :19:51.reset the ground rules on behaviour. The Google tax to Barca will

:19:52. > :19:59.demonstrate attempts to patch up the current international tax system are

:20:00. > :20:04.clearly, woefully inadequate. Despite the overhaul, it appears

:20:05. > :20:06.unlikely corporate tax will be an optional extra for most

:20:07. > :20:14.multinational companies going forward. The UK's tax treaties, this

:20:15. > :20:19.is to do with Ireland as well in terms of Google, would allow UK

:20:20. > :20:23.firms to allow their tax payments often in countries it is most

:20:24. > :20:32.needed, to fund hard pressed the big services. According to the IMF,

:20:33. > :20:39.recent calculation show developing countries are taking 200 billion a

:20:40. > :20:45.year in tax avoidance by companies. The OECD has estimated tax havens

:20:46. > :20:50.could be costing these countries three times the global aid budget

:20:51. > :20:54.currently. The value flowing out of countries is huge from companies not

:20:55. > :21:00.paying the tax. An estimated one trillion dollars a year, in context

:21:01. > :21:04.Africa is a net creditor to the world in terms of the taxi loses

:21:05. > :21:09.from multinational companies operating in their jurisdictions.

:21:10. > :21:13.According to Oxfam, corporate tax avoidance in the form of trade

:21:14. > :21:20.mispricing by the G-7 -based companies and investor costs, Africa

:21:21. > :21:25.six billion in 2010. More than enough to improve the health care

:21:26. > :21:33.systems of the bowler affected countries of Sierra Leone and New

:21:34. > :21:35.Guinea. Then anonymous shell companies on the British version

:21:36. > :21:43.Isles using minor concessions in the Democratic Republic of Congo for 275

:21:44. > :21:52.million. They were sold for 1.6 three billion or twice the combined

:21:53. > :21:59.health or education budget. What is to be done? David Cameron is hosting

:22:00. > :22:03.an anti-corruption Summit in May and inviting heads of state from all

:22:04. > :22:05.over the world to London. How can the UK lecture other countries in

:22:06. > :22:09.what they should be doing in tax avoidance and corruption when the

:22:10. > :22:14.Crown dependencies in overseas Territories in our own

:22:15. > :22:18.constitutional backyards are such purveyors of secrecy. I argued with

:22:19. > :22:22.the minister about this on radio five just before the election, we

:22:23. > :22:25.need to insist multinationals public accounts in every country, insist

:22:26. > :22:31.they clean up the backyard by making British link tax havens that cannot

:22:32. > :22:38.continue to act as conduits for tax dodging. We need to stop applying

:22:39. > :22:43.sticking plasters to a broken OECD tax rules mandate and the UN to

:22:44. > :22:46.develop a set of rules that show big business pay their fair share of tax

:22:47. > :22:53.on every country in which they do business in.

:22:54. > :23:02.I think it would be unfair. Mr deputy speaker, I will be great. The

:23:03. > :23:06.member for Wythenshawe said that paying corporation tax is an

:23:07. > :23:09.optional extra. If he is right, and there are good arguments, it is

:23:10. > :23:18.because of the unbridled complexity of the system. The character... When

:23:19. > :23:22.I went to the Public Accounts Committee tax conference organised

:23:23. > :23:25.by the Right honourable member for Barking, the Dame Professor lady

:23:26. > :23:31.right honourable lady for barking, I discovered the tax code is 17,000

:23:32. > :23:37.pages long. That is the central problem. If you made the Bible ten

:23:38. > :23:41.times longer, you would not expect there to be less work for

:23:42. > :23:47.theologians. This is what we need to sort out fundamentally. The

:23:48. > :23:51.complexity is not always avoidable in a mature economy but there are

:23:52. > :23:57.things that one can do to make it simpler. The office of tax

:23:58. > :24:01.simplification actually examined 155 different tax reliefs for the

:24:02. > :24:06.possibility of abolishing them. It recommended 47 for abolition and 43

:24:07. > :24:09.actually were abolished but, over the same period, it introduced, or I

:24:10. > :24:16.should say the government of the day through this place introduced 134

:24:17. > :24:22.new tax reliefs. That gave a total, according to the office of text

:24:23. > :24:29.implication, 1140 tax reliefs. HMRC had thought there were only 398, so

:24:30. > :24:33.you can see how extraordinarily complex this is. That is the problem

:24:34. > :24:36.which needs tackling. If the system can only be dealt with with a high

:24:37. > :24:42.priestly caste and you combine that with a global economy you will get

:24:43. > :24:45.what we have got. It is this government which introduced the idea

:24:46. > :24:49.of the office of tax simplification and this government has started to

:24:50. > :24:54.do something about flattening and simplifying the system. There is

:24:55. > :24:58.also the question of the cost. Sometimes tax relief costs a lot

:24:59. > :25:03.more than HMRC expects. When the right honourable lady introduced a

:25:04. > :25:07.film tax credit, she was horrified to find that, using the law of the

:25:08. > :25:10.land, some clever entrepreneurs and accountants went round doing things

:25:11. > :25:16.which bore some relations but perhaps, for her taste, too

:25:17. > :25:22.tangential in relation to UK film activity but were which in the law.

:25:23. > :25:26.They ended up costing taxpayers hundreds of millions more than was

:25:27. > :25:31.expected. This government is actually starting to tackle the

:25:32. > :25:34.problem. It hasn't made all of the progress it needs to. It is a very

:25:35. > :25:38.big problem indeed but at least it is starting to tackle it. The

:25:39. > :25:45.previous government didn't collect this tax. This government is making

:25:46. > :25:50.a start and I commend its activity. I am highly enamoured of the record

:25:51. > :25:53.of the last Labour government, particularly its treasury policies,

:25:54. > :25:57.and I'm grateful to my right honourable friend for drawing

:25:58. > :26:00.attention to the Financial Times assessment of the comparative record

:26:01. > :26:06.of the Labour government and the governments since then, reported on

:26:07. > :26:14.in an article in the newspaper last February. That article makes three

:26:15. > :26:20.very important points to set the record straight. First, it says the

:26:21. > :26:23.current Chancellor, and I quote, has raised much less income than the

:26:24. > :26:31.last Labour government from reforms to tackle corporate tax avoidance,

:26:32. > :26:34.much less than was the record of the last Labour government. The second

:26:35. > :26:38.point has already been referred to by my honourable friend in his

:26:39. > :26:42.introduction, and I'm quoting directly, measures put in place by

:26:43. > :26:47.Labour during its 13 years in power to counter corporate tax avoidance

:26:48. > :26:51.are projected to raise ten times as much over the next four years as

:26:52. > :26:56.those introduced by the Coalition Government. The third point, the

:26:57. > :27:04.important point, the coalition, and I quote again, eased laws aimed at

:27:05. > :27:09.stopping corporates using tax havens which had been repeatedly tightened

:27:10. > :27:15.under Labour. That is the difference between the record of the government

:27:16. > :27:20.that I was a Treasury minister in and the current government. It was,

:27:21. > :27:26.in fact, Labour in government that did the heavy lifting on corporate

:27:27. > :27:29.tax avoidance. The new government was elected, with different

:27:30. > :27:33.priorities, and it is entitled to that, but it cannot claim that it

:27:34. > :27:36.has maintained the progress that was made by Labour in government,

:27:37. > :27:42.because it hasn't. I also want to make a comment about country by

:27:43. > :27:46.country reporting. I welcome that the government seems now to be

:27:47. > :27:50.supporting that. Those close to the process and find it difficult to

:27:51. > :27:53.recognise the claim that this government has let on that since

:27:54. > :27:59.2010. We certainly were leading on it prior to that. The original idea

:28:00. > :28:02.for country by country reporting was devised by Richard Murphy, about who

:28:03. > :28:09.we have heard a lot more in the last couple of years. It was first

:28:10. > :28:13.brought to me when I was occupying the Minister's office by Christian

:28:14. > :28:19.Aid, and I pay tribute to their work on this. They came to see me in

:28:20. > :28:24.early 2009 and there were a series of meetings in Berlin and Paris and

:28:25. > :28:29.others. I was able to put this on the agenda, culminating in a joint

:28:30. > :28:33.meeting, I think, the first joint meeting of the OECD tax and

:28:34. > :28:38.development amity in January 2010 in Paris, which kicked off the process

:28:39. > :28:42.I am delighted the government is now swinging behind. But it was Labour

:28:43. > :28:49.in government which started this off and it is entitled to credit for

:28:50. > :28:53.that. I start by saying that it is rich to attack this government for

:28:54. > :28:57.collecting tax. Big multinational corporations cannot carry on as they

:28:58. > :29:03.have in the past and they must expect to pay more tax. Google's

:29:04. > :29:06.payment is an important step forward to address the long-standing problem

:29:07. > :29:11.that larger corporations were not paying fair amount of tax in the

:29:12. > :29:15.past, under the last Labour government. Let's be clear today.

:29:16. > :29:18.Any debate about that last tax in particular and aggressive tax

:29:19. > :29:23.avoidance debate in general are of course about the gap is a -- as

:29:24. > :29:28.against what passed law asked to be collected. Today's debate should

:29:29. > :29:32.rightly look ahead to whether and how our laws should change to

:29:33. > :29:39.collect more. Let's start with an understanding of the present tax

:29:40. > :29:43.gap, reported to be ?24 billion, 6.4% of tax liabilities. Let's have

:29:44. > :29:46.another look at what else is ?34 billion might buy you. It is half

:29:47. > :29:53.the deficit that the side opposite also let us, whereas public sector

:29:54. > :29:59.net borrowing is around... ?34 billion is three times more the pay

:30:00. > :30:04.bill for nurses, Mr Deputy Speaker. Let's break it down further and give

:30:05. > :30:08.international examples. Just ?1 billion would buy what we have

:30:09. > :30:12.contributed to be Ross and in the global fight against malaria. Let's

:30:13. > :30:18.also look at what that is made up of. Only one third is committed by

:30:19. > :30:21.large businesses. One half is in fact committed by small and

:30:22. > :30:26.medium-sized businesses, with the rest made up by what I take to the

:30:27. > :30:32.individuals in error and criminals in malice. We need to take to looks

:30:33. > :30:36.at this. First, is the law applied fairly? We should expect HMRC to

:30:37. > :30:41.collect as much as physically possible from every source, large

:30:42. > :30:46.and small, mistaken or malicious, under a fair application of existing

:30:47. > :30:51.law. Second, is the law fair itself and let's address whether and how

:30:52. > :30:54.our law needs to change further to ask for more tax. This is an

:30:55. > :31:00.international question and I welcome the OECD work on base erosion and

:31:01. > :31:03.profit shifting. I look forward to scrutinising the results in the

:31:04. > :31:08.finance bill to come, perhaps, because it is ready to implement. I

:31:09. > :31:11.welcome the government's leadership on a diverted profits tax and I look

:31:12. > :31:17.forward to hearing a summary of what it has brought in in its first year.

:31:18. > :31:21.In summary, I want tough action to ensure law companies pay their fair

:31:22. > :31:26.share of tax. I want more tax to be collected. I want the laws we

:31:27. > :31:30.already have two be used. I want new laws to be reported upon carefully

:31:31. > :31:35.so my constituents can be assured we are collecting what we need and I

:31:36. > :31:38.want Britain to continue to lead the world in the OECD's implementation

:31:39. > :31:44.in a sensible set of international measures. Thank you for allowing me

:31:45. > :31:50.the opportunity to contribute to this very important debate. I was

:31:51. > :31:53.originally going to start this speech by going through the

:31:54. > :32:00.alphabet, naming different companies which didn't pay their fair share of

:32:01. > :32:09.tax. Amazon, BP, Citigroup, Dell, eBay, Facebook, Google. Google. I

:32:10. > :32:15.stopped at Google and went to the search engine of the same name and

:32:16. > :32:18.searched for the word alphabet. I would assume that most people would

:32:19. > :32:26.assume I would have found information on the alphabet. But,

:32:27. > :32:32.no. What came up was alphabet incorporated. It turns out that the

:32:33. > :32:37.Google we all know and use has created a parent company, and it is

:32:38. > :32:41.called Alphabet. Alphabet is a multinational conglomerate created

:32:42. > :32:46.last year, a parent company of Google and several other companies

:32:47. > :32:51.previously owned by or tied to Google. It is the world's most

:32:52. > :32:57.valuable company, even wealthier than Apple. However, it does have

:32:58. > :33:01.something in common with Apple, the desire not to pay tax. In a world

:33:02. > :33:08.which is increasingly becoming more and more connected, and as we seek

:33:09. > :33:13.to develop far reaching global trade deals, we find ourselves in a

:33:14. > :33:18.situation where multinational corporations are moving their money

:33:19. > :33:21.and profits around the world. And we should be under no illusions as to

:33:22. > :33:28.why they do this. It is to maximise their profits by reducing their tax

:33:29. > :33:34.liability. So how do we make multinational companies pay their

:33:35. > :33:41.tax, when they invest so much money and time in trying to dodge paying

:33:42. > :33:47.them? Indeed, they use any system, loophole, avenue open to them to get

:33:48. > :33:51.out of paying their tax obligation. With this Chancellor, they have even

:33:52. > :33:59.got someone on the inside helping them out. Quite frankly, it sends

:34:00. > :34:04.out the wrong message. Now, the Chancellor often referred to as the

:34:05. > :34:10.octopus. With his tentacles reaching every part of government. He has

:34:11. > :34:15.declared this tax deal with Google as a victory. He may be the octopus,

:34:16. > :34:23.but we are not his suckers. He should publish the details of the

:34:24. > :34:29.deal, show transparently what was agreed, deal with every loophole

:34:30. > :34:34.which comes in forward and make sure we deal with the deficit by ensuring

:34:35. > :34:36.that those who can pay do pay. I joined my colleagues today in

:34:37. > :34:40.demanding that the government publish full details of the deal and

:34:41. > :34:48.implement country by country reporting of company accounts. I

:34:49. > :34:53.think this is a very timely debate and I am very grateful that I have

:34:54. > :34:57.been given the opportunity to speak in it. I think it is important to

:34:58. > :35:00.remember what the previous government actually did, because we

:35:01. > :35:07.have got members of that government who are speaking eloquently, in many

:35:08. > :35:10.cases, in this particular debate. It is absolutely relevant. That

:35:11. > :35:19.actually gives us the context in which this debate has been called.

:35:20. > :35:23.For 13 years, Labour were in power and, for at least the last five of

:35:24. > :35:30.those years, these multinational companies, Amazon, Google, Apple,

:35:31. > :35:35.paid almost no corporation tax whatsoever. That was the immediate

:35:36. > :35:43.context. I know that the honourable member for East Ham is suggesting...

:35:44. > :35:48.You know, is suggesting that that was a great record at that

:35:49. > :35:52.government had. It wasn't great. These companies paid very little,

:35:53. > :35:56.they paid very little, and this is the general context. It is quite

:35:57. > :36:01.right for the Shadow Chancellor to bring up this debate. I think he

:36:02. > :36:05.makes a reasonable point, that ordinary people, our constituents

:36:06. > :36:08.expect companies to pay their fair share, but I would observe that the

:36:09. > :36:14.very fact he points out with respect to Google employing thousands of

:36:15. > :36:19.people at very high salaries, in a way, shows the success of Google. It

:36:20. > :36:23.shows the success of this government in creating a business friendly

:36:24. > :36:29.environment, in which these companies can operate. Every single

:36:30. > :36:33.one of those employees are paid an average -- who are paid an average

:36:34. > :36:37.of ?161,000 per year are contributing to the Treasury in the

:36:38. > :36:45.form of income tax and other taxes. That fact should be observed. If we

:36:46. > :36:50.are looking at actually being able to tax multinational companies, and

:36:51. > :36:54.we have to consider the fact that, as the member for Sherwood

:36:55. > :36:58.suggested, they are operating in lots of jurisdictions and, in many

:36:59. > :37:03.cases, if they are not Internet companies, they will probably only

:37:04. > :37:06.be paying tax in one country. There lots of variations we need to

:37:07. > :37:14.consider. I don't think is right for members on the party opposite simply

:37:15. > :37:19.to try and score political capital in a sensitive debate and in a

:37:20. > :37:25.highly complicated debate. Lastly, as my honourable friend, the member

:37:26. > :37:29.for South Norfolk, has said, the reason why do companies avoid tax is

:37:30. > :37:34.because of the complexity. There is a direct correlation between their

:37:35. > :37:39.propensity to avoid tax and the complexity of the system, and that

:37:40. > :37:43.is something which the last Labour government had a pretty poor record

:37:44. > :37:45.on. So this is a complete debate and I object to the fact that they are

:37:46. > :37:57.scoring political points. He may have got more respect if he

:37:58. > :38:03.listened with respect to the views of my right honourable friend, the

:38:04. > :38:10.member for Barking. What we know? Google is valued at $524 billion,

:38:11. > :38:15.the profits last year were ?11 billion, an increase of 1 billion in

:38:16. > :38:21.a year, based on revenues of over ?52 billion. The Daily Mail reports

:38:22. > :38:27.it has over 5000 UK-based employees, a 10th of their total workforce and

:38:28. > :38:33.that includes 279 of their European, Middle East and African directors,

:38:34. > :38:37.compared to Dublin, where they have 79 directors. They are constructing

:38:38. > :38:46.a new headquarters worth 1 billion near King's Cross, on top of the

:38:47. > :38:50.other five offices they have in the UK. I do not want to get into the

:38:51. > :38:52.blame game. I want is to get the way we recover tax right. I believe

:38:53. > :38:58.there are factors that did not help to focus on a growing problem.

:38:59. > :39:06.Public finances up to 2008 were healthy, before netting 30% of tax

:39:07. > :39:11.receipts from financial services which fell by 2009. The online

:39:12. > :39:15.giants of today were largely below the radar and many floated before

:39:16. > :39:21.making a penny profit. We look at the corporate giants, Twitter,

:39:22. > :39:25.valued at ?18 billion on the day of flirtation, but it never made a

:39:26. > :39:31.profit up to that point and would not do so for another year --

:39:32. > :39:34.flotation. When Google floated, its valuation was $23 billion, but it

:39:35. > :39:41.did not turn profits we talk about today. That is not the case today.

:39:42. > :39:46.The government after six years, with all the benefit of hindsight has

:39:47. > :39:53.only achieved ?130 million of that we do not know how much is interest

:39:54. > :39:57.or penalties they have had to pay. We have to do more on this. We can

:39:58. > :40:06.add other household names to the list that paid no corporation tax in

:40:07. > :40:09.2014. Shell, Lloyds Banking Group, AstraZeneca, SAB Miller, Vodafone,

:40:10. > :40:14.British American Tobacco, six companies with a combined profit of

:40:15. > :40:21.?30 billion in 2014 but notionally not making money in the UK. I will

:40:22. > :40:26.give way. Does she not agree that initiatives like the fair tax mark,

:40:27. > :40:29.like the fair trade stamp, should encourage companies to demonstrate

:40:30. > :40:35.publicly their tax liabilities and they should wear it as a badge of

:40:36. > :40:40.pride? I think there is cross-party support for more transparency. Given

:40:41. > :40:46.Google, H MRC and the Chancellor publicised the outcome, surely they

:40:47. > :40:50.should be open about how they arrived at 130 million. We need to

:40:51. > :40:58.know the benchmark it sets for other companies as well. Government makes

:40:59. > :41:02.the rules. H MRC enforces. If I worked for Google and advise them, I

:41:03. > :41:09.would say volunteer to give the information because it is not doing

:41:10. > :41:13.your company any goods will stop -- good. It is important to restore

:41:14. > :41:19.confidence of UK-based businesses that have lower revenues but pay

:41:20. > :41:25.more tax, including 20% corporation tax. We cannot content ourselves

:41:26. > :41:31.with companies appearing to decide whether or not to pay tax, as if it

:41:32. > :41:36.is discretionary. If the broader shoulders bare their share of the