I have put my name to the Minister's two principal amendments—not to the consequential ones, but they are merely consequential. That is a firm expression of my view that they come as near as possible to meeting the necessity that we have identified, and the Government have identified, to do something about this matter. I am comforted by the fact that when the Secretary of State wrote to me in reply to an e-mail that I sent to him about the details of the new clauses, he pointed out that the intention behind them is exactly the same as that of new clause 53, albeit that it is fleshed out in greater detail, as I would expect. I was always conscious that in a matter of this sort a Government amendment would be required to resolve the legal minutiae, particularly regarding an issue that concerns revenue matters.
We entirely welcome new clauses 85 and 86. They are a sensible way forward to ensuring that the public are reassured that all Members of this House and the House of Lords are treated as if they were resident in the United Kingdom—like the vast majority of people in this country—for tax purposes.
The Minister also provided reassurance—at my prompting, I am glad to say, though I am sorry if I did not prompt him at quite the right points—to clear up the transitional arrangements, which excited some comment. One or two Members of the other place raised the matter with me to try to understand what it would involve. The Minister has now explained that more fully, and I am grateful to him.
To play devil's advocate, there is only one matter in the proposals about which I had some hesitation, although, on reflection, I can probably dispense with the hesitation. However, it is worth flagging up. There are currently provisions in the upper House for Members to take leave of absence. That enables them to go abroad to pursue their lives, professions, trades or businesses, but leaves them the option of returning and starting to sit in the House again when their leave of absence ends. I should be grateful if the Minister endorsed, in his winding-up speech, that the new provisions effectively mean that that system of leave of absence would no longer be possible if, during the course of it, the person went abroad and became domiciled there for business purposes, because he would be required to continue to be deemed UK-resident, even though he was not playing an active part in the life of the other place.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 1 February 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
505 c118-9 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 19:45:15 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617768
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617768
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617768