14/11/2017

0:00:00 > 0:00:05abolition Bill. Second reading, what day? Friday the 16th of March, 2018.

0:00:05 > 0:00:10Friday the 16th of March, 2018. We now come to the emergency debate,

0:00:10 > 0:00:14which is colleagues were advised yesterday, can last for up to two

0:00:14 > 0:00:23hours. Dame Margaret Hodge.Thank you, Mr Speaker. The actions and the

0:00:23 > 0:00:27culture of powerful, large corporations and of the wealthiest

0:00:27 > 0:00:32in our society, as revealed in the Paradise Papers constitute a

0:00:32 > 0:00:39national and international disgrace. What we have learned is tax

0:00:39 > 0:00:42avoidance is not only a trivial irritant practice by a small number

0:00:42 > 0:00:48of greedy individuals and global corporations will stop it is the

0:00:48 > 0:00:51widely accepted behaviour of too many of those who are rich and

0:00:51 > 0:00:56influential. --. It is the widely access debate -- it is the widely

0:00:56 > 0:01:03accepted behaviour. It has become a scourge on our society. The Paradise

0:01:03 > 0:01:07Papers reveal the enormity and scale of the problem. That is what makes

0:01:07 > 0:01:11this emergency debate on the issue so important. Our debate is also

0:01:11 > 0:01:16urgent and timely because the Chancellor, who sadly is not in his

0:01:16 > 0:01:22place to hear the debate, is putting the finishing touches to his budget.

0:01:22 > 0:01:26I hope he will read very carefully the views expressed today by members

0:01:26 > 0:01:30of the House and reflect them in the proposal sees brings to house next

0:01:30 > 0:01:36week.I will give way to the honourable member? There is no such

0:01:36 > 0:01:40thing as a magic money tree, the prime minister told a nurse who had

0:01:40 > 0:01:45not got an increase in eight years. Does the honourable lady agree with

0:01:45 > 0:01:53me that there is? In the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and in Jersey and

0:01:53 > 0:01:59the worthy ill gotten gains salted away of tax dodging to be picked and

0:01:59 > 0:02:02put into our public services, we would not have police officers and

0:02:02 > 0:02:08teachers facing the sack and a crisis in the health service.I

0:02:08 > 0:02:11completely agree with my honourable friend's remarks, which are

0:02:11 > 0:02:16pertinent to what we are discussing in the debate. Paying tax is an

0:02:16 > 0:02:21essential part of the social contract... Let me just make this

0:02:21 > 0:02:25point and I will come back. Paying tax is an essential part of the

0:02:25 > 0:02:30social contract into which we all enter as members of the community.

0:02:30 > 0:02:35As members of society we agree to abide by a set of rules and

0:02:35 > 0:02:39regulations that make all our lives better. One of those rules is we

0:02:39 > 0:02:43agreed to contribute through taxation into the common part for

0:02:43 > 0:02:50the common good.Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to ask why a

0:02:50 > 0:02:59family firm has paid virtually no tax?I am pleased the honourable

0:02:59 > 0:03:05gentleman has given me the opportunity to explain to the House.

0:03:05 > 0:03:12My father and his cousins were refugees from Germany and my father

0:03:12 > 0:03:18was then a refugee from Egypt. He was a double refugee. I remember as

0:03:18 > 0:03:21a child he often said to me, you will never feel safe in this

0:03:21 > 0:03:26country. Always have your suitcase ready. He did keep money abroad.

0:03:26 > 0:03:30When we discovered that after he died we closed those funds and put

0:03:30 > 0:03:39them into a charity. The level of taxation and who pays is decided by

0:03:39 > 0:03:46house here in Parliament, through our democratic process. That is how

0:03:46 > 0:03:52we create a system that is democratic and trusted by all. When

0:03:52 > 0:03:54a menorah to you choose to ignore and deliberately bypass our laws and

0:03:54 > 0:04:00regulations and get away with it, they undermine confidence in the

0:04:00 > 0:04:06fairness of the system. -- when people choose to ignore. Some people

0:04:06 > 0:04:11claim tax avoidance is OK because it is lawful. Indeed one government

0:04:11 > 0:04:14minister from the other place, the noble Lord Bates, said on Monday

0:04:14 > 0:04:19that tax avoidance continues to be part of the international system and

0:04:19 > 0:04:26we recognise and value it. He and others are simply wrong and they

0:04:26 > 0:04:33misunderstand the issues. HMRC's definition of tax avoidance is

0:04:33 > 0:04:37clear, tax avoidance, and I quote, involves bending the rules of the

0:04:37 > 0:04:44tax system to gain a tax advantage that Parliament never intended. It

0:04:44 > 0:04:48often involves operating within the letter but not the spirit of the

0:04:48 > 0:04:54law. Those are the words of HMRC. Even they say tax avoidance is wrong

0:04:54 > 0:05:00for stop I will give way to the honourable member?I thank her for

0:05:00 > 0:05:06giving way. That she agree that any feature of a strong tax system is

0:05:06 > 0:05:09having a proper network of offices and the closure and centralisation

0:05:09 > 0:05:12like the one in my constituency in Livingston is a disgrace and will do

0:05:12 > 0:05:18nothing to help the situation.I agree with the honourable lady. The

0:05:18 > 0:05:21resources of HMRC is essential to the fight against tax avoidance and

0:05:21 > 0:05:34evasion. Sorry... These are the words of HMI C. -- HMRC. Tax

0:05:34 > 0:05:38avoidance is completely different from tax planning, Webber example

0:05:38 > 0:05:43Parliament intended to encourage people to save their pensions by

0:05:43 > 0:05:51introducing ISAs and tax breaks. Tax breaks on the other hand walk the

0:05:51 > 0:05:55intention. It means collective will is ignored. It should not be

0:05:55 > 0:06:01tolerated and we must act urgently to eradicate it.I will give way to

0:06:01 > 0:06:04the honourable member. I thank her for giving way on that point. Does

0:06:04 > 0:06:08she agree one of the best ways of trying to deal with this

0:06:08 > 0:06:13increasingly serious issue is to have openness and transparency in

0:06:13 > 0:06:17all the funds held offshore? So those who are doing it have to face

0:06:17 > 0:06:24the legitimate scrutiny of taxpayers in this country.My honourable

0:06:24 > 0:06:29friend makes a central point to what we will be asking for today. Not

0:06:29 > 0:06:35only does the behaviour of a feud damage trust in the system as a

0:06:35 > 0:06:39whole but it damages the public services taxes are used to support.

0:06:39 > 0:06:44Can I carry on a little bit and I will give way? At a time in the NHS

0:06:44 > 0:06:49is under such pressure, when public sector workers have had wages held

0:06:49 > 0:06:53down for years, when schools struggle to deliver the best start

0:06:53 > 0:06:57for all our children, for the super rich and powerful to think they can

0:06:57 > 0:07:04opt out of their responsibilities to contribute fairly through taxes, is

0:07:04 > 0:07:08utterly and totally immoral and wrong. It is our responsibility to

0:07:08 > 0:07:14put an end to it.I thank her for giving way. I have been helpfully

0:07:14 > 0:07:18provided with some facts which I think should be put to the House. I

0:07:18 > 0:07:22am told since 2010 big up and secured £160 billion from tackling

0:07:22 > 0:07:29elevation and noncompliance, 2.8 billion from offshore tax evaders,

0:07:29 > 0:07:33invested 1.8 billion in HMRC to tackle avoidance and evasion. I am

0:07:33 > 0:07:37very proud of this. Will the honourable lady agree with me that

0:07:37 > 0:07:43this is a Nixon record from a Conservative government? --

0:07:43 > 0:07:45excellent record. How does it compare to the Labour government she

0:07:45 > 0:07:52is always so keen to support?

0:07:52 > 0:07:54I had hoped the honourable lady would listen to the whole of my

0:07:54 > 0:08:02speech. A little progress has been made but not enough. The previous

0:08:02 > 0:08:07Labour government record on tackling tax avoidance was not as good as I

0:08:07 > 0:08:12would have wanted. But the record and actions of this government are

0:08:12 > 0:08:18inadequate. And somewhat hypocritical. Their rhetoric is

0:08:18 > 0:08:26mostly fine but the reality is badly wanting.

0:08:26 > 0:08:29I'm extremely grateful to my honourable friend. Isn't the

0:08:29 > 0:08:33difficulty here that when ordinary people hear the budget next week and

0:08:33 > 0:08:38they have to think about their taxes against a background of inflation

0:08:38 > 0:08:41and food prices, they will wonder why the people opposite are

0:08:41 > 0:08:50hell-bent on avoiding any enquiry into aggressive tax avoidance?I

0:08:50 > 0:08:53agree entirely with my honourable friend and I was just going to make

0:08:53 > 0:08:57the point that those who do pay their taxes are completely federal.

0:08:57 > 0:09:03By eight o'clock this morning nearly 156,000 people had signed a petition

0:09:03 > 0:09:09to go to the Prime Minister. This is an issue that angers people across

0:09:09 > 0:09:13the country, men and women, supporters of all political parties,

0:09:13 > 0:09:20people of all ages, and people in every income group.She makes a very

0:09:20 > 0:09:26good point. Everybody wants tax evasion clamped down on. And I also

0:09:26 > 0:09:31have some statistics. It is this government who has invested £1.8

0:09:31 > 0:09:37million in HMRC to tackle tax avoidance, and indeed we have

0:09:37 > 0:09:41lessened the gap by 2% more than Labour did. So we are on the right

0:09:41 > 0:09:49track.If the honourable lady looks at the HMRC figure on the tax gap,

0:09:49 > 0:09:55running about 34 to £36 billion, if she then looks at the figure that

0:09:55 > 0:10:01tax campaigners talk about, which is a gap of £120 billion, I think she

0:10:01 > 0:10:06will share with me a determination to see much more action to deal with

0:10:06 > 0:10:15something which is just an ill in our society.

0:10:15 > 0:10:21I congratulate my right honourable friend on this debate. Does she

0:10:21 > 0:10:27share my concern about the complacency being Sean -- shown?

0:10:27 > 0:10:31Cutting down on global tax abuse clearly requires international

0:10:31 > 0:10:36cooperation. As we exit the EU, does she share my concern that this is

0:10:36 > 0:10:43not damaged in any away by our exit, but strengthened by our actions

0:10:43 > 0:10:46domestically and internationally?I completely concur with those very

0:10:46 > 0:10:55important remarks made by my honourable friend. It is my -- our

0:10:55 > 0:10:58job as elected representatives to do what we can to put a stop to tax

0:10:58 > 0:11:03injustice. Tax avoidance should not be an issue that divides us. It

0:11:03 > 0:11:10should be an issue on which we work together. In the interests of all

0:11:10 > 0:11:15taxpayers, and to protect our public services. The Paradise Papers are

0:11:15 > 0:11:19the latest in a series of leaks that have been unmasked by the

0:11:19 > 0:11:25international press. I salute the journalists who have been involved

0:11:25 > 0:11:29in making sense of the millions of documents that have been passed to

0:11:29 > 0:11:33them. Especially those at the Guardian and Panorama, who have been

0:11:33 > 0:11:38working on the papers for a year. And I salute the public spirited

0:11:38 > 0:11:41courage of the whistle-blower who first past the paper to the German

0:11:41 > 0:11:48newspaper. Can I just make some progress? The Paradise Papers

0:11:48 > 0:11:57contain 13.4 million files from just two offshore providers of tax advice

0:11:57 > 0:12:00and the company registries of 19 tax havens. The scale of the data is

0:12:00 > 0:12:06what makes the leak so important. Let me say this. We have had the

0:12:06 > 0:12:13Panama papers, the so-called Russian and Azerbaijani laundromat

0:12:13 > 0:12:18revelations on money-laundering. Now we have the Paradise Papers. And we

0:12:18 > 0:12:25will continue to have new leaks splashed over our papers, filling

0:12:25 > 0:12:29our television screen, until such time as the government acts firmly

0:12:29 > 0:12:33to clamp down on the avoidance that is so blatant and yet so wrong. I

0:12:33 > 0:12:41will give way.She said several things that I agree with. For

0:12:41 > 0:12:45instance, everybody should pay their fair share of tax to help fund

0:12:45 > 0:12:49public services, which is vital, and also tax avoidance is something we

0:12:49 > 0:12:52should work together on. Yet considering that point, doesn't she

0:12:52 > 0:12:59feel a little bit ashamed about her party's efforts to block steps

0:12:59 > 0:13:01before the most recent election, that would have actually reduced tax

0:13:01 > 0:13:09avoidance?On trying to not make this overly partisan but I feel more

0:13:09 > 0:13:14ashamed as a member of Parliament at her party's reluctance to adopt the

0:13:14 > 0:13:18very clear and simple methods that could actually really tackle tax

0:13:18 > 0:13:24avoidance. I'm going to make progress. There are a lot of people

0:13:24 > 0:13:28who do want to speak in what is a two-hour debate. Last week our

0:13:28 > 0:13:34papers were filled with scams and scandals concerning celebrities from

0:13:34 > 0:13:38the self appointed philanthropist Bonneau, to the actors in Mrs

0:13:38 > 0:13:42Brown's Boys, stories that tainted the reputation of our much loved

0:13:42 > 0:13:48royal family, regulations about establishment figures and further

0:13:48 > 0:13:52evidence that corporations like Apple deliberately established

0:13:52 > 0:13:57artificial financial structures that have no other purpose than to avoid

0:13:57 > 0:14:05tax. But I want to focus on the systemic history. It is the systemic

0:14:05 > 0:14:10issues we need to consider if we are going to make progress. Let me start

0:14:10 > 0:14:14with two comments arising from what we have learned from the Paradise

0:14:14 > 0:14:17Papers. Observations that help us to understand what is wrong with our

0:14:17 > 0:14:22system. The lawyers at the heart of the Paradise Papers are one of the

0:14:22 > 0:14:29few offshore law practices that belong to the offshore magic circle

0:14:29 > 0:14:32of service providers. Indeed, Appleby was named offshore firm of

0:14:32 > 0:14:40the year by legal 520 15. Yet the Paradise Papers reveal that the firm

0:14:40 > 0:14:47was criticised 12 times over a 10-year period in reports issued by

0:14:47 > 0:14:54regulators in our UK tax havens, the British Virgin Islands, the Isle of

0:14:54 > 0:14:58Man, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda. Appleby was criticised for its

0:14:58 > 0:15:01failure to comply with regulations designed to stop the funding of

0:15:01 > 0:15:06terrorism and to prevent money-laundering. The reports talk

0:15:06 > 0:15:11about persistent failures and deficiencies. Severe shortcomings.

0:15:11 > 0:15:18And a highly significant weakness in the adequacy of organise nation

0:15:18 > 0:15:25systems and controls. -- organisation. Appleby simply ignored

0:15:25 > 0:15:30these critical reports and failed to change their procedures, despite the

0:15:30 > 0:15:36strong words. Even the authorities of the British Virgin Islands found

0:15:36 > 0:15:41after an inspection of Appleby that the confirm has contravened

0:15:41 > 0:15:43financial services legislation, the anti-money-laundering regulations

0:15:43 > 0:15:51and code practice of prep -- 2008, and has severe shortcomings, with

0:15:51 > 0:15:55the majority of the legislation with prudential standards and good

0:15:55 > 0:16:00standards of practice not been met. Our regulatory frameworks are so

0:16:00 > 0:16:04weak that law firms can break the law with complete impunity. It is

0:16:04 > 0:16:11hopeless having self-regulation, national and international codes of

0:16:11 > 0:16:18practice, and regulatory bodies with legal powers that can practice...

0:16:18 > 0:16:27The lawyers just don't give a dam and nobody held them to account.I

0:16:27 > 0:16:34thought I understood prior to this the distinction between tax

0:16:34 > 0:16:38avoidance and evasion. I feel the line is blurred. What is the

0:16:38 > 0:16:41honourable lady's understanding of the disc -- the distinction between

0:16:41 > 0:16:47avoidance and evasion?I have to say I agree with the honourable member

0:16:47 > 0:16:54that the line is extremely blurred and that some schemes put forward as

0:16:54 > 0:16:59legitimate are very frequently then found to be unlawful when HMRC

0:16:59 > 0:17:04finally catches up with them. It is a very blurred area where it is

0:17:04 > 0:17:07difficult to make distinctions. Worse than that, Appleby helped to

0:17:07 > 0:17:12coordinate a well funded and comprehensive lobby by the

0:17:12 > 0:17:18international finance centres for that took place before it G8 summit

0:17:18 > 0:17:24that David Cameron were sharing in 2013. The then Prime Minister had

0:17:24 > 0:17:28intended to insist that UK tax havens should publish public

0:17:28 > 0:17:33registers of beneficial ownership in their jurisdiction. Had David

0:17:33 > 0:17:38Cameron had his way, we might not have been here today. But the group

0:17:38 > 0:17:43lobbied fiercely to maintain secrecy. They lobbied the Right

0:17:43 > 0:17:46Honourable member for South West Hertfordshire, the then Exchequer

0:17:46 > 0:17:49Secretary, they lobbied the permanently -- the permanent

0:17:49 > 0:17:54Secretary, they lobbied the senior official who was director of the

0:17:54 > 0:17:57UK's G8 presidency unit, and they succeeded in weakening David

0:17:57 > 0:18:03Cameron's commitment to transparency.I am very grateful to

0:18:03 > 0:18:05my right honourable friend and neighbour. Isn't the fact that the

0:18:05 > 0:18:15vast majority of these tax havens are British overseas territories?

0:18:15 > 0:18:21And isn't it time that this government or any government of this

0:18:21 > 0:18:25country took seriously the fact that those places are not doing what is

0:18:25 > 0:18:32in the interests of British people all over the world?And I would add

0:18:32 > 0:18:35to that, particularly not in the interests of many of the developing

0:18:35 > 0:18:39countries who lose more tax through tax avoidance than we do

0:18:39 > 0:18:48proportionate to their budgets.Her central contention is that these

0:18:48 > 0:18:57territories should have a register of beneficial ownership. Which he

0:18:57 > 0:19:00acknowledged that the UK is now one of the only countries in the world

0:19:00 > 0:19:04to do that under this government? That was a huge achievement by the

0:19:04 > 0:19:10United Kingdom. And secondly, to put it into international context,

0:19:10 > 0:19:13virtually no other major developed country in the world has done that.

0:19:13 > 0:19:18The state of Delaware, in which 90% of US corporations are registered,

0:19:18 > 0:19:23hasn't done...Order! When I say order, the honourable gentleman

0:19:23 > 0:19:29resumes his seed. That was far too long.

0:19:29 > 0:19:34I would simply observe that the UK also has responsibility for the

0:19:34 > 0:19:38overseas territories and Crown Dependencies, and I wish the UK

0:19:38 > 0:19:43didn't in its own tax court have so many harmful elements in the cold

0:19:43 > 0:19:52that encourage tax avoidance. -- code. Treasury ministers and

0:19:52 > 0:19:58government departments only listen to a very small and exclusive group

0:19:58 > 0:20:03of tax professionals when they take decisions on tax policy. It is one

0:20:03 > 0:20:07thing for the government to consult stakeholders on the issues, but it

0:20:07 > 0:20:12is quite another for the government to be captured by the tax industry

0:20:12 > 0:20:16at the expense of the wider public interest. Tough and active

0:20:16 > 0:20:21regulation of the tax industry to ensure compliance in existing rules

0:20:21 > 0:20:29is vital. And making the advisers accountable for the schemes they

0:20:29 > 0:20:34invent and market is central to the campaign to destroy tax avoidance.

0:20:34 > 0:20:41The government's measures represent one small step in the right

0:20:41 > 0:20:47direction. But the small print suggests that very few, if any, will

0:20:47 > 0:20:52get caught by the legislation. The definitions are too narrow and the

0:20:52 > 0:20:55penalties too weak. They have been brought in so the government can

0:20:55 > 0:20:59claim it is acting. But until advisers are really brought to

0:20:59 > 0:21:04account and properly punished for inventing schemes that are surely

0:21:04 > 0:21:07aimed at avoiding tax, the army of lawyers, accountants and bankers

0:21:07 > 0:21:12will continue to prosper. If the government is serious about packing

0:21:12 > 0:21:15avoidance, it must act strongly on the illegitimate practices of those

0:21:15 > 0:21:24who make a huge living out of peddling tax avoidance advice.It is

0:21:24 > 0:21:28a very powerful case. Does she agree that another area that has to be

0:21:28 > 0:21:33improved is the approach of prosecuting authorities? When we put

0:21:33 > 0:21:39legislation on the statute book, what is striking is how seldom that

0:21:39 > 0:21:41legislation is Excilly proceeded with by the prosecuting authorities

0:21:41 > 0:21:48in this country.I agree with that entirely. I'm now going to make

0:21:48 > 0:21:51progress, otherwise I'll take up too much time. Over half of the Appleby

0:21:51 > 0:21:57offices are located in British tax havens. Over half of the entity is

0:21:57 > 0:22:02exposed in the Panama papers were incorporated in just one UK tax

0:22:02 > 0:22:06haven, the British Virgin Islands. Estimates of the wealth held in this

0:22:06 > 0:22:14tax haven by their nature difficult to verify, but they vary from

0:22:14 > 0:22:21trillion to a figure of 32 trillion. -- trillion to a figure of 32

0:22:21 > 0:22:26trillion.Does she agree that Britain has a unique leadership role

0:22:26 > 0:22:29in the light of what he said and the developing countries lose around 100

0:22:29 > 0:22:35billion, between 100 billion to 160 billion, of lost income a year?

0:22:35 > 0:22:39Imagine what we could do to tackle poverty.I agree with that very

0:22:39 > 0:22:45powerful point that she has made.

0:22:45 > 0:22:48Unbelievable sums of money I hidden in these jurisdictions. It is

0:22:48 > 0:22:54impossible to measure how much tax is lost by the presence of tax

0:22:54 > 0:22:59havens but it does run into hundreds of millions of pounds per year. We

0:22:59 > 0:23:03know developing countries lose three times as much in tax avoidance as

0:23:03 > 0:23:12they gain from global investment in international aid. Our tax havens

0:23:12 > 0:23:16acting as a jurisdiction is central to much of the tax avoidance. We

0:23:16 > 0:23:19cannot continue to pretend we are leading the international fight

0:23:19 > 0:23:27against tax avoidance and evasion when what we do and what we failed

0:23:27 > 0:23:35to do is allowing tax avoidance to prosper. It is also money

0:23:35 > 0:23:37laundering, bribery, corruption and other financial crime prospering

0:23:37 > 0:23:42through the secrecy we allow to prevail. Our failure to tackle our

0:23:42 > 0:23:48tax havens, weak regulatory regimes and some tax rules means we are now

0:23:48 > 0:23:54seen as the country of choice for criminals as well as tax avoidance

0:23:54 > 0:23:59and evaders, as they look to hide their money and minimise their tax

0:23:59 > 0:24:05bills. We need our government to hold to the commitment made by the

0:24:05 > 0:24:09Prime Minister and Chancellor in 2013-14. They understood

0:24:09 > 0:24:15transparency was the key. We need public registers of beneficial

0:24:15 > 0:24:20ownership showing who owns what and where. That would undermine at a

0:24:20 > 0:24:25stroke so much. Would Bono have invested in tax havens if he thought

0:24:25 > 0:24:29we would all know? Would Lewis Hamilton have created a complex

0:24:29 > 0:24:36structure of companies to avoid VAT? Would the actors in Mrs Brown 's

0:24:36 > 0:24:39boys hide their earnings in artificial financial structures if

0:24:39 > 0:24:43they thought we would find out? The answer is no. David Cameron

0:24:43 > 0:24:49understood that when he told the UK tax savings to Riverside, I quote,

0:24:49 > 0:24:56the cloak of secrecy, in 2013. -- rip aside. He urged consultation on

0:24:56 > 0:25:01a public registry vital to meeting the urgent challenge of finance and

0:25:01 > 0:25:09tax evasion. When in 2015 he proclaimed "If we want to break the

0:25:09 > 0:25:12best is a model of stealing money and hiding it in places where it

0:25:12 > 0:25:20cannot be seen, transparency is the answer". In the last two years the

0:25:20 > 0:25:22Government has watered down that commitment to public registers in

0:25:22 > 0:25:28British tax savings. Now we hear ministers say we had to wait for

0:25:28 > 0:25:32other countries to go first. Their proper call for international action

0:25:32 > 0:25:37on transparency has become the lame excuse for inaction in our own

0:25:37 > 0:25:44territory. Mr Speaker, we should lead by example. We should

0:25:44 > 0:25:49demonstrate how transparency can and does change behaviour. We should

0:25:49 > 0:25:54compel overseas territories and Crown dependencies to publish public

0:25:54 > 0:25:59registers in all their territory. In the past, a Conservative government

0:25:59 > 0:26:03has used powers to outlaw capital punishment in our Crown dependencies

0:26:03 > 0:26:08and overseas territory. A Labour government used the same power to

0:26:08 > 0:26:13outlaw discrimination against gay people. Today we should work

0:26:13 > 0:26:17together to outlaw the secrecy of these jurisdictions which leads to

0:26:17 > 0:26:23massive tax injustice. Nothing-macro shows the problems created by

0:26:23 > 0:26:29secrecy are much larger and more complex than we thought possible. --

0:26:29 > 0:26:40the Paradise Papers. We should support behaviours in transforming

0:26:40 > 0:26:43economies so hidden wealth, unsavoury people and questionable

0:26:43 > 0:26:48financial practices are stopped. I cannot think of one good reason not

0:26:48 > 0:26:54to do this and to do it now. There is more that we can do right now. It

0:26:54 > 0:27:00simply requires the Government to have the political will. They will

0:27:00 > 0:27:04certainly have the support of the whole house and the whole country if

0:27:04 > 0:27:10they demonstrate by their action, not words, that they will work to

0:27:10 > 0:27:15stamp out tax avoidance. We can and should implement the legislation

0:27:15 > 0:27:19requiring multinational companies to report their activity and profits on

0:27:19 > 0:27:24a country by country basis. The legislation would be successfully

0:27:24 > 0:27:27steered through Parliament by my honourable friend. We can and should

0:27:27 > 0:27:32introduce right now the public register of property ownership,

0:27:32 > 0:27:39enacted before the general election, promoted by transparency and

0:27:39 > 0:27:42supported by members of the all-party Parliamentary on

0:27:42 > 0:27:47anti-corruption. Nobody knows why this legislation has not been

0:27:47 > 0:27:51implemented. It is a key element in the fight against corruption,

0:27:51 > 0:27:58avoidance and evasion. We should properly resource HMRC right now so

0:27:58 > 0:28:02they are capable of pursuing all those who look to avoid tax, not

0:28:02 > 0:28:08just small businesses, who are an easy target and can be stopped with

0:28:08 > 0:28:14little effort. Every pound invested in HMRC enforcement yields £97 in

0:28:14 > 0:28:21additional tax revenue. It is a no-brainer that we should strengthen

0:28:21 > 0:28:27the HMRC and reverse some of the cuts. The Paradise Papers have

0:28:27 > 0:28:30played tax avoidance back at the heart of the political agenda and

0:28:30 > 0:28:35back at the top of the list of public concerns. The government

0:28:35 > 0:28:39needs to grasp the moment to act. They have an opportunity to do so in

0:28:39 > 0:28:45the budget next week. Britain will never get rich on dirty money.

0:28:45 > 0:28:49Public services cannot function if the most wealthy individuals and the

0:28:49 > 0:28:53most powerful companies deliberately avoid paying their fair share

0:28:53 > 0:28:58towards the cost of those services. This government will not be forgiven

0:28:58 > 0:29:02if it fails to heed the lessons we can all learn from the Paradise

0:29:02 > 0:29:08Papers. Proper transparency will come. The government can choose

0:29:08 > 0:29:12whether it leads the changes needed, or if you would like to be dragged

0:29:12 > 0:29:18kicking and screaming it in fermenting essential reform. I hope

0:29:18 > 0:29:23they will listen, learn and act.-- in in fermenting. The question is

0:29:23 > 0:29:30has on the order paper. I call Mel stride. Financial Secretary to the

0:29:30 > 0:29:36Treasury.Can I begin, Mr Speaker, by congratulating the right

0:29:36 > 0:29:41honourable lady on securing this important debate? She has campaigned

0:29:41 > 0:29:45vigorously on these issues over many years and has certainly been active

0:29:45 > 0:29:51in the past week. I responded to an urgent question also in terms of the

0:29:51 > 0:29:55isle of man and an adjournment debate last week and now of course

0:29:55 > 0:30:01in this debate, as well. She said tax and tax avoidance was one of

0:30:01 > 0:30:06those matters which should not be dividing us and I believe she is

0:30:06 > 0:30:10right. It seems to me in the various iterations of this debate she and I

0:30:10 > 0:30:14have had across the dispatch box there is a great deal in which we

0:30:14 > 0:30:19can be united rather than divided. Not least on the shared view across

0:30:19 > 0:30:23this House and certainly on my side, Mr Speaker, that aggressive tax

0:30:23 > 0:30:29avoidance and evasion are utterly wrong. They are wrong for the

0:30:29 > 0:30:32reasons she has given. Because those who pay tax fairly should not be

0:30:32 > 0:30:40penalised by virtue of the fact some do not paid fairly. We also know, as

0:30:40 > 0:30:45she has pointed out, tax is necessary to fund vital public

0:30:45 > 0:30:51services. It is entirely wrong that those aggressively evading or

0:30:51 > 0:30:54avoiding tax put pressure on public services, the NHS, doctors and

0:30:54 > 0:31:02nurses. I will give way to the honourable member.Under the last

0:31:02 > 0:31:06government there was an appointment made as an anti-corruption czar by

0:31:06 > 0:31:12the former Prime Minister. I'm wondering who the anti-corruption

0:31:12 > 0:31:17czar is under the current government.That is a matter I will

0:31:17 > 0:31:24get back to. If I can make a little progress... We know tax is

0:31:24 > 0:31:31important. Clearly for public services. And we know, has the lady

0:31:31 > 0:31:37has quite rightly stressed, it is important the Government acts and is

0:31:37 > 0:31:40seen to act when we come across aggressive tax avoidance and

0:31:40 > 0:31:48evasion. As my friends on this side of the House have eloquently pointed

0:31:48 > 0:31:56out, we have a very strong track record in that regard. We have ways.

0:31:56 > 0:31:59£160 billion in additional revenue as a consequence of clamping down on

0:31:59 > 0:32:06tax avoidance, evasion and noncompliance since 2010. We have

0:32:06 > 0:32:13brought in... Let me make this point, we have also brought in £2.8

0:32:13 > 0:32:17billion tracking down those who have looked to inappropriately hide their

0:32:17 > 0:32:24finances in overseas tax jurisdictions. We brought in £28.9

0:32:24 > 0:32:30billion in additional compliance in the last 12 months alone. This is

0:32:30 > 0:32:35the most telling point, because the honourable lady is rightly critical

0:32:35 > 0:32:39of the last Labour government in terms of their performance. She

0:32:39 > 0:32:42raised it this afternoon and also the same point in an adjournment

0:32:42 > 0:32:49debate last week. If we look at the tax gap currently between what we

0:32:49 > 0:32:52could potentially bring in by way of taxation and what we actually do is

0:32:52 > 0:33:006%. It is a historic low. A world beating figure. If we had today the

0:33:00 > 0:33:06average tax gap that was pertinent under the last Labour government we

0:33:06 > 0:33:15would be £45 billion less in the exchequer as a consequence. That is

0:33:15 > 0:33:18£45 billion not therefore vital public services which the right

0:33:18 > 0:33:24Honourable lady is keen to discuss. I think the honourable gentleman is

0:33:24 > 0:33:31first.I thank the Minister for giving way. Can he confirm HMRC

0:33:31 > 0:33:37inform the commercial services union that in 2017 the equivalent of

0:33:37 > 0:33:4117,000 years of staff experience is leaving the department? How will

0:33:41 > 0:33:43that help the Government record going forward in dealing with tax

0:33:43 > 0:33:50evasion and avoidance?I thank him for raising the issue in HMRC. We

0:33:50 > 0:33:56have a very good record in that regard. 1.8 billion invested in HMRC

0:33:56 > 0:34:04since 2010, in which 800 million will relate to the period after

0:34:04 > 0:34:132015, bringing in £7.2 billion by 2020 - 21. We will triple the number

0:34:13 > 0:34:15of investigations into the wealthy to make sure they are indeed paying

0:34:15 > 0:34:21the appropriate level of tax, as a direct consequence of that

0:34:21 > 0:34:26additional investment. I will give way.The Minister is very kind. Can

0:34:26 > 0:34:34he explain to the housewife only 420 HMRC staff are engaged in chasing

0:34:34 > 0:34:38tax avoidance and get ten times that number of civil servants are engaged

0:34:38 > 0:34:44in benefit fraud in the DWP?I challenge the honourable member's

0:34:44 > 0:34:53actual figure. It is a far larger number than the figure he suggested

0:34:53 > 0:34:59which are engaged in clamping down on tax avoidance. For example, in

0:34:59 > 0:35:03the 2100 largest corporations in this country, around 50% are under

0:35:03 > 0:35:06investigation not necessarily for doing anything wrong, but because

0:35:06 > 0:35:12they have complex tax affairs at any one time.I will give way to the

0:35:12 > 0:35:18honourable member again. Can he confirm to the House he has answered

0:35:18 > 0:35:22the question yesterday saying that there are 522 employees in the

0:35:22 > 0:35:30network union in 2017 and that compares with 4045 full-time

0:35:30 > 0:35:37equivalents in DWP chasing Social Security?On this issue of the tax

0:35:37 > 0:35:40take from the wealthiest in this country, this government has an

0:35:40 > 0:35:47exemplary record. Of the wealthiest 1%, they pay around 20% of all

0:35:47 > 0:35:54income tax. Under the last Labour government it was below 24%. I will

0:35:54 > 0:35:57not take any lectures from the party opposite.

0:36:00 > 0:36:03She has a question about the tax gap...I will give way to the

0:36:03 > 0:36:09honourable member. He is right to point out HMRC do a very good job in

0:36:09 > 0:36:12terms of collection of tax in this country but it does not mean it

0:36:12 > 0:36:17cannot do better. With the Minister agree that the way in which the tax

0:36:17 > 0:36:22take is identified and it is based on what we think should be paid in

0:36:22 > 0:36:28tax, it is not deal with Google, Amazon, Starbucks and others, who

0:36:28 > 0:36:31hides tags and it is not computed into the actual tax we should take

0:36:31 > 0:36:37and therefore the delivery of a tax gap?I am pleased she has raised the

0:36:37 > 0:36:42issue. The robustness of this figure is extremely high. The IMF said it

0:36:42 > 0:36:47is one of the highest standards in the world. It is audited and agreed

0:36:47 > 0:36:50by the National audit office and made public in the HMRC annual

0:36:50 > 0:36:58report and accounts. I will give way to my honourable friend.I thank him

0:36:58 > 0:37:02for giving way. He rightly talks about the need for the wealthiest to

0:37:02 > 0:37:06pay their fair share. Does he agree one of the most obscene things under

0:37:06 > 0:37:10the last Labour government was cleaners have to pay more tax man

0:37:10 > 0:37:14hedge fund owners that employed them and a Conservative government closed

0:37:14 > 0:37:23the so-called Mayfair loophole?My honourable friend is entirely right.

0:37:23 > 0:37:27It is this government that has raised the personal allowance to

0:37:27 > 0:37:3311,500, taking 3-4,000,000 has a tax altogether. This government brought

0:37:33 > 0:37:38in the National Living Wage. This government will go on to make sure

0:37:38 > 0:37:42those with the broadest shoulders will pay their fair share. I will

0:37:42 > 0:37:48give way to the honourable member.

0:37:48 > 0:37:52Does the honourable member agree that the HMRC would be serving this

0:37:52 > 0:37:55government and the people in the United Kingdom better by challenging

0:37:55 > 0:38:02those who bend the rules rather than finding my law-abiding constituent

0:38:02 > 0:38:08Sheila £1600 for a £100 -- £135 yearly tax bill when all she failed

0:38:08 > 0:38:13to do was press enter at the end of the form?The honourable lady raises

0:38:13 > 0:38:18a very important point, which brings me onto my next point. There is an

0:38:18 > 0:38:22assumption on the opposition benches that somehow nothing is being done

0:38:22 > 0:38:28about these various issues. The right honourable lady, the lady --

0:38:28 > 0:38:33the member from parking, referred to one of the instances in the Panama

0:38:33 > 0:38:37papers were some income had been diverted overseas and then loaned

0:38:37 > 0:38:42back to individuals, which is known as disguised remuneration. And quite

0:38:42 > 0:38:46rightly she has asked the question, what is the government doing about

0:38:46 > 0:38:49those circumstances? Pointer to the Finance Bill that has just gone

0:38:49 > 0:39:00through this house. -- I pointer. People will be given until 2019 to

0:39:00 > 0:39:03clear up those arrangements or they will pay the penalty. I will make a

0:39:03 > 0:39:07little more progress. I am conscious of time and the shortness of the

0:39:07 > 0:39:11debate. There are other issues were in fact we have brought in 75

0:39:11 > 0:39:18measures since 2010 to clamp down on these measures. A further 35 will,

0:39:18 > 0:39:26growing from 2015, raising £18.5 billion by 2020 - 2021. One of the

0:39:26 > 0:39:30problems is we have been so active in bringing in so many measures that

0:39:30 > 0:39:33unfortunately not all of them have been noticed. The right

0:39:33 > 0:39:38honourable... I will finish this point and I will give way. The right

0:39:38 > 0:39:44honourable lady, the member for barking, raised, for example, the

0:39:44 > 0:39:49issue of taking action. She razored last week in the debate. Taking

0:39:49 > 0:39:53action against those who promote these tax avoidance schemes. Once

0:39:53 > 0:40:01again in the Finance Bill. All 777 pages of it, very technical, it will

0:40:01 > 0:40:04probably put you to sleep that night, but within it there are

0:40:04 > 0:40:09measures to deal with precisely what she was urging us to take action on

0:40:09 > 0:40:18last week. We have already done it. I give way.Whilst I congratulate

0:40:18 > 0:40:23the government on specific changes it has made, as not the biggest

0:40:23 > 0:40:28change being the general Anti-Abuse Rule which catches a number of these

0:40:28 > 0:40:35schemes and allows governments to look at what is tax avoidance,

0:40:35 > 0:40:37aggressive avoidance, which therefore becomes invasion, which is

0:40:37 > 0:40:46illegal?-- evasion. My friend is entirely right. The rule has had

0:40:46 > 0:40:49significant impact. It was brought in under this government. It is very

0:40:49 > 0:40:55effective. There is a certain irony in the fact the opposition profess

0:40:55 > 0:40:58the importance of some of these measures, some of which have already

0:40:58 > 0:41:07been brought into law. The irony is that when it came to the third

0:41:07 > 0:41:10reading of the Finance Bill which brought these things in, the

0:41:10 > 0:41:16opposition voted against them. I will give way.I thank the Minister.

0:41:16 > 0:41:22The fact remains though that there is at least £30 billion of

0:41:22 > 0:41:32uncollected tax. It could be up to 120 billion. Wouldn't it be better

0:41:32 > 0:41:40if we were to invest in and not cut tax offices, and go after that

0:41:40 > 0:41:45multi-billion pound tax gap?Going after the tax gap, which is what

0:41:45 > 0:41:49this government is doing, and we have an exemplary record, the lowest

0:41:49 > 0:41:53tax gap in the world, the lowest in history, far lower than under the

0:41:53 > 0:42:00last government... As her tax offices, we need to move to an HMRC

0:42:00 > 0:42:03which is ready and equipped for the 21st century. That doesn't mean a

0:42:03 > 0:42:07large number of scattered offices. It means offices where the technical

0:42:07 > 0:42:14skills are there, where the staff is there. Where knowledge and

0:42:14 > 0:42:17understanding can be facilitated to move forward. I will make some

0:42:17 > 0:42:26progress. I am aware this is just a two-hour debate. Many wish to speak.

0:42:26 > 0:42:28Mr Speaker, we have covered the issue of the various measures that

0:42:28 > 0:42:32we have taken. We have covered the issue of the huge investment we have

0:42:32 > 0:42:36made an HMRC. Haps I can now turn to the international aspects, where we

0:42:36 > 0:42:41all agree that we need to look closely at what is happening in the

0:42:41 > 0:42:45international sphere. This government has a record of which it

0:42:45 > 0:42:49can be proud. Through the OECD we have been at the vanguard, in the

0:42:49 > 0:42:53vanguard of the base erosion of profit shifting project. We have

0:42:53 > 0:42:56worked very closely with the Crown Dependencies and overseas

0:42:56 > 0:43:00territories. We brought in a diverted profits tax that will raise

0:43:00 > 0:43:051.3 billion by 2019, common reporting standards to ensure

0:43:05 > 0:43:11information is exchanged to around 100 different countries, a directory

0:43:11 > 0:43:15of beneficial ownership, which is accessible by HMRC, the body, the

0:43:15 > 0:43:21authority that needs to have that information. This is a game changer.

0:43:21 > 0:43:25It has happened within the last couple of years. Many of those items

0:43:25 > 0:43:28and issues arising from the Paradise Papers go back very, very many

0:43:28 > 0:43:36years. But these actions are in position right now. Can I make one

0:43:36 > 0:43:44important point? On the issue of transparency... The Right Honourable

0:43:44 > 0:43:47member talks about transparency. I asked her at the last debate last

0:43:47 > 0:43:54week if, when it comes to that -- those 13 million files, which she

0:43:54 > 0:43:57join me in calling upon them to release that information to HMRC so

0:43:57 > 0:44:04that we can go after anybody who, as a consequence of that data release,

0:44:04 > 0:44:11has been abusive in terms of our tax system? Will see support us?-- will

0:44:11 > 0:44:19see support us. It is not in the gift of the Guardian or Panorama to

0:44:19 > 0:44:24release those papers. They are not able to do so.What I actually asked

0:44:24 > 0:44:29is whether the right honourable lady would join me in calling for them to

0:44:29 > 0:44:33release that information, which is a slightly different question, and I'm

0:44:33 > 0:44:40happy to give way if she would like to tell us yes or no.Order. Stop

0:44:40 > 0:44:44the clock. There is far too much noise in this chamber. I say very

0:44:44 > 0:44:50gently to the Parliamentary Private secretary, don't do it. You may

0:44:50 > 0:44:53think you are being clever. It doesn't enhance your application as

0:44:53 > 0:44:59a parliamentarian in the end. Please don't do it. It's juvenile, the

0:44:59 > 0:45:05public despise it and I have no patients for it. Dame Margaret

0:45:05 > 0:45:13Hodge. -- patience.I would certainly join the Minister in

0:45:13 > 0:45:16seeking any documentation HMRC require to pursue those guilty of

0:45:16 > 0:45:21avoidance bird evasion. I would say to the Minister that when I have

0:45:21 > 0:45:28given papers to HMRC in the past, whether about Google or others, they

0:45:28 > 0:45:34disappear and no action appears to be taken.I will take that as a yes

0:45:34 > 0:45:38and that we can work together to try and see that that information is

0:45:38 > 0:45:44provided to HMRC. I can see no reasonable reason why it should not.

0:45:44 > 0:45:54I will give way.I very much agree with my rival harbour front. Will he

0:45:54 > 0:46:02confirm that in recent years, made -- well after many of these papers,

0:46:02 > 0:46:05Crown Dependencies have fully cooperated with the UK in relation

0:46:05 > 0:46:09to all tax transparency, all OECD measures, and have the same

0:46:09 > 0:46:13transparency ratings as the United States, Germany and other Western

0:46:13 > 0:46:20democracies?I thank him for that intervention. We have automatic

0:46:20 > 0:46:25access in terms of corruption enquiries to are Crown Dependencies

0:46:25 > 0:46:31in overseas territories as a result of that cooperation. I recognise how

0:46:31 > 0:46:34important this issue as to the public and it is of critical

0:46:34 > 0:46:37importance to this government. UK tax authorities have more

0:46:37 > 0:46:41information and more power than ever before to clamp down on evasion and

0:46:41 > 0:46:44avoidance because of the actions of the government, actions the

0:46:44 > 0:46:49government she was part of and failed to take. I conclude with the

0:46:49 > 0:46:54words of the right honourable lady, the member for Berkin, made in last

0:46:54 > 0:47:01week's adjournment debate she has, and I quote, never depended the

0:47:01 > 0:47:04record of the Labour government in this area. That speaks directly to

0:47:04 > 0:47:10the heart of this issue. An apparent legacy of tax abuses going back many

0:47:10 > 0:47:15years, framed by the inaction of the party opposite. And it speaks to the

0:47:15 > 0:47:20core of Labour's approach to the world, that the opportunity lies

0:47:20 > 0:47:23always in the criticism and the derision rather than in action and

0:47:23 > 0:47:29justice. It is this government that is acting. It is this government

0:47:29 > 0:47:34that will continue to leave no stone unturned in the pursuit of those who

0:47:34 > 0:47:38seek to duck their responsibilities at the expense of us all. Whenever

0:47:38 > 0:47:41and wherever it is found, this government will continue to bring

0:47:41 > 0:47:49the avoiders, the evaders, the noncompliant, to book.Order. Both

0:47:49 > 0:47:54the Right Honourable member for Barking and the financial Secretary

0:47:54 > 0:47:57to the Treasury, characteristically courteously, gave way extensively.

0:47:57 > 0:48:01They are not being criticised for that. But I simply draw attention to

0:48:01 > 0:48:05the limited time available for the debate and ask those speaking from

0:48:05 > 0:48:11the front bench to be extremely sparing in their remarks. First

0:48:11 > 0:48:14responsibility for brevity is that of the honourable member for Bootle,

0:48:14 > 0:48:18Mr Peter Dowd. I will try and take that suggestion

0:48:18 > 0:48:27on board rather than a direction. The minister identifies what should

0:48:27 > 0:48:33be done. I'll tell you what should be done. Labour's tax enforcement

0:48:33 > 0:48:35programme, it says an immediate public enquiry into avoidance,

0:48:35 > 0:48:40greater scrutiny of MPs, create a specialist tax enforcement unit,

0:48:40 > 0:48:44public filing of large company tax returns, of the tax returns of

0:48:44 > 0:48:51wealthy individuals earning more than £1 million. No public contracts

0:48:51 > 0:48:54Froch tax avoidance, repatriate contracts parked in tax havens,

0:48:54 > 0:48:59public contract transparency, a register of ownership of companies,

0:48:59 > 0:49:06a register of trusts, a general tax avoidance rule principle, strict

0:49:06 > 0:49:08minimal standards for Crown Dependencies and overseas

0:49:08 > 0:49:14territories, create an offshore companies levy, full country by

0:49:14 > 0:49:20country reporting. A comprehensive proposal by Labour to begin with.I

0:49:20 > 0:49:23think the Shadow Minister forgiving way. Would he agree with me that

0:49:23 > 0:49:28there is an army of facilitators around tax avoidance, including,

0:49:28 > 0:49:31sadly, the four big accountancy firms often based just a mile down

0:49:31 > 0:49:38the road in the Square mile?My honourable friend makes an important

0:49:38 > 0:49:42point. What goes to the heart of this is the question of

0:49:42 > 0:49:46transparency. We have the bizarre situation that when I was on

0:49:46 > 0:49:53Newsnight last week, and the chair, the chairman of the Cayman Islands

0:49:53 > 0:49:58stock exchange was on the programme as well... What an insouciant

0:49:58 > 0:50:08attitude of that man had to tax avoidance. Mr Speaker, he actually

0:50:08 > 0:50:13said, there hadn't been any wrongdoing. Maybe not. What he did

0:50:13 > 0:50:19do was he called for the journalist to be jailed that is what he did.

0:50:19 > 0:50:23That is what he did. He called for the journalist to be jailed. And

0:50:23 > 0:50:29that is the position we find ourselves in. I am going to take the

0:50:29 > 0:50:33suggestion, otherwise it will be an admonition from the Speaker, to push

0:50:33 > 0:50:38on. Then I will take some interventions. I hope that members

0:50:38 > 0:50:42across this House will join with me in condemning those responsible and

0:50:42 > 0:50:48offensive comments. All of us or a debt of gratitude to the

0:50:48 > 0:50:50hard-working and diligent journalists involved to have

0:50:50 > 0:50:54demonstrated the importance of a free press, holding the wealthiest

0:50:54 > 0:50:59and most powerful individuals and multinationals to account. To be

0:50:59 > 0:51:03clear, we are talking about tax avoidance, which covers activities

0:51:03 > 0:51:11within the law. But that work against its effective application.

0:51:11 > 0:51:15Most of the people and cases involved have not broken any law or

0:51:15 > 0:51:19acted in a criminal way. That does not make tax avoidance acceptable

0:51:19 > 0:51:24are justifiable in the 21st century. After all, as has been identified,

0:51:24 > 0:51:33tax avoidance costs of us all. Every pound avoided is taken from her

0:51:33 > 0:51:37children's education, from our armed Forces, the very people who protect

0:51:37 > 0:51:43us. From the elderly and disabled. Even if we were to look, as we -- as

0:51:43 > 0:51:50has been identified, at the Conservative figures published on

0:51:50 > 0:51:57tax avoidance, 12.8 billion was lost to the Exchequer because of tax

0:51:57 > 0:52:01avoidance. That is not acceptable. And frankly, the question about what

0:52:01 > 0:52:06a Labour government did in the past, people have a view about that.

0:52:06 > 0:52:10People think it was much better than the Tories overall. I'm not going

0:52:10 > 0:52:15there. The question arises as to what... I referred the honourable

0:52:15 > 0:52:19gentleman to the financial Times, Mr Speaker. With the greatest of

0:52:19 > 0:52:22respect to the honourable gentleman, I'm not his research. I'm sure he is

0:52:22 > 0:52:29capable of doing that.I'll give way. I thank you. Does he accept

0:52:29 > 0:52:34that if the tax gap we have now was at the same level it had been on

0:52:34 > 0:52:41average on the Labour, that our deficit would be £12 billion higher?

0:52:41 > 0:52:45My honourable friend behind me says, move on. And I think she is

0:52:45 > 0:52:52absolutely right in relation to that issue. I will reaffirm the point I

0:52:52 > 0:53:02made in the Labour document. We have got to push on with this debate.

0:53:02 > 0:53:07It's no good talking about the past. We want to talk about here and now

0:53:07 > 0:53:15and the future. I will give way to the honourable member.He does not

0:53:15 > 0:53:22had to speak if he does not want to! The tax gap is now 60%. It averaged

0:53:22 > 0:53:278% under Labour. If it was 8% as then, we would have a bigger deficit

0:53:27 > 0:53:38by £12 billion per year. -- the tax gap now is 6%.I am not going to get

0:53:38 > 0:53:43into that particular issue. No doubt we will come back to this at the

0:53:43 > 0:53:49time of the budget. I know you are looking at me with those guys. And a

0:53:49 > 0:53:55smile at the same time. I will move on. Mr Speaker, while tax avoidance

0:53:55 > 0:54:01is a global problem it is also a UK problem. The UK accounts for 17% of

0:54:01 > 0:54:05the global market for offshore services. We are considered one of

0:54:05 > 0:54:08the biggest if not the biggest players in the global offshore

0:54:08 > 0:54:14system of tax havens. Accounting for some of the world's key tax havens,

0:54:14 > 0:54:20Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man 's Tom Bahama, isle of man, Kate Cross and

0:54:20 > 0:54:25British Virgin Islands, all British overseas territories and all

0:54:25 > 0:54:30afforded the protection of the British Government. Despite our

0:54:30 > 0:54:33prominence as a country at the heart of the network offshore tax havens

0:54:33 > 0:54:37which helps tax avoidance across the globe, the Government refuses to

0:54:37 > 0:54:42lead the way in relation to tax transparency. I keep using that

0:54:42 > 0:54:53word. I will consistently use that word, tax transparency.Thank you.

0:54:53 > 0:54:58Would the Shadow Minister agree the purchasing of a private jet, nearly

0:54:58 > 0:55:03£17 million, setting up an offshore leasing company, with the sole aim

0:55:03 > 0:55:10of saving £3 million in VAT is an affront to our public services.My

0:55:10 > 0:55:18honourable friend is quite right. It is shocking. The denial of those on

0:55:18 > 0:55:24the Government benches is not something new. In 2013 when the G8

0:55:24 > 0:55:28was pushing ahead with strict rules to clamp down on tax avoidance, the

0:55:28 > 0:55:33then Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron was busy undermining

0:55:33 > 0:55:36them, writing to the president of the European Council demanding

0:55:36 > 0:55:43offshore trusts were excluded. The government record on tackling tax

0:55:43 > 0:55:49avoidance is not all that it would like it to be. Yes, I'm quite happy.

0:55:49 > 0:55:53He is being generous with his time. We all agree this has to be a

0:55:53 > 0:55:58priority. He is focusing on our record but why did the Labour Party

0:55:58 > 0:56:02block the three measures we brought forward by Chamakh it would have

0:56:02 > 0:56:09been worth £8.6 billion vital to the public services the listed earlier.

0:56:09 > 0:56:20-- we brought forward?I am more than happy to give the honourable

0:56:20 > 0:56:27gentleman a narrative. Let's put it like that. About the proceedings. If

0:56:27 > 0:56:31he wishes I have more than happy to talk to him outside. I think the

0:56:31 > 0:56:36information he is getting from his front bench is nonsense. I'm going

0:56:36 > 0:56:41to close to give people an opportunity, Mr Speaker. First we

0:56:41 > 0:56:48had the Panama Papers. Now the Paradise Papers. How many more tax

0:56:48 > 0:56:55avoidance leaks will then need to be before the Government acts? It is

0:56:55 > 0:56:58clear we desperately need a public enquiry into tax avoidance, the use

0:56:58 > 0:57:02of onshore trusts and havens. The government should listen to this

0:57:02 > 0:57:07side of the House and people outside the House, more importantly, and act

0:57:07 > 0:57:12by introducing a public register of offshore trusts and publishing the

0:57:12 > 0:57:16information already provided to it from overseas territories. It should

0:57:16 > 0:57:22also stop cuts to HMRC and make sure HMRC staff have the staff and

0:57:22 > 0:57:30resources needed to enable it to tackle tax avoidance. Mr Speaker,

0:57:30 > 0:57:32this House should be reassured that if this government continues to

0:57:32 > 0:57:39ignore the problem and to act, I can assure them of the Labour government

0:57:39 > 0:57:45will.I draw the attention of the House to my entry in the register of

0:57:45 > 0:57:49members interests. I congratulate the honourable lady on securing this

0:57:49 > 0:57:55debate. She brings great expertise and authority on these matters, not

0:57:55 > 0:58:01least from her time on the PAC. Mr Speaker, I think the most important

0:58:01 > 0:58:06point for her to focus on this afternoon is this is not a party

0:58:06 > 0:58:10political issue. Although the right honourable lady had some criticisms

0:58:10 > 0:58:16of this government, criticisms of the Government of which she was a

0:58:16 > 0:58:19part, the only plausible criticism in my judgment which can be made of

0:58:19 > 0:58:24the current government is they need to speed up some of the initiatives

0:58:24 > 0:58:29they have already implemented. But the Government has not done that in

0:58:29 > 0:58:33respect of the overseas territories, because we would rather these havens

0:58:33 > 0:58:38took action themselves. And to be fair, to some extent they have

0:58:38 > 0:58:43already started doing so. In terms of the actions taken by the

0:58:43 > 0:58:47Government, David Cameron and George Osborne led the international effort

0:58:47 > 0:58:52at the G8 to clamp down on these matters. Especially on tax avoidance

0:58:52 > 0:58:58and evasion. We introduced publicly accessible registers in the UK for

0:58:58 > 0:59:04people with significant control. We abolished anonymous shareholders. We

0:59:04 > 0:59:12introduced very important unexplained wealth orders. And the

0:59:12 > 0:59:16anti-bribery law, first started under John Major in Paris in 1995,

0:59:16 > 0:59:22was finally introduced into this country in 2011, after 13 years of

0:59:22 > 0:59:28Labour government, by David Cameron. Let's be clear that this government

0:59:28 > 0:59:32has been taking action and has raised an immense amount of extra

0:59:32 > 0:59:37tax as a result. However, the time has come, this is the third debate

0:59:37 > 0:59:44in which I had taken part, to insist on the same level of transparency

0:59:44 > 0:59:49for the overseas territories as we have in this country. These

0:59:49 > 0:59:54territories gain hugely from their relationship with the UK. As the

0:59:54 > 1:00:00Government made clear in 2012, and I quote, it is a matter of

1:00:00 > 1:00:03constitutional law, the UK Parliament has unlimited power to

1:00:03 > 1:00:09legislate for these territories. I give way.I am grateful to the

1:00:09 > 1:00:13gentleman for giving way. He will go from his considerable expertise on

1:00:13 > 1:00:17international development that the abuse of these sorts of offshore

1:00:17 > 1:00:21schemes not only harm the British taxpayer but also disadvantage some

1:00:21 > 1:00:25of the poorest people in the world. That is why the Government must

1:00:25 > 1:00:27increase greater transparency in Crown dependencies and overseas

1:00:27 > 1:00:33territories.I am coming onto exactly that point. The position of

1:00:33 > 1:00:39the territories, like many members, I have had visits from senior

1:00:39 > 1:00:42ministers in virtually all of them, the position of the territories is

1:00:42 > 1:00:49best summed up by the prayer of Saint Augustin, make me chaste, O

1:00:49 > 1:00:54Lord, but not yet. They have double-macro arguments. The first I

1:00:54 > 1:01:00will call the Dutch Antilles argument. -- they have two

1:01:00 > 1:01:05arguments. They will head off to the Dutch Antilles. There is a real

1:01:05 > 1:01:09momentum around the world, thanks to David Cameron and George Osborne, to

1:01:09 > 1:01:16attack these unfair nurses. The havens in bracing and open register

1:01:16 > 1:01:20in my view will have an advantage from being at the front of opening

1:01:20 > 1:01:26up for what are billions of pounds of legitimate business. The second

1:01:26 > 1:01:31argument and this is one in a way I think we must address head-on, is

1:01:31 > 1:01:35they already provide the private registers, they are available to

1:01:35 > 1:01:41lawmakers and regulators like the HMRC, and they proudly say they will

1:01:41 > 1:01:48turn around enquiries from the HMRC within a matter of hours. That is

1:01:48 > 1:01:52very good but completely misses the point, as this recent release of

1:01:52 > 1:02:00information shows. Registers must be open to the media, journalists, NGOs

1:02:00 > 1:02:05and those people who can join up the dots. The regulatory authorities are

1:02:05 > 1:02:10not with the best will in the world in that business. Narrow questions

1:02:10 > 1:02:16jaunt from regulatory authorities do not suffice. -- drawn from

1:02:16 > 1:02:23regulatory authorities.My honourable friend makes a fair

1:02:23 > 1:02:27point. Will he accept that we should not run all overseas territories

1:02:27 > 1:02:32into the same basket? Some are much more compliant than others.He makes

1:02:32 > 1:02:38a very good point. I would like to exclude Gibraltar from what I am

1:02:38 > 1:02:42saying. Gibraltar is not an example of what we are talking about. Time

1:02:42 > 1:02:48is short. The final point I want to make is the United Kingdom led on

1:02:48 > 1:02:53point seven. Around the world the United Kingdom is looks to for its

1:02:53 > 1:02:56leadership on international developer on. It is part of this

1:02:56 > 1:03:02Parliament's identity. It is who we are. It is part of global Britain.

1:03:02 > 1:03:07We have an obligation, not least to Oregon taxpayers, the champion

1:03:07 > 1:03:14transparency and openness and have zero tolerance towards corruption.

1:03:14 > 1:03:18-- our own taxpayers. When we came into government in 2010 the

1:03:18 > 1:03:20Department for International development led the way with

1:03:20 > 1:03:25transparency guarantees. We published openly all expenditure

1:03:25 > 1:03:31above £500 on the Internet and it may be a cliche, but sunlight is the

1:03:31 > 1:03:34best disinfectant and that is at the heart of what we are talking about

1:03:34 > 1:03:42today.I am most grateful to him for giving way and support what he is

1:03:42 > 1:03:46saying. Will he agree with me that actually the market for financial

1:03:46 > 1:03:52services in the future is huge? Jurisdiction with this transparency

1:03:52 > 1:03:55is going to attract a loss of business in the future exactly for

1:03:55 > 1:04:01that reason.My honourable friend is absolutely right. That was the first

1:04:01 > 1:04:05of the two points I was making in trying to tackle head-on the

1:04:05 > 1:04:09counterargument sometimes but up by some of the territories. In terms of

1:04:09 > 1:04:16tackling corruption and having a zero tolerance towards it, in 2010,

1:04:16 > 1:04:20when I was responsible for these matters, we targeted funding

1:04:20 > 1:04:24specifically on to the city of London police, who have some

1:04:24 > 1:04:28expertise in pursuing and recovering stolen funds. We should do as much

1:04:28 > 1:04:33with that as we possibly can. I give way.I agree with a great deal of

1:04:33 > 1:04:37what he has said. Given the British Virgin Islands in particular, the

1:04:37 > 1:04:42majority of the economy is in financial services, the islands have

1:04:42 > 1:04:45been devastated in the hurricanes. Is now the right time to impose on

1:04:45 > 1:04:52the islanders rather than working with them?He makes a fair point in

1:04:52 > 1:04:55view of the current humanitarian crisis which has afflicted the

1:04:55 > 1:05:00British Virgin Islands. It is in fact one of the most transparent is

1:05:00 > 1:05:08of these havens. But I do not think what I hope is a temporary crisis

1:05:08 > 1:05:12should in any way mitigate the argument I am making that maybe in a

1:05:12 > 1:05:15short period of time but in a defined period, these open registers

1:05:15 > 1:05:21are absolutely essential. I was talking about Britain's

1:05:21 > 1:05:23international developer and leadership and I finish on this

1:05:23 > 1:05:30point... I will give way to the honourable member.Earlier he said

1:05:30 > 1:05:34the UK lead on point seven. They were about 45 years later on the

1:05:34 > 1:05:39agreement in 1970 and decades behind Scandinavia. I do not see the

1:05:39 > 1:05:45leadership. Will he come back on that?He cannot get away with such a

1:05:45 > 1:05:50narrow partisan comment. Britain was at the G8 country to stand by

1:05:50 > 1:05:54commitments to the poorest people in the world and we are very proud

1:05:54 > 1:06:01indeed that it was this government that did it. Mr Speaker, the highly

1:06:01 > 1:06:10respected Africa progress panel in a recent study on the DRC, made clear

1:06:10 > 1:06:14that stolen funds and stolen taxes was costing their country £1.5

1:06:14 > 1:06:21billion. More than the country spends on health and education. It

1:06:21 > 1:06:25is deeply ironic some deeper as people in the world live on top of

1:06:25 > 1:06:31some of the richest real estate. That is clear in the DRC. There are

1:06:31 > 1:06:36incredible studies which make it absolutely clear that in Africa the

1:06:36 > 1:06:46money that is stolen from the people through nonpaid taxes or concealment

1:06:46 > 1:06:48dwarfs all foreign direct investment and international developer and

1:06:48 > 1:06:52money flowing into Africa each year. I will give way to the honourable

1:06:52 > 1:06:58member.We know a lot of that money does not end up in overseas

1:06:58 > 1:07:10territories. We know a lot of money ends up in places like Dubai. We

1:07:10 > 1:07:14need to engage in other parts of the world, particularly in places like

1:07:14 > 1:07:19Dubai where much of this money can be found.He makes a good point. The

1:07:19 > 1:07:24key point is transparency. It is openness. Make all these matters

1:07:24 > 1:07:27published and the way they are published in an open register in

1:07:27 > 1:07:31Britain and that is the way in which we make progress. Mr Speaker, we

1:07:31 > 1:07:35look to the Government to advance this agenda. Probably in the Finance

1:07:35 > 1:07:40Bill. We have the Treasury benches will clearly hear the will of the

1:07:40 > 1:07:46House on this matter today and that progress will indeed now be made.I

1:07:46 > 1:07:52asked the SNP spokesperson not to exceed ten minutes in the interests

1:07:52 > 1:08:02of facilitating others. We are in her hands. Kirsty Blackman.

1:08:02 > 1:08:08It is try to stick to that. -- it is not common for me to exceed ten

1:08:08 > 1:08:17minutes. Thanks for bringing this debate to the House. I would like to

1:08:17 > 1:08:22thank the journalists who have done the work in the Paradise papers,

1:08:22 > 1:08:27they have done it huge amount of work, investigating this, and

1:08:27 > 1:08:31exposing the issues and bringing this to the attention of the

1:08:31 > 1:08:35international media as well as the attention of this House and they

1:08:35 > 1:08:40deserve to be thanked. I normally have a lot of time for the minister,

1:08:40 > 1:08:46I find him to be often wrong, but generally reasonable.LAUGHTER

1:08:46 > 1:08:54The speech he made today was badly pitched, frankly. The speech from

1:08:54 > 1:08:59the member for Sutton Coldfield was much better, not just talking about

1:08:59 > 1:09:01resting on his laurels, but about what the government was going to do

1:09:01 > 1:09:08and then could do in the future, I have the minister listens to the

1:09:08 > 1:09:11voices across the House on what they are calling for De Shai Hope. This

1:09:11 > 1:09:19is not a party political issue -- I hope the minister. I don't have much

1:09:19 > 1:09:26respect for either government's actions on tax evasion, Labour or

1:09:26 > 1:09:29the Conservatives, and I think there's more that can be done.

1:09:29 > 1:09:33Members across the House would agree that is the case. Transparency

1:09:33 > 1:09:41international look into the issue of companies dodging tax and they found

1:09:41 > 1:09:44766 UK companies that were involved in corruption and money-laundering

1:09:44 > 1:09:48to the June of £80 billion, and a quarter of those companies that we

1:09:48 > 1:09:54investigated are still active. Those organisations once the government

1:09:54 > 1:09:59can take action against. UK Government is making a number of

1:09:59 > 1:10:03incredibly ill advised and not great decisions right now around things

1:10:03 > 1:10:07like closing HMRC officers, round their continued pursuit of

1:10:07 > 1:10:16austerity. The work that has been done by number of journalists is

1:10:16 > 1:10:18helping us, and I appreciate that the government has taken action on

1:10:18 > 1:10:25this, but it took a very long time for MPs like Roger Mullen... In

1:10:25 > 1:10:29order to convince the government to make any move on this. It is not

1:10:29 > 1:10:33just this UK Government, previous governments have successively failed

1:10:33 > 1:10:39to crack down on this, and the UK tax code is out of hand. It requires

1:10:39 > 1:10:44simplification and changes that they are making around that in

1:10:44 > 1:10:48conjunction with the office for taxing the vacation, have not gone

1:10:48 > 1:10:55far enough -- tax simplification. You cannot no longer carry the tax

1:10:55 > 1:11:00code around because it is so significant, and the potential for

1:11:00 > 1:11:03people to dodge things as a result of that very complex tax code is

1:11:03 > 1:11:10ridiculous. The member for Boodle spoke about the UK Government

1:11:10 > 1:11:15previously calling for the EU's sanctions around tax dodging to be

1:11:15 > 1:11:21watered down, and I think this was a grim action for them to take them

1:11:21 > 1:11:25especially in the wake of the Paradise Papers when this call came.

1:11:25 > 1:11:29The UK Government should be leading by example, they should be doing,

1:11:29 > 1:11:34not just saying, we have got the tax gap down to 6%, they should be

1:11:34 > 1:11:38saying, the tax code is still 6%, we have it huge amount of work to do in

1:11:38 > 1:11:44order to crack down on that final 6%, we have, the UK has the

1:11:44 > 1:11:47virginity to lead the world in this regard and I think they should do

1:11:47 > 1:11:55that -- UK has the opportunity.Does the lady thinks the introduction of

1:11:55 > 1:12:00further tax bands in Edinburgh is an additional convocation to the UK tax

1:12:00 > 1:12:06codes? --, location.You are confusing the issue of income tax

1:12:06 > 1:12:14with other types of tax. What has happened in Scotland in relation to

1:12:14 > 1:12:18the paper that has been produced, that consults on a number of

1:12:18 > 1:12:21options, and lays out the effects they have, that is way more

1:12:21 > 1:12:29transparent than any action that any UK Government takes in advance of

1:12:29 > 1:12:34any budget, where they bring rabbits out of hats. The Scottish Government

1:12:34 > 1:12:37has entered into dialogue with the other parties and other parties have

1:12:37 > 1:12:44got the opportunity to take that chance to criticise or praise. The

1:12:44 > 1:12:51honourable man but should do that. -- member. The Scottish Government

1:12:51 > 1:12:54have called for this to be devolved to Scotland because we think we

1:12:54 > 1:13:03would do a better job. The issue that was highlighted especially by

1:13:03 > 1:13:08the Paradise Papers, is the fact that everyone knows that tax evasion

1:13:08 > 1:13:12is illegal but tax avoidance as highlighted in these papers is

1:13:12 > 1:13:22immoral.I'm grateful for giving way. I'd like to share my concern.

1:13:22 > 1:13:30Bright house, company that exploits areas with extortion at APR rates,

1:13:30 > 1:13:36is that immoral?I agree, I'll say her constituents who are exploited

1:13:36 > 1:13:42by organisations like that -- I also have constituents. It is a company

1:13:42 > 1:13:47that no one should be investing in. It is not that difficult to pay the

1:13:47 > 1:13:50tax that you know, it is not that difficult to say to financial

1:13:50 > 1:13:56adviser, if you have bags of cash, I would like my money to grow, but I

1:13:56 > 1:14:02do not want it to grow by avoiding the tax I/O. It would be very easy

1:14:02 > 1:14:09for people to say that. It is clear that some people lack the moral

1:14:09 > 1:14:13compass and where they are taking the decisions to engage in

1:14:13 > 1:14:17aggressive tax avoidance of the government requires to legislate in

1:14:17 > 1:14:21order that they could no longer do that, to provide the moral compass,

1:14:21 > 1:14:26to make sure the tax is paid when it is owed. We must have the best

1:14:26 > 1:14:30possible tax rules in place and we must simplify the tax code and we

1:14:30 > 1:14:34must crack down on evasion and we must legislate to reduce avoidance,

1:14:34 > 1:14:40and the government is in a untenable position, it cannot continue to

1:14:40 > 1:14:49implement austerity while at the same time leaving a tax gap.Many of

1:14:49 > 1:14:55the tax avoidance, they don't avoid using our roads and the schools and

1:14:55 > 1:15:00they don't avoid using hospitals or using the police to look after their

1:15:00 > 1:15:08lumps of money.I absolutely agree. However much they are earning, and

1:15:08 > 1:15:12however much tax they are paying, people are using the public

1:15:12 > 1:15:18services. In our party we aspire to have brilliant public services and

1:15:18 > 1:15:22we aspire to have people working in public services that are paid a

1:15:22 > 1:15:26reasonable amount and don't have to face a pay cut. The only way we can

1:15:26 > 1:15:30provide the public services we want and provide the benefits system that

1:15:30 > 1:15:38we want, is to have a system where people pay the tax they owe. We

1:15:38 > 1:15:40continue to call for this to be devolved to Scotland because we

1:15:40 > 1:15:45think we would take better decisions in the absence of devolution we

1:15:45 > 1:15:48would like the UK Government to take actual action rather than just say,

1:15:48 > 1:15:55look how great we are.Thank you. There will be with immediate effect

1:15:55 > 1:16:01a six minute limit on backbench speeches. Mr David Morris.Thank you

1:16:01 > 1:16:13very much. I did not expect to be called so early. I'm a bit at a loss

1:16:13 > 1:16:16at what we are trying to achieve, is this about tax evasion or offshore

1:16:16 > 1:16:21companies? Offshore companies are legal entities, and many of them,

1:16:21 > 1:16:25especially across the Commonwealth and overseas territories have been

1:16:25 > 1:16:29set up with HMRC guidelines, and that has got to be clarified here

1:16:29 > 1:16:36and now, is this about tax avoidance or is this about overseas

1:16:36 > 1:16:43territories having tax advantages? What is it about? Yesterday when the

1:16:43 > 1:16:49SA 24 was being granted, I was absolutely of the mind that this was

1:16:49 > 1:16:54about overseas territories or even tax evasion under certain forms of

1:16:54 > 1:16:58tax bandages in certain forms of countries across the world -- tax

1:16:58 > 1:17:03advantages. The problem we have, the UK can do its bit, and this

1:17:03 > 1:17:08government has done, and the labour government for 13 years did very

1:17:08 > 1:17:14little, to be frank. But now it is the perception, the perception of

1:17:14 > 1:17:17who pays the taxes in this country, and I can give you a very basic

1:17:17 > 1:17:24economic argument. It is like a piggy bank. You earn your money, you

1:17:24 > 1:17:28put your money in an offshore piggybank, and then you pay tax on

1:17:28 > 1:17:32it at source and when you put the money back into this country, so

1:17:32 > 1:17:37there is no tax evasion there. I remember the Leader of the

1:17:37 > 1:17:43Opposition talking about the Isle of Man government, and the Isle of Man

1:17:43 > 1:17:48government I have a lot of time for them and many links with them, in my

1:17:48 > 1:17:53constituency, and the problem I have with this issue is that the Isle of

1:17:53 > 1:17:58Man government are the most highly regulated offshore tax haven, if you

1:17:58 > 1:18:04want to call it that, in the whole world. This is from the Isle of Man

1:18:04 > 1:18:08government, amongst other things customs and excise agreements remove

1:18:08 > 1:18:12the need for customs barriers between the Isle of Man, the UK and

1:18:12 > 1:18:17the EU, and even the EU is very loath to draft any legislation on

1:18:17 > 1:18:23this matter. It makes the island part of the European VAT territory,

1:18:23 > 1:18:29the agreement also makes the revenue sharing agreement, by which tax and

1:18:29 > 1:18:34VAT and most other indirect tax revenues are split between the UK

1:18:34 > 1:18:39and the Isle of Man. Since 2011 and this is on the subject of private

1:18:39 > 1:18:45jets, since 2011 the Isle of Man customs and excise has raised more

1:18:45 > 1:18:50than 30 assessments for under declared and over claimed VAT

1:18:50 > 1:18:57against businesses in the aircraft leasing sector. Approximately

1:18:57 > 1:19:04protecting £4.7 million VAT to this extractor. -- Exchequer. Are we

1:19:04 > 1:19:09arguing about reforming tax laws or are we arguing about reforming tax

1:19:09 > 1:19:12havens

1:19:12 > 1:19:15are we arguing about reforming tax havens? Most have been sorted out in

1:19:15 > 1:19:20overseas territories by this House, so I will keep it short, but I think

1:19:20 > 1:19:24this is a grand waste of time, this debate, and it is very confusing for

1:19:24 > 1:19:35the public out there.I am dismayed, what we are talking about is

1:19:35 > 1:19:38openness and transparency about tax, and the member for Sutton Coldfield

1:19:38 > 1:19:44set the tone for this debate along with the member for Barking, this is

1:19:44 > 1:19:50a cross-party issue, it is important, and I agree with every

1:19:50 > 1:19:53word the member for Sutton Coldfield said, this is something that harms

1:19:53 > 1:19:56countries around the world, developing countries, it hits

1:19:56 > 1:19:59taxpayers because the wealthiest and large corporations find ways to

1:19:59 > 1:20:04reduce their tax bills and avoid paying tax completely, and if you

1:20:04 > 1:20:11would let me make some progress please for the... I congratulate the

1:20:11 > 1:20:16member for barking to secure this debate. And the shining a light on

1:20:16 > 1:20:24what has come out of the Panama papers. The Public Accounts

1:20:24 > 1:20:27Committee have shone a light on this for some years and I pay tribute to

1:20:27 > 1:20:37the member for barking for her work. Some of the worst excesses of

1:20:37 > 1:20:40avoidance have come to light and we saw real change, international

1:20:40 > 1:20:44action, and it has to be international action, it actually

1:20:44 > 1:20:48saw change at a faster pace than we have seen under any government for

1:20:48 > 1:20:53many years in making more information about tax for

1:20:53 > 1:20:56corporations public, and we continue to pursue this, and with political

1:20:56 > 1:21:01will we can make progress. In the last year the Public Accounts

1:21:01 > 1:21:05Committee held in international tax transparency conference and we had

1:21:05 > 1:21:10in our own humble way, we thought we might get some countries from the

1:21:10 > 1:21:15EU, but we had countries from around the world. Over 20 of them signed up

1:21:15 > 1:21:18to our pledge on international tax transparency, pledging to fight for

1:21:18 > 1:21:22our citizens, through our parliaments, to press governments

1:21:22 > 1:21:29and to be bolder and faster as the member for Sutton Coldfield said. We

1:21:29 > 1:21:38are not moving at the right pace, and this release of papers and

1:21:38 > 1:21:42information is a real eye-opener for our constituents who just pay their

1:21:42 > 1:21:49tax and have no idea about this. Public country by country reporting

1:21:49 > 1:21:55the large corporations is something the government could do and the

1:21:55 > 1:21:59member for Don Valley, I know has been a champion of this issue and

1:21:59 > 1:22:02managed to work with the government to change the law on this, and the

1:22:02 > 1:22:06Paradise Papers show that these tax arrangements only come to light when

1:22:06 > 1:22:11the information is in the public domain. We need to see fast change

1:22:11 > 1:22:16on this, the establishment of offshore trusts which then buy homes

1:22:16 > 1:22:18and wine and cards for the beneficiary without tax being paid,

1:22:18 > 1:22:24or money being paid into offshore trusts which makes loans to

1:22:24 > 1:22:28individuals which can't be repaid, and they may be legal, although I

1:22:28 > 1:22:33doubt they are in some cases. With the Panama papers, they were

1:22:33 > 1:22:36released in April 2016, and according to HMRC, who appeared

1:22:36 > 1:22:44before our committee last week, there are 66 criminal or civil

1:22:44 > 1:22:46investigations underway, four people have been arrested and a further six

1:22:46 > 1:22:55have been interviewed under caution. The HMRC only expects an additional

1:22:55 > 1:23:00revenue of £6 million, and that is small fry, and it demonstrates the

1:23:00 > 1:23:03lengths that people will go to to hide their money, and the importance

1:23:03 > 1:23:11of making sure that HMRC have the resources necessary to pursue this.

1:23:12 > 1:23:18So what we need is public country by country reporting enacted, and that

1:23:18 > 1:23:21needs to be done internationally, but if international players will

1:23:21 > 1:23:26not lead the way, then let the UK Government take us forward on this,

1:23:26 > 1:23:31be bold, be brave, and make sure we are setting the tone and standard

1:23:31 > 1:23:36for the world. We have urged HMRC to consider a wealth tax for wealthy

1:23:36 > 1:23:39individuals as they have in Japan and Australia to make it easier to

1:23:39 > 1:23:44track down where people hold their wealth and pay their tax, and we

1:23:44 > 1:23:47need continued Parliamentary and public pressure so that this is

1:23:47 > 1:23:52voluntarily move towards more openness. Already this has been

1:23:52 > 1:23:57taken up by 30 companies and we hope to see it go further. I would like

1:23:57 > 1:24:01HMRC to have more prosecutions to set an example to those who seek to

1:24:01 > 1:24:05avoid tax and make sure people questioned these highly paid tax

1:24:05 > 1:24:08advisers that they recruit, and then they say, I didn't know what was

1:24:08 > 1:24:13going on, I paid someone else. People need to take responsibility

1:24:13 > 1:24:15for their actions, whether they are corporations all wealthy

1:24:15 > 1:24:23individuals. As I say, resources from HMRC to tackle this. There is a

1:24:23 > 1:24:31very high return rate for every pound of taxpayers' money, and it is

1:24:31 > 1:24:35important that the Exchequer sees the benefit of that and ramps up the

1:24:35 > 1:24:37money available. We have an arbitrary target of a hundred

1:24:37 > 1:24:40prosecutions which has been set which seems an odd figure to pluck

1:24:40 > 1:24:47out of the hat. We are pressing HMRC to explain why that figure has come

1:24:47 > 1:24:53out of the blue. We need to make sure that the right number

1:24:53 > 1:24:58prosecutions take place, not just a target. Tax is paid for the common

1:24:58 > 1:25:02good, and my committee works hard to make sure that that tax money is

1:25:02 > 1:25:05spent efficiently, effectively and economically by the Government, but

1:25:05 > 1:25:09we do need to speed up on the measures to crack down on this

1:25:09 > 1:25:13aggressive tax avoidance and an tax evasion, and we need to move to a

1:25:13 > 1:25:17world where the impact of not paying their fair share of taxes is

1:25:17 > 1:25:23recognised as something that is plainly wrong.It is a pleasure to

1:25:23 > 1:25:30follow the honourable lady, and I join in the thanks to the Member for

1:25:30 > 1:25:34barking for ensuring this important debate. I agree with her

1:25:34 > 1:25:39conclusions, but I come a slightly different way to get there. I would

1:25:39 > 1:25:44like to start by saying identity this fair to say that over the last

1:25:44 > 1:25:4715 years, HMRC and the previously the Government and the Conservative

1:25:47 > 1:25:50one have not tried to tackle aggressive avoidance. I think the

1:25:50 > 1:25:57amount of measures that have been introduced, ranging from disclosure

1:25:57 > 1:26:01rules of artificial schemes to the more recent ones, if you cant up how

1:26:01 > 1:26:05many targeted anti-avoidance rules have been added, we have been trying

1:26:05 > 1:26:09everything we can to tackle the most outrageous behaviour, and many of

1:26:09 > 1:26:13the schemes that used to be possible in the widespread 15 years ago at

1:26:13 > 1:26:19you now just can't do at all.I thank the honourable member

1:26:19 > 1:26:23forgiving way. Would he agree with me that there is a cultural issue on

1:26:23 > 1:26:26the whole machinery which enables and facilitates these sorts of

1:26:26 > 1:26:30arrangements which the 99% of us have nothing to do, but we do have

1:26:30 > 1:26:35to be aggressive in tackling that 1%.Exactly, the point I was trying

1:26:35 > 1:26:40to make is that the I don't think the size of the tax gap is down to a

1:26:40 > 1:26:45lack of effort, the problem is that the invaders are one step ahead and

1:26:45 > 1:26:50move to different things, and that's why I think these Panama Papers show

1:26:50 > 1:26:55is that people are going offshore, using artificial ways to be offshore

1:26:55 > 1:26:58rather than using artificial domestic planning to get around the

1:26:58 > 1:27:09rules, and that is why...Isn't the problem the tactics of applying

1:27:09 > 1:27:18these complicated rules and regulations and the expensive way

1:27:18 > 1:27:22that accountants can devise a wearer. Shouldn't we be looking at a

1:27:22 > 1:27:29general principle?I agree with that, the Government did introduce

1:27:29 > 1:27:35the General Anti-Abuse Rule. I think there is scope for extending that,

1:27:35 > 1:27:40and also for trying to improve behaviour. That is why it is right

1:27:40 > 1:27:44that we should now expect large businesses to publish their tax

1:27:44 > 1:27:47revenue, and we can now say, we don't condone with this, we don't

1:27:47 > 1:27:57engage in it, and that is the way we change the behaviour and culture. We

1:27:57 > 1:28:00have seen some advisers changing their code of conduct saying that

1:28:00 > 1:28:03artificially aggressive policies won't be used, but there is clearly

1:28:03 > 1:28:07a long way to go. But before I talk about the various measures we could

1:28:07 > 1:28:13take, let's be clear that we can't disclose the whole of the tax gap by

1:28:13 > 1:28:20tackling aggressive avoidance by the rix and the large multinationals. We

1:28:20 > 1:28:24should get that down as low as we can, but it is a simple fact that

1:28:24 > 1:28:29the largest group or are not paying tax are small and medium-size

1:28:29 > 1:28:36businesses. Of the tax gap of £38 billion, 15 billion is small and

1:28:36 > 1:28:42medium-sized businesses. It is not aggressive avoidance that causes the

1:28:42 > 1:28:47biggest tax gap, it is not taking reasonable care. So I don't think

1:28:47 > 1:28:51Wigan look at the whole tax gap and say that that is being lost to us by

1:28:51 > 1:28:57awful behaviour by large corporate. There is much more to do sadly on

1:28:57 > 1:29:01individuals in the UK who are working and not declaring VAT or

1:29:01 > 1:29:05working in the hidden economy, so it is not fair to say this isn't about

1:29:05 > 1:29:08ordinary people, sadly quite a lot of it is about people who should not

1:29:08 > 1:29:12be doing that and we need to find ways to tackle those as well. But

1:29:12 > 1:29:17what we have exposed again by these papers is that there is a crisis of

1:29:17 > 1:29:21confidence that our tax and financial system is fair and as

1:29:21 > 1:29:25clean as we can get it to be. There are some further measures the

1:29:25 > 1:29:30Government can take to improve the reputation of our economy and

1:29:30 > 1:29:33financial system and to increase the confidence that our constituents

1:29:33 > 1:29:41have in our tax regime. The good news is most of these issues are

1:29:41 > 1:29:48government policy already, so I agree, let's get the country back

1:29:48 > 1:29:59into the public domain, and compare companies' turnover. It is not

1:29:59 > 1:30:04greatly enhanced disclosure. If you look at large plcs' accounts, they

1:30:04 > 1:30:09are required to disclose segmental information, tax reconciliation down

1:30:09 > 1:30:15to what tax they are being paid. For that information to be done in a

1:30:15 > 1:30:18meaningful, useful way, it needs to be understandable so that we can

1:30:18 > 1:30:22work out how they are not paying the tax they ought to be paying. Let's

1:30:22 > 1:30:25have a date when we will start requiring that information to be in

1:30:25 > 1:30:30the public domain. It doesn't have to be tomorrow, let's have a date in

1:30:30 > 1:30:372019 something so that we can actually see it. And on linked

1:30:37 > 1:30:40measures, the other issue of transparency we do need in the UK is

1:30:40 > 1:30:44that we can nowhere very rich people, large companies, are buying

1:30:44 > 1:30:49very expensive property in the UK. We need to know who they are and how

1:30:49 > 1:30:52they have raised the money to buy the property, it can't be right that

1:30:52 > 1:30:57somebody can buy property here for 50 million, not live in it, and we

1:30:57 > 1:31:00have no idea where they got the money to do that. So let's go ahead

1:31:00 > 1:31:05with having a transparent register of overseas owners of expensive

1:31:05 > 1:31:15property in the UK, and that will show that people can't put their

1:31:15 > 1:31:21money here and set property is a safe asset. The shocking miss of the

1:31:21 > 1:31:29papers last week was that something like Apple, when being chased by the

1:31:29 > 1:31:33EU through Ireland, chose to try to move their affairs to Jersey to try

1:31:33 > 1:31:40to avoid the tax we all think they owe, and this shows again why we

1:31:40 > 1:31:43need transparency in our territories, who was operating there

1:31:43 > 1:31:50and where the money they have their actually came from. Those

1:31:50 > 1:31:52territories have a right to exist and choose their own tax rates, they

1:31:52 > 1:31:56have a right to be competitive, but what they don't have a right to do

1:31:56 > 1:31:59is hide money that he's been stolen from elsewhere in the world, and

1:31:59 > 1:32:03they don't have a right to move profits that are not being earned

1:32:03 > 1:32:06there and give them a beneficial rate. If we get the transparency

1:32:06 > 1:32:10there to show who is operating there, who really owns them and

1:32:10 > 1:32:14where the money came from, then they can show how clean they claim to be,

1:32:14 > 1:32:20or whether that is true, and that way they can compete on reputation.

1:32:20 > 1:32:26They don't need to compete on being closed and dirty. They are after

1:32:26 > 1:32:30real business. If they go ahead with that transparency, they will get a

1:32:30 > 1:32:34competitive advantage, and we can't as a country which has so many of

1:32:34 > 1:32:39those territories say that we will follow the herd. We are heard, let's

1:32:39 > 1:32:44set an example.Thank you, Mr Speaker, and it is a pleasure to

1:32:44 > 1:32:48follow the honourable gentleman from Amber Valley and congratulate him on

1:32:48 > 1:32:52securing a Westminster Hall debate on the subject of country by country

1:32:52 > 1:32:56reporting, and I hope members on all sides of the House will support that

1:32:56 > 1:33:00debate. It is just over a year ago, in September 2016, that cross-party

1:33:00 > 1:33:07support successfully secured the only non-government amendment to the

1:33:07 > 1:33:12Finance Bill. And it gave the power, as the honourable member for Amber

1:33:12 > 1:33:15Valley are applied, to require multinationals to publish tax

1:33:15 > 1:33:18information in all countries where they operate, known as public

1:33:18 > 1:33:22country by country reporting. And this is an important part, an

1:33:22 > 1:33:26important measure, not the only measure, about how we tackle some of

1:33:26 > 1:33:33the scandals that have emerged through the Panama Papers, and more

1:33:33 > 1:33:38recently, the Paradise papers, because openness on this issue will

1:33:38 > 1:33:47help us all. It is interesting that in the interactive centre and the

1:33:47 > 1:33:50finance sector a form of public country-by-country reporting is

1:33:50 > 1:33:55already in place, and there is certainly to my mind and increasing

1:33:55 > 1:33:58movement by investors who want to see more of this, and why do

1:33:58 > 1:34:01investors want to see more of this? Because they are getting more and

1:34:01 > 1:34:06more worried by these public disclosures about the reputational

1:34:06 > 1:34:12damage to them of putting money into good enterprises which at the end of

1:34:12 > 1:34:18the day compromise their investment and their sense of the contribution

1:34:18 > 1:34:24they want to make towards creating wealth, we all want to create wealth

1:34:24 > 1:34:26because that gives us the opportunity to provide towards

1:34:26 > 1:34:36public services. But it is clear from the Panama Papers and now the

1:34:36 > 1:34:40Paradise papers, companies are under pressure to try to cut their tax

1:34:40 > 1:34:48bills, despite the large profits they make, and that is why

1:34:48 > 1:34:51governments have a duty to make sure that as much as possible

1:34:51 > 1:34:56transparency is provided for. We know, and let's be honest, we have

1:34:56 > 1:35:02always known, that big companies and very wealthy individuals can easily

1:35:02 > 1:35:06move their revenues around the world out of reach of governments can find

1:35:06 > 1:35:10whatever loophole they cant to just become richer. Corporate tax

1:35:10 > 1:35:14avoidance is not only unfair, it damages economies and societies, and

1:35:14 > 1:35:18at home and overseas, it means less money for stretched public services.

1:35:18 > 1:35:22A colleague earlier said that there is an estimate that developing

1:35:22 > 1:35:28companies lose at least $100 billion every year. That would be enough to

1:35:28 > 1:35:31educate 12 million children currently missing schooling and

1:35:31 > 1:35:35health care that could save the lives of 6 million children. Paying

1:35:35 > 1:35:41tax responsibly isn't an issue of right and wrong. If those with

1:35:41 > 1:35:44accountants and lawyers seek to avoid this, preferring a world of

1:35:44 > 1:35:49hidden havens and shell companies, trust breaks down and in the end we

1:35:49 > 1:35:55all lose out. Last year the former Treasury Minister, now the Secretary

1:35:55 > 1:35:58of State for the Department of Work and Pensions said that while the

1:35:58 > 1:36:02Government was keen for there to be a multilateral deal when it came to

1:36:02 > 1:36:06public country-by-country reporting, if we have not made progress in a

1:36:06 > 1:36:10year, we would have to revisit this issue. Those were his words. In

1:36:10 > 1:36:14fact, in answer to a question to the promised on this very subject, she

1:36:14 > 1:36:20admitted little progress had been made. A year on, the EU proposal,

1:36:20 > 1:36:23which is flawed, has stalled, and the time I think has now come for

1:36:23 > 1:36:27the Government to have the courage of its convictions to introduce

1:36:27 > 1:36:32public reporting requirements and then seek to build a coalition of

1:36:32 > 1:36:38the willing. Transparency is the one sure way to rebuild trust. I hope

1:36:38 > 1:36:41the Minister will consider this. I hope he will meet with a cross-party

1:36:41 > 1:36:46delegation to discuss this further. I look forward to the honourable

1:36:46 > 1:36:48gentleman's debating Westminster Hall next week. But be assured, when

1:36:48 > 1:36:52it comes to the next Finance Bill, cross-party support in this House

1:36:52 > 1:36:56will be seeking to amend that Bill to set a deadline for when the power

1:36:56 > 1:36:59to bring in public country-by-country reporting will

1:36:59 > 1:37:08become a reality.I will speak briefly, but I wanted to go slightly

1:37:08 > 1:37:14early in the debate when I had the pleasure to intervene on the shadow

1:37:14 > 1:37:21spokesman, and he allowed me a second intervention, I think it is

1:37:21 > 1:37:29called a BOGOF, Mr Speaker.There is no obligation on the honourable

1:37:29 > 1:37:33gentleman to speak, he can if he wants to but I'm sure we would

1:37:33 > 1:37:35manage. LAUGHTER

1:37:35 > 1:37:40The problem I was tried to get out was the substance in the difference

1:37:40 > 1:37:46in the tax gap. The tax gap is now 6%, it was 8% under Labour, and the

1:37:46 > 1:37:50difference is £11.8 billion, and I think that is incredibly important,

1:37:50 > 1:37:54because when you have something like the Paradise papers, and the

1:37:54 > 1:37:56newspapers dominated by all the coverage, it is the impression that

1:37:56 > 1:38:00that gives to the public out there, that is one where multinational

1:38:00 > 1:38:05companies are running the rule over us, getting away without paying

1:38:05 > 1:38:09their fair share of tax, and in fact we are failing to deal with that,

1:38:09 > 1:38:13whereas in fact all the statistics show significant improvement under

1:38:13 > 1:38:17this government in closing the tax gap, bringing forward measures to

1:38:17 > 1:38:21deal with avoidance and evasion that should be added. On one of the

1:38:21 > 1:38:24aborted areas was mentioned by my honourable member for Amber Valley,

1:38:24 > 1:38:33and that is property. My experience of the great grievances felt by

1:38:33 > 1:38:36first-time buyers is about the sheer quantity of money that has come

1:38:36 > 1:38:40particularly into the London property market, driving up prices

1:38:40 > 1:38:45and making property less accessible to local people who want to get onto

1:38:45 > 1:38:49the ladder.

1:38:49 > 1:38:54Two important measures to deal with that, but until April 2015, if you

1:38:54 > 1:38:58were a foreign national, you did not pay capital gains tax when you sold

1:38:58 > 1:39:03a property in the UK, but they closed that loophole in April 2015,

1:39:03 > 1:39:09and in 2016 we changed... I'm happy to give way.Isn't one of the

1:39:09 > 1:39:15greatest problems regarding the housing crisis, inequality in the

1:39:15 > 1:39:27UK, the hundred richest individuals have this own wealth as 19 million.

1:39:27 > 1:39:30Well, without going global on the answer, I'm talking about the

1:39:30 > 1:39:36position in the UK property market, it is true that a sense of

1:39:36 > 1:39:39unfairness pertains because prices have risen sharply and beyond the

1:39:39 > 1:39:46means of those on modest incomes and also relatively high incomes, young

1:39:46 > 1:39:51professionals can be on £100,000 and still cannot get on the ladder. That

1:39:51 > 1:39:56isn't just about London, my constituency in Suffolk, the

1:39:56 > 1:40:00counties around London, the ripple of high prices in expensive areas

1:40:00 > 1:40:07comes many miles out, many people move to buy constituency because of

1:40:07 > 1:40:12the sheer cost in London. -- my constituency.He is talking about

1:40:12 > 1:40:15property prices and he mentioned the government's decision to close the

1:40:15 > 1:40:19loophole whereby it foreign owners of residential properties were

1:40:19 > 1:40:27avoiding capital gains tax. Does he regret not joining with us to close

1:40:27 > 1:40:28the loophole where commercial properties were not treated so

1:40:28 > 1:40:34because that is having the same impact on the cupboard -- property

1:40:34 > 1:40:40market?The commercial side has been weaker, since the Brexit vote, it

1:40:40 > 1:40:45must be said. The main issue in terms of fairness from taxpayers

1:40:45 > 1:40:50perspective is residential property and by making property in relation

1:40:50 > 1:40:54to change it is not just about tax avoidance, some have been the

1:40:54 > 1:41:02highest stand duty we now levy. -- stamp duty. This has had an impact

1:41:02 > 1:41:09to support first-time buyers.Does he agree with the Institute for

1:41:09 > 1:41:15Fiscal Studies that it is likely to raise £0?I wasn't aware of that.

1:41:15 > 1:41:22The broad point and my friend made this point, we should be looking to

1:41:22 > 1:41:27have cross-party agreement because we could agree on the simple point

1:41:27 > 1:41:30that taxpayers want to see a system where all companies especially the

1:41:30 > 1:41:35biggest are paying their fair share of tax, and what simply concerns me

1:41:35 > 1:41:42about stories like the Paradise Papers, there is hyperbole

1:41:42 > 1:41:45associated with it, and it gives the impression that the system is not

1:41:45 > 1:41:50bringing in as much tax as it should when that is not the case. Quite

1:41:50 > 1:41:53simply I would like to see a system where we reward success, we should

1:41:53 > 1:41:59never discourage enterprise but we need businesses to generate the

1:41:59 > 1:42:01wealth to fund public services, but I think this government is getting

1:42:01 > 1:42:08the balance right. We should not get the impression from this debate that

1:42:08 > 1:42:13the government is failing to get a grip on this issue.Vince Cable.Can

1:42:13 > 1:42:19I add my congratulations to the member for introducing this debate

1:42:19 > 1:42:24and I agree with much of what she has said. It is useful to go over

1:42:24 > 1:42:28the chronology with which tax avoidance measures have evolved, and

1:42:28 > 1:42:34if we go back to 2010, the main source of industrial scale tax

1:42:34 > 1:42:37avoidance wasn't in the British Virgin Islands or became an island,

1:42:37 > 1:42:42it was a few miles down the road in the City of London -- or the Cayman

1:42:42 > 1:42:49Islands. At the big banks, tax avoidance was taking place, there

1:42:49 > 1:42:52was a man called Jenkins who was paid £40 million in one year at

1:42:52 > 1:42:56Barclays for his contribution to avoiding tax that should have gone

1:42:56 > 1:43:00to the Treasury. The agreement that the government then had with the

1:43:00 > 1:43:05banks was so loose that they perpetuated it indefinitely until

1:43:05 > 1:43:10there was a change of government and we pressed the charts are very hard

1:43:10 > 1:43:17and this was made illegal -- pressed the Chancellor. As far as unaware

1:43:17 > 1:43:19that activity has largely stopped, the next big step was the

1:43:19 > 1:43:26introduction of the general avoidance principle, important in

1:43:26 > 1:43:31clarifying this murky area, edit is now clear that if individuals and

1:43:31 > 1:43:36their advisers engage in activity which is specifically designed to

1:43:36 > 1:43:40circumvent the intentions of Parliament, they can be pursued and

1:43:40 > 1:43:45many have constituents at the moment who are being construed by HMRC

1:43:45 > 1:43:50quite rightly and indeed in substantial arrears. I would have

1:43:50 > 1:43:55won the good things that comes out of the Paradise Papers is that HMRC

1:43:55 > 1:43:58have a substantial list of names which they can now investigate as to

1:43:58 > 1:44:05whether they have subscribed to the law as it is now redefined, and as I

1:44:05 > 1:44:09understand it after the Panama Papers they pursued 65 individuals

1:44:09 > 1:44:18for £100 million a year, that is a positive step. The third step in the

1:44:18 > 1:44:23evolution was the introduction of the open register of beneficial

1:44:23 > 1:44:25ownership, various people have referred to it, and I know a little

1:44:25 > 1:44:28bit about it since I was the Secretary of State who brought it

1:44:28 > 1:44:34here and took it through Parliament together with the abolition of

1:44:34 > 1:44:39bearer bonds, and it is fair to say David Cameron was very supportive of

1:44:39 > 1:44:44that at the time, but he was less impressive when it came to standing

1:44:44 > 1:44:46up to lobbying from the Crown dependencies and the overseas

1:44:46 > 1:44:55territories.I'm grateful for you giving way for the widget not agree

1:44:55 > 1:44:59with me that it seems that after the flourish of the anti-corruption

1:44:59 > 1:45:05Summit in May 2016, how long ago it feels, much was promised and none of

1:45:05 > 1:45:08this seems to have been delivered, and the anti-corruption champion

1:45:08 > 1:45:13Eric Pickles sedan and it seems the government has forgotten that the

1:45:13 > 1:45:20post exists at all -- stood down. The strategy we were promised for

1:45:20 > 1:45:262016, we are now being told 2018.I was in a political Axar that time

1:45:26 > 1:45:31and I can't testify one way or the other, but we did introduce strong

1:45:31 > 1:45:35anti-corruption measures when I was in government -- political exiles.

1:45:35 > 1:45:40The argument that the overseas territories and Crown dependencies

1:45:40 > 1:45:45advanced was that they had to keep this secret because of probity

1:45:45 > 1:45:49concerns but precisely those privacy concerns applied to the UK, and

1:45:49 > 1:45:53where there was a genuine concern about privacy, as for example people

1:45:53 > 1:45:58who would be worried about being pursued, say, animal rights

1:45:58 > 1:46:01terrorists were involved, their privacy was protected, it was a very

1:46:01 > 1:46:07transparent and weak defence. Many of the overseas territories do is

1:46:07 > 1:46:09perfectly reasonable, there is a reason why people should be paying

1:46:09 > 1:46:16double taxation -- there is no reason. But serious anti-avoidance

1:46:16 > 1:46:20activities should be pursued and I hope the government will be more

1:46:20 > 1:46:23aggressive in pursuing this issue of the open register, and the way they

1:46:23 > 1:46:28can do that is to give a deadline to the overseas territories for the

1:46:28 > 1:46:32introduction of an open register, if they do not comply, there a series

1:46:32 > 1:46:40of sanctions that could be introduced, initially stopping cars

1:46:40 > 1:46:49-- stopping companies from bidding for public contracts. And if they

1:46:49 > 1:46:55avoid taxation in the way that seriously damages the UK, that's the

1:46:55 > 1:46:58kind of measure that should be introduced. Much of the discussion

1:46:58 > 1:47:06we have had, and I know the member said this in her interaction, it is

1:47:06 > 1:47:08not about individuals, this is about companies, because the scale of

1:47:08 > 1:47:14avoidance is on a much greater level and we are all familiar with the way

1:47:14 > 1:47:20in which some of the big internet platforms avoid... I have got

1:47:20 > 1:47:30limited time for them ... Avoid large sums of taxation by the way

1:47:30 > 1:47:35they can for intellectual property liabilities, and the government

1:47:35 > 1:47:42response has been very weak. It is significant, in the light of the

1:47:42 > 1:47:45Brexit debate, the one institution that is going after those companies

1:47:45 > 1:47:51is the European Commission. Their actions in the competition

1:47:51 > 1:47:58commission, is both highly competent and Heidi -- highly effective, we

1:47:58 > 1:48:04worry that all of that energy will disappear if we have Brexit. I have

1:48:04 > 1:48:07a question about what the government could do to deal with corporate tax

1:48:07 > 1:48:11avoidance, a simple regulation that requires large companies registered

1:48:11 > 1:48:18here to declare first of all their total UK revenues and then their

1:48:18 > 1:48:22total UK expenses, it will then be immediately apparent whether there

1:48:22 > 1:48:30is a tax liability that is not being met. And a simple levy in tax

1:48:30 > 1:48:35payment will bring some of those companies to book and in a

1:48:35 > 1:48:41reasonable way. And I think the bees and why there is so much indignation

1:48:41 > 1:48:46about this question -- the reason why. It is not just because taxes

1:48:46 > 1:48:51being avoided, but because many of my constituents and all of our

1:48:51 > 1:48:53constituents are being aggressively pursued for tax avoidance at a much

1:48:53 > 1:49:00petty level, and there's a big crackdown taking place what are

1:49:00 > 1:49:04called IR 35 companies are contractors for the health service,

1:49:04 > 1:49:07often software specialist, and there is a certain amount of tax avoidance

1:49:07 > 1:49:12of national insurance, but they are being pursued in a highly aggressive

1:49:12 > 1:49:17way that the government does not use in pursuing much bigger fish. We are

1:49:17 > 1:49:22being told that in the budget the VAT tax threshold could be

1:49:22 > 1:49:27considerably lower it in order to stop tax avoidance, but effectively

1:49:27 > 1:49:31drawing very large numbers of small companies into the tax net and it is

1:49:31 > 1:49:35the pettiness of these measures contrasted with large scale

1:49:35 > 1:49:42avoidance which attracts so much anger amongst the public.I'm afraid

1:49:42 > 1:49:48there's a three-minute limit with immediate effect. Craig McKinley.

1:49:48 > 1:49:52This has an international dimension to it, we have done more than any

1:49:52 > 1:49:58government before on this. Creating CGT for foreign ownership sales and

1:49:58 > 1:50:04ending non-Dom status, and we have opened up share beneficial ownership

1:50:04 > 1:50:10information through the profit shifting initiative, and we have

1:50:10 > 1:50:13introduced the diverted profits tax which when there is an insufficient

1:50:13 > 1:50:19economic substance to a transaction especially in intellectual property

1:50:19 > 1:50:24that is held abroad, and undue payments are paid to those foreign

1:50:24 > 1:50:27jurisdictions, that can be stopped and taxed accordingly, we have

1:50:27 > 1:50:31stopped the shifting of debt interest to the UK to stop

1:50:31 > 1:50:37artificial deductions in the UK. There's one tax I'm rather proud of,

1:50:37 > 1:50:43for the lower paid in this country. -- tax haven. We have created a low

1:50:43 > 1:50:46tax environment for those who are lower paid and when we look at what

1:50:46 > 1:50:50Labour did between 1997 and 2010, rather paltry increase in the

1:50:50 > 1:50:59personal allowance from just 4045 two 6475 over 13 years, we have now

1:50:59 > 1:51:04increased that in our seven years in government to £11,500 and that's a

1:51:04 > 1:51:09serious tax cut for every low paid person. We are doing something very

1:51:09 > 1:51:14similar with companies as well, and that is the key to this, I would

1:51:14 > 1:51:17like to encourage more companies back to the UK so they can pay their

1:51:17 > 1:51:24fair share of tax, and that is being shown to be done with £35 billion,

1:51:24 > 1:51:29the corporation tax taken in 2010, now up to £53 billion, and the

1:51:29 > 1:51:35wealthy in the UK are playing the top 1%, 28% of all income tax higher

1:51:35 > 1:51:41than at any other time. But we mustn't lose a lack of understanding

1:51:41 > 1:51:47of what foreign jurisdictions and so-called tax havens are there for,

1:51:47 > 1:51:52they are essential in the mix of international trade. It is not

1:51:52 > 1:51:56uncommon for a French investing company to choose the Cayman Islands

1:51:56 > 1:52:00or British Virgin Islands to be the place of contract for a deal to

1:52:00 > 1:52:04invest in say the Democratic Republic of Congo, and although I

1:52:04 > 1:52:09have great respect for the legal system of the Democratic Republic of

1:52:09 > 1:52:14Congo, the legal system and common law of the UK is what creates legal

1:52:14 > 1:52:19certainty, and it is not all about saving tax, avoiding tax, it is try

1:52:19 > 1:52:27to transaction -- transact in the right place, so let's continue the

1:52:27 > 1:52:30promotion of data-sharing with Al international partners, let's make

1:52:30 > 1:52:37sure that global profits are taxed in the right places, and let us use

1:52:37 > 1:52:43our influence on overseas territories and I say we are doing

1:52:43 > 1:52:46this more than the previous party of government for 13 years.Stella

1:52:46 > 1:52:48Crecy.

1:52:48 > 1:52:56Thank you, Mr Speaker. I congratulate the member of Barking

1:52:56 > 1:53:00for bringing this important debate and all the journalists involved in

1:53:00 > 1:53:04this investigation. I hope in my short contribution I might elicit

1:53:04 > 1:53:06from the Minister a modicum of regret for some of his recent

1:53:06 > 1:53:10actions because what we need to talk about today's tax avoidance, and I

1:53:10 > 1:53:14want to take on the Challenge put forward by the Member for Morkel.

1:53:14 > 1:53:19What precisely is the issue with these offshore companies, and more

1:53:19 > 1:53:23specifically why would anybody hold UK property at UK entities overseas?

1:53:23 > 1:53:33Because when you

1:53:35 > 1:53:38look at that, I believe these papers produced two very clear issues for

1:53:38 > 1:53:40us, first and foremost the case for transparency, and PFI companies and

1:53:40 > 1:53:42why that is a problem, and second the case for addressing the

1:53:42 > 1:53:45loopholes that this has brought forward for us. I have only got two

1:53:45 > 1:53:48minutes left. There are nine offshore infrastructure companies

1:53:48 > 1:53:56who own between 50 and 100% of the equity in 335 equity and PFI

1:53:56 > 1:53:59project, 12 companies have occurred in 74% of all the current project.

1:53:59 > 1:54:05We do not know at this point in time what tax is being held overseas as a

1:54:05 > 1:54:09result of it, tax that was part of the PFI value for money assessment.

1:54:09 > 1:54:14These papers reveal quite how that happens. Secondly, an avoidance and

1:54:14 > 1:54:19capital gains tax, these papers reveal that Blackstone which avoided

1:54:19 > 1:54:25stamp duty and capital gains tax to a value of around £66 billion. These

1:54:25 > 1:54:29are all choices, because at the end of the day we know that the lawyers

1:54:29 > 1:54:32involved like water moving towards the sea, they will follow the

1:54:32 > 1:54:39easiest route. The problem here is politicians, not lawyers.Does my

1:54:39 > 1:54:43honourable friend support country-by-country reporting?

1:54:43 > 1:54:46Absolutely, and I concur with all those who brought that. But I also

1:54:46 > 1:54:57believe we can take action in this House, a new cause -- specifically,

1:54:57 > 1:55:01a new clause for the Finance Bill. I will take no lectures about how

1:55:01 > 1:55:04wonderfully this government is doing an tax avoidance when just two weeks

1:55:04 > 1:55:08ago they voted down a measure that would have brought in £6 billion a

1:55:08 > 1:55:15year to Alex Cejka and given British business is a level playing field.

1:55:15 > 1:55:24-- to the Exchequer. We are not getting this tax money because these

1:55:24 > 1:55:26companies are registered overseas. And neither will I take lectures

1:55:26 > 1:55:30from the Minister about loans given that he passed in this Finance Bill

1:55:30 > 1:55:34a measure to reduce the share relief that PFI companies can claim on

1:55:34 > 1:55:38their loans, so the very companies that own millions of pounds worth of

1:55:38 > 1:55:42our public sector that are able to trade off the interest that they pay

1:55:42 > 1:55:45on those loans in overseas companies, he has just passed an

1:55:45 > 1:55:51amendment to make sure they don't have to pay any tax on that. And

1:55:51 > 1:55:53they can hold these companies overseas so that we don't even see

1:55:53 > 1:55:58what happens. So I want to propose some simple ways. We need a public

1:55:58 > 1:56:04register. But we also need a moratorium on all public investment

1:56:04 > 1:56:07in these companies until we know precisely what tax we are missing,

1:56:07 > 1:56:11until we can be confident that these offshore companies are not milking

1:56:11 > 1:56:16the British taxpayer twice in not paying their taxes and getting us to

1:56:16 > 1:56:20pay for them through PFI investment. We must also close the loophole of

1:56:20 > 1:56:24capital gains tax on commercial properties as a matter of urgency.

1:56:24 > 1:56:27Everybody who is facing cuts in their public services cannot allow

1:56:27 > 1:56:31that to continue for a second longer. And we need to rethink their

1:56:31 > 1:56:34decision to give the PFI companies tax relief that this Government has

1:56:34 > 1:56:38just given them. I hope the Minister regret his actions, because frankly

1:56:38 > 1:56:49this is not about the Paradise Papers, it is about parasites

1:56:49 > 1:56:52bleeding the system.I am grateful to you for allowing this debate and

1:56:52 > 1:56:56to all members who have participated, particularly those who

1:56:56 > 1:57:00looked beyond the narrow political party interest and more at the

1:57:00 > 1:57:04public interest. We can't allow the serious issues raised by the

1:57:04 > 1:57:09Paradise Papers today to simply become the fish and chips wrappers

1:57:09 > 1:57:14for people tomorrow. It is our responsibility as lawmakers to do

1:57:14 > 1:57:17all that we can in the UK and with our international partners to stamp

1:57:17 > 1:57:23out an injustice that is both unfair and offensive. The Government can

1:57:23 > 1:57:30take action that will make a difference, and it needs strong

1:57:30 > 1:57:34political will to make that happen. I urge the Government in the budget

1:57:34 > 1:57:41next week to act. THE SPEAKER:The question is as on

1:57:41 > 1:57:48the order paper, as many as agreeing say aye, to the contrary, no. The

1:57:48 > 1:57:54ayes have it, the ayes have it.Have you heard, Mr Speaker, from the

1:57:54 > 1:58:01Foreign Office on an intention to speak in this House on the ongoing

1:58:01 > 1:58:06coup in Zimbabwe?The short answer is that I have received no

1:58:06 > 1:58:09indication from any Minister from the Foreign Office or any other

1:58:09 > 1:58:12department of an intention to make a statement on that matter, however

1:58:12 > 1:58:17what the honourable gentleman has said will have been of great

1:58:17 > 1:58:22interest to members in all parts of the House, and importantly, his

1:58:22 > 1:58:26remarks will have been heard on the Treasury bench. Knowing the

1:58:26 > 1:58:30honourable gentleman as I do, his interest in this subject and his

1:58:30 > 1:58:33experience, I've got a feeling we are going to hear more about this

1:58:33 > 1:58:39matter before very long. Meanwhile, he has put his point very firmly on

1:58:39 > 1:58:46the record. If there are no further points of order, we proceed to the

1:58:46 > 1:58:49main business, the clerk will now proceed to read the orders of the

1:58:49 > 1:58:58day.European Union withdrawal bill committee.Order.

1:59:22 > 1:59:31Order.European Union withdrawal Bill. May I first of all draw the

1:59:31 > 1:59:36attention of the House to a mistake on page one of the notice paper. The

1:59:36 > 1:59:42name of John Grogan should not have appeared as a supporter of new

1:59:42 > 1:59:48clause 40 nine. We will begin with new clause 49, with which it will be

1:59:48 > 1:59:56convenient to take amendment 79, and clause 1 together with other

1:59:56 > 1:59:59amendments which will come on later date in committee as listed on the

1:59:59 > 2:00:07selection paper. I now call Mr Frank Field.I rise to move the amendments

2:00:07 > 2:00:14in my name and all those other names that still remain on the order paper

2:00:14 > 2:00:18from what we have actually just heard, and although of course I'm

2:00:18 > 2:00:27limited to moving clause 49, this clause 49 is linked to clause 50 and

2:00:27 > 2:00:3151 and 52, and the reasons for that I might develop in a moment if I

2:00:31 > 2:00:35may. But I wish to begin by declaring my sentiments in moving

2:00:35 > 2:00:43this clause and the clauses which are publicly attached to it. The

2:00:43 > 2:00:51first is that I am a reluctant Brexiteer. I am too old to feel that

2:00:51 > 2:00:56I was born to bring us out of Europe, but I've not had one of this

2:00:56 > 2:00:59evangelical revivals that somehow life began again once we entered

2:00:59 > 2:01:05into the Common Market, and my aim and purpose and being and everything

2:01:05 > 2:01:11I breathe was to get us sight of that organisation. That is not so.

2:01:11 > 2:01:16In my own constituency and the small amount of work I did nationally, I

2:01:16 > 2:01:21stressed it was on a balance that we actually had to make a decision

2:01:21 > 2:01:25about Europe, and that we didn't need more facts about Europe, we

2:01:25 > 2:01:32needed to draw on our very nature is, all that we had been taught, in

2:01:32 > 2:01:37our culture, in our very being, and where we feel we stand in this

2:01:37 > 2:01:42country to make that decision on whether we wish to leave or not. And

2:01:42 > 2:01:52I

2:01:52 > 2:01:58alsoin this amendment, we are debating an exit date of March 2019,

2:01:58 > 2:02:01and yet grouped with it there are Government amendments to be debated

2:02:01 > 2:02:08at a later date which put the exit date at 11pm on March 29 2019. There

2:02:08 > 2:02:13is a difference of one hour, as does far as I'm aware, the clocks only go

2:02:13 > 2:02:18forward on Sunday the 31st of March. So could you give some guidance to

2:02:18 > 2:02:22the movers of these amendments so that the arch Brexiteers on both

2:02:22 > 2:02:27sides get their clocks and house in order?Lets not worry about time too

2:02:27 > 2:02:32much, because we are using it up at the moment, but it is a matter for

2:02:32 > 2:02:36the debate to decide, not for me to decide, and when we get there, we

2:02:36 > 2:02:41will know better, so let's not take more time.It is a good

2:02:41 > 2:02:47intervention, because my amendment decides on British time when to

2:02:47 > 2:02:52lead, and their amendment is at the beckoning of Europeans, so we have a

2:02:52 > 2:02:55clear choice, and I would willingly take those interruptions that are

2:02:55 > 2:03:02trying to trip me up in making this short contribution. So the first

2:03:02 > 2:03:06thing is, I fought as much as I could the referendum campaign being

2:03:06 > 2:03:13a reluctant Brexiteer. It was on balance that I thought our country's

2:03:13 > 2:03:16future and increasingly our future would thrive outside rather than

2:03:16 > 2:03:24inside. I boys wanted to make a deal, although I thought it

2:03:24 > 2:03:26immensely sensible in any negotiations that you have to make

2:03:26 > 2:03:31sure the other side knows that you may be banking and planning for no

2:03:31 > 2:03:38deal. And the third factor that I will touch again in a moment when we

2:03:38 > 2:03:45think what the House of Lords might do to a bill of this size, it has

2:03:45 > 2:03:51been very difficult for most of us to come to terms with what our role

2:03:51 > 2:03:58has been as MPs in a representative democracy, and how we come to terms,

2:03:58 > 2:04:03and digester fact that a referendum has taken place, and the British

2:04:03 > 2:04:10people have spoken. How do we we act in those circumstances which I

2:04:10 > 2:04:13believe are unique and in no way comparable with any other

2:04:13 > 2:04:20Parliamentary procedure that we consider in this House. As I said at

2:04:20 > 2:04:27the very beginning and before I was helpfully interrupted, this clause

2:04:27 > 2:04:32stands with three other new clauses. Together, they present the

2:04:32 > 2:04:38Government with a clean, small, slimline Brexit bill. Which by the

2:04:38 > 2:04:45time we get to the end of this process, this life raft, they will

2:04:45 > 2:04:48thank the Lord that it is actually in the Bill, and it is one that they

2:04:48 > 2:04:55will be able to get on. Today in the amendment, we decide on the date by

2:04:55 > 2:04:59British time, not European time, when we actually leave. That is our

2:04:59 > 2:05:05choice. It is about the freedom, a little freedom, the beginnings of

2:05:05 > 2:05:09freedom, but we hope will flow, with difficulties of course, by actually

2:05:09 > 2:05:16setting us on the course of leaving the European union. The second thing

2:05:16 > 2:05:24is a simple clause that ensures that all the laws and regulations come

2:05:24 > 2:05:30onto our statute point, at that point of time, British time, not

2:05:30 > 2:05:33European time. And can I just finished, and then I will willingly

2:05:33 > 2:05:40give way. The third clause is how Parliament reviews those laws. Once

2:05:40 > 2:05:46we wish to keep fully, those we wish to amend, those we wish to thereby

2:05:46 > 2:05:53add to, those we wish to kick out. But the clause says this House will

2:05:53 > 2:05:56decide how that process is done, and I'm sure before we have actually

2:05:56 > 2:06:01finished our debate on this bill, this committee stage, the Government

2:06:01 > 2:06:09will be agreeing with me on that. Because the Henry VIII staff is an

2:06:09 > 2:06:12absurd way of going about the business. Although as we get down to

2:06:12 > 2:06:18the mega task of reviewing, we may beg the Government for a touch of

2:06:18 > 2:06:22Henry VIII to get through the size of the task which will be before us.

2:06:22 > 2:06:30Last point is given that we have real difficulties of completing a

2:06:30 > 2:06:34negotiation, I've got views on that with this clause. I said I will give

2:06:34 > 2:06:38way to the honourable lady as soon as I have finished explaining this

2:06:38 > 2:06:43and the three clauses attached to it. We need a safe haven. Talking of

2:06:43 > 2:06:50a safe haven...I thank my right honourable friend forgiving way.

2:06:50 > 2:06:56Would he not concede however that an arbitrary date for Brexit could risk

2:06:56 > 2:07:01damaging the British economy is clear evidence emerges as it already

2:07:01 > 2:07:05is that harrying Brexit may indeed badly damage our manufacturing

2:07:05 > 2:07:12sector, our cultural agricultural sector and our financial services

2:07:12 > 2:07:18sector.I am supported by people largely whose constituents agree

2:07:18 > 2:07:24with me and not their views. And how they deal with that is not my

2:07:24 > 2:07:28problem. I agree it is a difficult problem, which doesn't mean to say

2:07:28 > 2:07:34that one should have any particular solution to it. But Labour voters,

2:07:34 > 2:07:39the larger the majority, generally speaking, the more clear they spoke

2:07:39 > 2:07:51about Brexit. Absolutely... SHOUTING

2:07:51 > 2:07:56I will be dealing with her pointed a moment. It comes down to, who do we

2:07:56 > 2:08:01think we are dealing with? Are we playing a game of cricket, or have

2:08:01 > 2:08:07we got people who are... I am just saying that. I'm saying that. Some

2:08:07 > 2:08:12people suggest, I am saying that we will be fighting for our lives, and

2:08:12 > 2:08:17why we want this clause, if I ever get on to fully explaining it, I

2:08:17 > 2:08:24will actually say so. Mal Brobbel friend wanted to intervene.

2:08:24 > 2:08:30I was confused by the idea that all Labour supporters are supporting his

2:08:30 > 2:08:37decision, but the majority didn't. Would he correct the record?I

2:08:37 > 2:08:42happily add to the record because it makes some people's circumstances

2:08:42 > 2:08:47more difficult, I said generally speaking the larger the Labour

2:08:47 > 2:08:53majority in a general election, the bigger the turnout. The last

2:08:53 > 2:08:57election and the one before that and the one before that... The more

2:08:57 > 2:09:15likely they were to vote leaving. Before I give way...Order, order.

2:09:15 > 2:09:21We don't need everybody stood up at the same time, I'm sure if the

2:09:21 > 2:09:26gentleman is going to give way he will say so, but please don't keep

2:09:26 > 2:09:38standing up at the same time.Before I give way, and before I...Mr

2:09:38 > 2:09:42Farrelly has already had a good start to the day, let's not continue

2:09:42 > 2:09:47in the same way.As I would say, in qualifying that general statement,

2:09:47 > 2:09:52the area I love to represent, not my own constituency but others, who

2:09:52 > 2:10:00actually voted to Remain, they were against the trend in the country of

2:10:00 > 2:10:08Labour support and the referendum. I will give way.I'm grateful to my

2:10:08 > 2:10:14colleague. He is making a case I don't agree with, but with his

2:10:14 > 2:10:21normal reasonable approach. I think he needs to focus on the fact...

2:10:21 > 2:10:24He's probably right, at the moment, most people haven't changed their

2:10:24 > 2:10:31mind and the reasons they voted to leave the main as far as they are

2:10:31 > 2:10:35concerned and resolve may think it will be resolved by leaving. The

2:10:35 > 2:10:42question I would ask, though, supposing it emerges within the next

2:10:42 > 2:10:45year that all of the reasons why they voted the way they did not

2:10:45 > 2:10:51going to be realised and on top of that, the economic consequences will

2:10:51 > 2:11:01be disastrous, what then?I only have four short sheets of paper.

2:11:01 > 2:11:09It's taken all this time. I do have an answer for that. Any

2:11:09 > 2:11:16politician... Indeed, it seems to me the Labour side that needs educating

2:11:16 > 2:11:25as I would say to wear Labour voters are. And if my very honourable

2:11:25 > 2:11:31friend can contain himself, I hope I have a... I will take account of

2:11:31 > 2:11:35that, but I would emphasise, is wisdom in saying we don't know where

2:11:35 > 2:11:40these negotiations will end up, they are fraught, especially if you have

2:11:40 > 2:11:45a group of people that don't really want you to succeed because they

2:11:45 > 2:11:48fear what would happen in their own countries if you actually did

2:11:48 > 2:11:52succeed, and that is part of the negotiations that we will actually

2:11:52 > 2:12:03have.I'm grateful to my right honourable friend, did you receive a

2:12:03 > 2:12:08pamphlet from the government during the referendum, paid for by the

2:12:08 > 2:12:16taxpayers, which on the backside, that the government would carry out

2:12:16 > 2:12:22the wishes of the people by the referendum? And doesn't he believe a

2:12:22 > 2:12:29fixed date actually delivers what the people voted for?I have to

2:12:29 > 2:12:34confess, in receiving the pamphlet but throwing it away in the bin

2:12:34 > 2:12:42immediately. I never believed the sort of campaign we fought with

2:12:42 > 2:12:48false truths on both sides enhanced the standing of us as a political

2:12:48 > 2:12:54class or addressed the very serious issues of which people had to sum up

2:12:54 > 2:13:00everything they knew about, their own identity and their community,

2:13:00 > 2:13:03the country's identity and the position they want to see in the

2:13:03 > 2:13:08world, but which we all know people take different views on. The idea

2:13:08 > 2:13:14that a government pamphlet was going to help, dear God. But I will give

2:13:14 > 2:13:25way to my honourable friend.He did qualify his earlier statement, but

2:13:25 > 2:13:29would he accept that at the last general election over 85% of

2:13:29 > 2:13:36Liverpool Riverside constituents voted for the Labour Party candidate

2:13:36 > 2:13:43and 73% of Liverpool Riverside voted to Remain, so those people have

2:13:43 > 2:13:53great wisdom, does he accept?If it did -- if I did, it would mean the

2:13:53 > 2:13:58voters of Birkenhead did not have wisdom, so I will not put my head in

2:13:58 > 2:14:05that direction, no, I have given way once. We have a serious debate. I

2:14:05 > 2:14:08will if I can make progress willingly ring people in if we go

2:14:08 > 2:14:15along. -- bring people. I wish to express disappointment with the

2:14:15 > 2:14:20government and how they are handling the strategy. I don't believe there

2:14:20 > 2:14:27is a sense of importance and drive or coherence that this issue merits.

2:14:27 > 2:14:34I've argued

2:14:34 > 2:14:36privately that anyone serious about comparing this historic event with

2:14:36 > 2:14:41fighting for survival in World War II would have followed the move that

2:14:41 > 2:14:47Churchill made once he took over from Chamberlain, he would have

2:14:47 > 2:14:56moved from the ramshackle way of existing institutions and he

2:14:56 > 2:15:08established a war cabinet, and I believe that... I think we need a

2:15:08 > 2:15:15Brexit Cabinet, small with an offer to the opposition to be on it, as in

2:15:15 > 2:15:18wartime, which Clement Attlee accepted, that we actually try to

2:15:18 > 2:15:30have a national interest... You may laugh. Well, I mean...You want a

2:15:30 > 2:15:38job.Clearly this is proving shocking to this side, but this will

2:15:38 > 2:15:44also be a test of whether we are intent of the best possible terms

2:15:44 > 2:15:47and whether we have a clear position or not and whether we are putting

2:15:47 > 2:15:56our country first. I will give way. I thank my friend and neighbour

2:15:56 > 2:16:01forgiving way. Can I ask him if he agrees that the reason why we ought

2:16:01 > 2:16:05to have such cross-party co-operation is because this issue

2:16:05 > 2:16:09is not a joke, this is about the future of our country, and that is

2:16:09 > 2:16:13why we should listen to everyone in this Hazard, and not just the narrow

2:16:13 > 2:16:21interests of the Tory party -- in this House.My honourable friend,

2:16:21 > 2:16:30she ended her sentence rather early, that we should try and be able to

2:16:30 > 2:16:39put aside differences and concentrate on the national issue

2:16:39 > 2:16:45for now. I'm not going to give way until much later now, much much

2:16:45 > 2:16:53later. I did give way to you. Try another point of order and see

2:16:53 > 2:17:03whether it works. The first is a real disappointment, as we have

2:17:03 > 2:17:12seized the aerial bombardment over this Bill -- ceased. And we are now

2:17:12 > 2:17:18down to hand-to-hand fighting over the nature of our leaving, but the

2:17:18 > 2:17:24sentiments of my honourable friend, my neighbour, about us trying to

2:17:24 > 2:17:30steer this debate in the national interest is crucially important. No,

2:17:30 > 2:17:35I'm not giving way. I want other people to get into the debate. The

2:17:35 > 2:17:42second reason why I feel disappointment with the government's

2:17:42 > 2:17:45stance is that I feel they misread the other side with whom we are