Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have made any assessment of the impact of regulation on the ease with which companies can open bank accounts; and whether there is a detrimental impact on investment.
Answered by Baroness Penn - Minister on Leave (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State)
Access to banking facilities is important for the economy. The provision of banking services is a commercial decision for firms based on a variety of factors, including the local law, regulation of individual countries, an assessment of profitability, or other commercial drivers.
The Government regularly engages with industry to understand the impacts of regulation on businesses’ ability to access banking services. That is why, for example, in last year’s review of the Money Laundering Regulations, the Government committed to consult on options aiming to address the difficulties for businesses in accessing Pooled Client Accounts, including broadening the range of low-risk circumstances in which these accounts may be provided without checks being required on the clients whose funds are held in the account. As committed to in the second Economic Crime Plan, this consultation on changes to the Money Laundering Regulations will begin by the end of this year.
I would encourage businesses seeking a bank account to explore the Business Current Account (BCA) finder tool developed by UK Finance, designed to help businesses compare the full range of bank accounts available and find products that best suit their needs
My officials will continue to engage with industry to understand any emerging issues and assess any impact on investment as a result.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the human rights violations in Tunisia; what representations they have made to the government of the Republic of Tunisia about the detention of political prisoners, including the former Speaker, Rached Ghannouchi; whether they plan to take action against any individuals involved in these violations and, specifically, to enact targeted sanctions against Kais Saied (President of the Republic), Leila Jaffel (Minister of Justice), Imed Memmich (Minister of Defence), Kamel Feki (Minister of the Interior) and former ministers, Taoufik Charfeddine and Ridha Gharsallaoui, as requested by Tunisia’s democratic opposition.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
On 18 April, the Minister of State for North Africa, Lord (Tariq) Ahmad of Wimbledon made clear the UK's view that the recent wave of arrests and restrictions on political opposition in Tunisia are eroding the space for political plurality, and urged the Tunisian Government to respect the principles and values of an open and democratic society. Lord Ahmad also raised our issues over the arrests directly with Tunisian Chargé d'Affaires on 23 February, as did His Majesty's Ambassador to Tunisia with Foreign Minister Nabil Ammar on 23 February. The UK believes in the importance of space for legitimate political opposition, civil society, strengthening human rights and including all voices in building resilient and successful democracies. The UK is a constructive partner to Tunisia, and we will continue to raise these important issues with the Tunisian authorities at every available opportunity. Imposing sanctions is one response among other diplomatic tools and we will continue to consider a range of approaches to tackle human rights issues. The UK Government does not speculate on future designations. We continue to monitor the political and human rights situation in Tunisia closely.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the government of Georgia regarding the continuing detention of Mikheil Saakashvili, whose health has reported to have “deteriorated sharply”; and what plans they have to encourage that government to release him on humanitarian grounds.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We are following former President of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili's treatment during his imprisonment closely. Our Ambassador to Georgia has met members of Mr Saakashvili's family to discuss his detention on two occasions, the FCDO raised his treatment with the Georgian Ambassador to London on 2 November, and Embassy officials also met representatives of the United National Movement political party to discuss his health, most recently on 2 and 14 December. Mr Saakashvili's case was also discussed in a meeting between our Ambassador to Georgia and Prime Minister Garibashvili on 15 December. We have repeatedly emphasised that Mr Saakashvili should receive treatment in line with international human rights standards, and urged that any further court hearings are in line with due process and the rule of law. We will continue to highlight the importance of Mr Saakashvili's treatment in line with international human rights standards, and that any further hearings are in line with the rule of law and due process in discussions with the Georgian Government.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they still recognise Juan Guaidó as the legitimate interim president of Venezuela; and if so, whether they consider the current occupants of the Venezuelan embassy and consulate in London to be legitimate.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We remain deeply concerned about the political situation in Venezuela, where multiple crises are afflicting its people. We continue to recognise Juan Guaidó as the interim constitutional president of Venezuela and continue in our efforts to support a return to democracy in Venezuela. While UK Government does not accept the legitimacy of the Maduro regime, we maintain limited engagement with regime officials where necessary.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the government of Tunisia about its recent crackdown on dissent, including (1) the trial of civilians before military courts, (2) the use of the death penalty, and (3) the prosecution of opposition MPs.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We regularly raise human rights with the Tunisian authorities, and will continue to do so. We are aware of reports of the trial of civilians before military courts. We are monitoring legal cases being brought against politicians from the parliament and previous governments, including allegations of irregularities in the 2019 elections. We also engage regularly with government leaders in the country, most recently on 8 June when I [Lord Ahmad] met with President Kais Saied.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) President Saied of Tunisia's roadmap for reform, and (2) whether that roadmap provides an adequate route for restoring full democracy in the country.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The UK closely monitors the political situation in Tunisia and will continue to do so as the new constitution is published on 30 June and the referendum takes place, scheduled for 25 July. The UK stands ready to play a constructive role as Tunisia addresses significant political and economic challenges. We also regularly emphasise the importance of accountability and inclusive political participation in the democratic process, most recently during my visit, in June.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how they will ensure that UK patents granted via the European Patent Office are subject to the same conditions, and confer the same rights, as national patents granted via the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO); and what assessment they have made as to whether the IPO could grant a separate but equivalent right which provides the same benefits as a national UK patent but provides a grace period which is fully compatible with the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific (CPTPP).
Answered by Lord Callanan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership sets clear and consistent rules in the intellectual property sector which will be of benefit to both UK businesses and consumers. It would be inappropriate to comment on the specific matters raised as negotiations on the terms of the UK’s accession are ongoing.
The UK possesses a world leading intellectual property regime, and it will not sign trade deals that compromise it. Our membership of the European Patent Convention (EPC) is an important part of that regime, by providing an efficient mechanism for innovative UK businesses to protect their inventions across 38 states. The UK takes its international obligations seriously and our accession negotiations will be consistent with our national interest and wider Government priorities, which include our continued alignment with the European Patent Convention and other international IP treaties.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific (CPTPP) membership is compatible with the UK’s continued membership of the Convention on the Grant of European Patents; and whether they have requested exclusions from Article 18.38 CPTPP (patent grace period) or Article 18.46 CPTPP (patent term adjustment).
Answered by Lord Grimstone of Boscobel
The UK has a world leading intellectual property regime and will not sign trade deals that compromise it. The Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership sets clear and consistent rules for the intellectual property (IP) sector which will benefit UK businesses and consumers. Article 18.46 (patent term adjustment) is a suspended provision so the UK does not have to sign up to it.
The UK takes its international obligations seriously and our accession negotiations will be consistent with our national interest and wider Government priorities, which include our continued alignment with the European Patent Convention and other international IP treaties.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made, if any, of the cost to business of applying VAT on imports from EU states.
Answered by Viscount Younger of Leckie - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
Before the UK left the EU, sales of goods from the EU to UK customers were already subject to VAT. This has not changed. Prior to the end of the transition period, VAT was collected and paid through the VAT return system. For sales to consumers or non-VAT-registered businesses, VAT was either due in the EU Member State or in the UK, depending on whether the volume of the supplier’s sales made into the UK breached an annual threshold. For sales to VAT-registered businesses, the VAT registered-business would be responsible for accounting for the VAT on a VAT return through what is known as a ‘reverse charge’. The VAT-registered business could reclaim this VAT as input tax on the same VAT return, subject to the normal recovery rules. Only sales to the UK from outside the EU were subject to import VAT collection at the border.
Now that the transition period has ended, the UK has used its freedom from EU rules to create a fairer and more robust tax system, while also complying with World Trade Organisation rules by treating EU and non-EU goods the same. For goods in consignments up to £135, VAT is due at the point of sale. Where a UK VAT-registered business provides its VAT registration number to the supplier, the VAT registered business is responsible for accounting for the VAT due on the goods through a reverse charge. For goods in consignments over £135, import VAT is due and UK VAT-registered businesses can choose to use ‘postponed VAT accounting’. Accounting for VAT on a VAT return in these ways allows businesses to reclaim it as input tax on the same VAT return, as was the case under the previous rules, and ensures continuity for businesses.
Asked by: Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions they have had, if any, with the UK insurance sector regarding the impact of timing differences arising from Pillar 2 of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development BEPS Framework.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
OECD discussions on addressing the tax challenges of digitalisation have been ongoing for a number of years, with the detailed frameworks for Pillars One and Two having been under development since 2019.
Over the course of that time the OECD has conducted multiple public consultations on the proposals and had extensive engagement with businesses across sectors to take their views on board.
UK government officials are also engaged with many sectors regarding the potential impact of both pillars, including with the insurance sector on the specific issue of timing differences under Pillar 2.