Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 18 January (HL Deb, col 212), and in the light of paragraph 17(7) of Schedule 19 to the Finance Act 2016 which provides for the Treasury to make regulations requiring group tax strategies to include a country-by-country report, what steps they are taking to ensure that transnational companies are fully transparent about the real centres of their economic activity and reveal any misalignment between that and where such companies declare their profits for tax purposes in their annual accounts.
Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
The Government believes that profits should be taxed where economic activities are performed. The UK has introduced the OECD model of country-by-country reporting. This will provide a clear overall picture of the global position on profit and tax of multinational groups to tax authorities, enabling them to make more informed assessments of where risks lie.
The Government has set out its objective for a comprehensive and effective model of public country-by-country reporting that is agreed on a multilateral basis, to improve transparency over businesses’ tax affairs and build public trust in the tax system. The UK will continue to work with international partners with a view to delivering on that objective. This includes our continued participation in the discussions on the European Commission’s proposal.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Young of Cookham on 28 December 2016 (HL4016), and in the light of the LuxLeaks trials in Luxembourg, whether they intend to review their policy of not offering immunity from prosecution to whistle-blowers in so far as it applies to cases where information has been supplied about aggressive tax avoidance schemes that have caused a significant loss to the public purse.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
The Government does not currently intend to review the law.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the appeal in Luxembourg of Antoine Deltour against his conviction in June for theft, what steps they are taking to protect whistleblowers who expose companies’ aggressive tax avoidance schemes when those schemes are organised in conjunction with the governments of other EU member states.
Answered by Lord Young of Cookham
The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 ensures that workers who raise concerns of wrongdoing to their employer or a relevant external body (by making what is known as a ‘protected disclosure’) and suffer detriment as a result may seek redress through an Employment Tribunal.
With regards to information on tax avoidance and evasion HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) gathers information from a number of sources including whistle-blowers. Any information which is provided to HMRC is treated as confidential and details of the individual providing the information will not be divulged, without consent, except where compelled by law.
HMRC does not offer immunity from prosecution within the UK or in a third country where that country’s legislation is at odds with UK Legislation.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what form the consultation on section 9(5) of the Equality Act 2010 on caste-based discrimination will take; how they will formulate the questions to be addressed in the consultations; and whether that consultation will be on how section 9(5) can best be brought into effect or on whether it should be brought into effect.
Answered by Lord Nash
The Government has considered carefully the Tirkey v Chandhok judgment and its implications, including for the caste duty and the Equality Act, and has decided to issue a public consultation on this important and sensitive matter. The consultation will run for 12 weeks from its commencement date. One of the key aims of the consultation will be to obtain the views of stakeholders on the appropriate provision that should be made for caste in the Act.
We are especially keen to hear the public’s views on whether, in light of the Tirkey v Chandok judgment, additional measures are needed to ensure victims of caste discrimination have appropriate legal protection and effective remedies under the 2010 Equality Act.
We will then consider the responses to the consultation very carefully before deciding what further action is most appropriate.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will press the government of Indonesia to implement the recommendations of the Human Rights Watch report <i>Something to Hide? Indonesia’s Restrictions on Media Freedom and Rights Monitoring in Papua</i>; and in particular whether they plan to ask the government of Indonesia to (1) issue a specific written directive instructing all relevant ministries and security forces to (a) comply with the decision in May to lift restrictions on foreign media access to Papua and West Papua, and (b) stop restricting the operations of international NGOs and the movement of their staff in Papua and West Papua; (2) instruct the National Police to stop requiring accredited Indonesia-based foreign correspondents to apply for travel permits to report from Papua and West Papua; and (3) instruct the National Police, the Armed Forces and the State Intelligence Agency to (a) investigate fully incidents in which their staff do not comply with the lifting of restrictions on foreign media and international NGOs’ personnel, or impede, obstruct, harass or arbitrarily detain them, and (b) prevent the surveillance, harassment, and intimidation of, and violence against, Indonesian journalists in Papua and investigate incidents in which such abuses allegedly occurred.
Answered by Baroness Anelay of St Johns
We welcome the Indonesian government’s commitment to improving the situation in the Indonesian provinces of Papua and West Papua. This includes President Joko Widodo’s visit in May, when he granted clemency to a number of prisoners and announced the lifting of travel restrictions for foreign journalists. Since May, a number of foreign journalists have successfully visited and reported from the region. Staff from our Embassy in Jakarta visit Indonesia's provinces regularly, discussing our concerns with relevant authorities. Our Ambassador visited Papua in May, where he discussed ways to ensure the sustainable and equitable development of the provinces with members of the police, and religious and community leaders. We will continue to raise concerns where we have them with the appropriate authorities across Indonesia.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether reporters are now allowed to enter West Papua; and if not, what representations they are making to the government of Indonesia to allow access to the press.
Answered by Baroness Anelay of St Johns
We welcome the Indonesian government’s commitment to improving the situation in the Indonesian provinces of Papua and West Papua. This includes President Joko Widodo’s visit in May, when he granted clemency to a number of prisoners and announced the lifting of travel restrictions for foreign journalists. Since May, a number of foreign journalists have successfully visited and reported from Papua and West Papua.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have made any representations to the government of Georgia about its actions towards the independent tv station Rustavi 2.
Answered by Baroness Anelay of St Johns
In response to developments in the legal case concerning the Rustavi 2 TV station, the UK and other EU Member States' Missions released a joint written statement on 6 November with the Embassy of the United States of America in Georgia, which said:
"The Delegation of the European Union, in agreement with the Heads of Mission of the EU Member States in Georgia, and the Embassy of the United States of America express our concern related to the appointment of a new management to the Rustavi 2 TV company.
In light of the recent interim decision of the Constitutional Court and considering that the substantial judgment of the first instance court in the Rustavi 2 case does not envisage immediate enforcement, the preventive measures adopted on 5 November raise serious questions about the independence of the judiciary and the actual degree of freedom of the media in Georgia.
As our respective Missions have publicly stated many times, freedom of media and independence of the judiciary are essential foundations of a democracy, and diverse opinions should be encouraged in democratic societies. We call on all political actors to refrain from any step or statement that could prevent the Georgian judiciary from ruling dispassionately on this case.
The government and judicial institutions need to uphold the principles of media freedom and political pluralism that are an integral part of Georgia’s declared aspirations.
We will continue to monitor developments closely and raise concerns with all relevant parties as appropriate.”
Our Ambassador in Tbilisi has also held discussions with senior members of the Georgian government and will continue to engage on this issue, bilaterally as well as with EU and other concerned partners.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of evidence that bees are harmed by the use of neonicotinoids, what plans they have to restrict the use of neonicotinoid-treated seeds.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Decisions on the approval of pesticide active substances are made at European level. Since December 2013, three of the five neonicotinoids currently approved are not permitted for use on a wide range of crops considered “attractive to bees”. A number of other uses remain permitted under the EU approval. The restrictions currently in place for neonicotinoids are not time-limited.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for International Development:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure that post-earthquake aid to Nepal is being distributed fairly.
Answered by Baroness Verma
The UK is providing more than £33 million to the earthquake response in Nepal, making us the largest donor to the relief operation, and we are committed to ensuring that this assistance is available to those most in need. UK funding and technical expertise is supporting a central coordination mechanism, under the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), which is gathering real time information and feedback from affected communities. This mechanism helps to ensure that aid efforts are not being duplicated and that the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable are understood and acted upon.
The UK has placed particular emphasis on reaching vulnerable groups; immediately after the earthquake, DFID identified the heightened risk of violence to displaced women and children. Examples of our assistance include: two UK-funded support centres, in Sindhupalchowk District, which ensure a safe and protected environment for around 500 women and girls; and the distribution of over 15,000 dignity kits to provide women with basic essentials, like clothing and hygiene products.
Asked by: Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to make representations to the government of Indonesia to encourage it to establish an inquiry into the incident at Paniai, West Papua, on 8 December in which the Indonesian police and military reportedly shot into a crowd; and whether they will encourage that government to allow access to West Papua for non-governmental organisations and the media.
Answered by Baroness Anelay of St Johns
We are concerned by reports of a number of deaths in Paniai on 8 December, apparently following attempts to disperse a group of protesters. We support calls by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights for the authorities to conduct an independent and thorough investigation into the incident.
We regularly discuss the situation in Papua province with the Indonesian authorities, raise concerns about access for international journalists and non-governmental organisations and encourage a greater focus on resolving disputes through peaceful dialogue. Most recently the Charge d’Affairs visited Papua province on 3-5 December.