House of Lords (Members’ Taxation Status) Bill [HL]

I knew that this debate would prove interesting, and I have been proved correct. We have all learnt a little something about domicility and tax residence, and no doubt we will learn a great deal more. Most of us start from the proposition that UK legislators should pay UK tax. The trouble is how we get from there to trying to put that into law. One of the reasons why I am in favour of the Government coming forward in due course with legislation on this matter is that they have the knowledge, resources and ability to consult widely, with Green Papers, White Papers, and so on, to make sure that we get this kind of thing right instead of having the rather tortuous discussions that we have had today. I am not quite sure why the Liberal Democrats have been so upset about the time that has been taken on this amendment when I think of my noble friends who sit on the Front Bench and have to listen to Liberal Democrats, most notably on the Marine and Coastal Access Bill. The noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, and his noble friends need to get their own house in order before they start talking about my Back-Benchers. This Bill is about who should not sit in the House of Lords. It is worth looking at some of those people on whom it might have an impact, because it raises questions about all those who are born abroad but who make their homes in this country and are appointed to the House of Lords. At Second Reading, I raised the question of the noble Lord, Lord Paul. He is undoubtedly extremely proud of his birthplace, but he has made his life in the United Kingdom, has employed many tens of thousands of people over the years and plays a major role. Under the terms of this Bill, he would be out. My noble friend Lady Gardner, who spoke with great eloquence this evening, is rightly proud of her birthplace and her heritage. She pays tax in Australia, as she pointed out, but she has made her home here. Although the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, said that she would not be excluded by the Bill, that is not what I think it means, and perhaps the Government may have another view. There are other, more obvious examples. I have to admit that I have not seen the noble Baroness, Lady Dunn, in this House for some time, but she could come back here and introduce useful, important and relevant debates about what is happening in the Far East. She has been a Member of this House for a long time. I have no idea how much tax she pays in this country—I could not possibly comment on that—but the Bill would stop any future Lady Dunn being able to sit in the second Chamber of these Houses of Parliament. Quite recently, Lord Cooke of Thorndon was a distinguished Member of the Cross Benches. He was a judge from New Zealand, who gave great weight and authority to our deliberations. But he would be excluded as well—as would many others. I do not know yet whether that is really the noble Lord’s intention. It was extremely useful for my noble friend Lord Astor to read out a passage— which I had forgotten—from the White Paper that the Government published last year about their view of the international net of people who could come and sit in a second Chamber. For a while, the newest Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Abersoch, was sitting on the Front Bench. Again, I cast absolutely no doubt on his tax status, but he is a very good example of somebody who has spent a large part of their life working abroad in international finance and has now come to the House of Lords. It is perfectly possible that, for a period, he was paying his taxes elsewhere. Would he be excluded from taking his place in the House of Lords until he had sorted out those aspects? I do not know. I see the noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, who I know has spent a large part of his life working in Hollywood and, no doubt, has paid a substantial fortune to the American Government. But he should certainly not be excluded from sitting in this House. This Bill slams the door permanently on people such as him. As my noble friend Lord Selsdon pointed out, many of those countries that he listed contain loyal subjects of the Crown. Many of those countries have double tax arrangements with the United Kingdom. Perhaps we should look more closely at those arrangements before rather hastily seeking to exclude the subjects concerned from being able to sit in your Lordships' House.