argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question. He is absolutely right that it is the action that we have been taking that has meant that companies are changing their behaviour and that we are getting in revenue.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
Robin Caspar Walker (Conservative, Centre-right): The Minister has said much about bringing our tax system up to date for the 21st century and about closing the tax gap, which I welcome. None the less, we have in our business rates system, a tax regime that is hopelessly out of date, and the cross-party Business, Innovation and Skills Committee called for fundamental reform of it under the previous Government. May I urge him to be as ambitious as possible in that reform so that we can close the gap between online businesses and the bricks and mortar businesses on our high streets?
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): We always look to try to find ways to simplify the tax system. I would make the point that if a company operates in many jurisdictions, its tax affairs are inherently more complex than if it existed in just one country, but the Government are determined to ensure that where the economic activity occurs in the United Kingdom, we tax it in the United Kingdom.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
Richard Michael John Ogilvie Graham (Conservative, Centre-right): Everyone wants business to pay its fair share of tax, and most people will welcome the additional £130 million of tax revenue to fund important services, but many will wonder, given that the period of the settlement covers 2005 to 2011, what other multinational tax bills are out there that have still not been settled and what, if anything, the Labour party did in government to highlight those questions?
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): On the latter question, it may be the case that astronomers have located the ninth planet, but I am not sure that they have found any evidence of the Labour party doing very much on tax avoidance in government.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): There has been a shift in public opinion in recent years, and the pressure on companies to pay the tax that is due under the law is greater than ever before. I welcome that, and I welcome that change in public opinion, but it is the measures taken by this Government that mean that we are getting additional sums from large companies, as has been demonstrated in the past couple of days.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
Alan Mak (Conservative, Centre-right): Following the successful Google settlement, will the Minister confirm that the Government will continue to work with our international partners and organisations such as the OECD to continue taking a lead to ensure that our tax laws are complied with—action that Labour failed to take over 13 years?
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend makes an important point. It was very much the Prime Minister who got the OECD and the G20 to focus on how multinational companies are taxed. It is right that we did that and that we are making progress, and I am pleased that this is coming to fruition.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s comments, but he should not be quite so defeatist. If he looks at what happened over the previous Parliament, he will see that HMRC’s large business team brought in £38 billion in additional tax as a consequence of their intervention. The UK has a reputation as somewhere with competitive tax rates but where taxes do have to be paid. That is a reputation that we should all seek to maintain.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
Robert Edward Jenrick (Conservative, Centre-right): Although £130 million might seem low for a business as large as Google, is not the reality that the Revenue cannot do as much to collect back-taxes as we would like it to, because they come from a significantly more lax era? This morning one tax expert described the situation under the previous Labour Government thus: "Everything was above board, and the board was set at floor level." Under this Government, the diverted profits tax gives us the opportunity to change the landscape, but is there not a concern that letting Google off paying the diverted profits tax suggests that the Revenue will find this significantly more complex to implement than we would like? What more can we do to give the Revenue the support it needs to apply that evenly and to all?
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): We always seek to ensure that HMRC has the powers and resources it needs. For example, in the July Budget last year we announced a requirement for large tax companies to set out explicitly what their tax strategy is, and we will be legislating for that in the Finance Bill.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
Andrew James Bridgen (Conservative, Centre-right): Human nature and ingenuity being what they are, from the moment taxes were invented there has always been a difference between the tax that Governments expect to receive and the tax that is actually paid—that is known as the tax gap. Will the Minister explain to the House in what direction the tax gap has been going since we came to office in 2010?
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Lady asks a very good question. We are in the process of implementing those recommendations. The BEPS process is more closely aligning economic activity with taxing rights. That is the direction in which we believe we should go. Having led the way in getting the BEPS process started, this Government want to lead the way in implementing its recommendations.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
Nigel John Mills (Conservative, Centre-right): When the Minister makes large businesses publish their tax strategy, will he also make them publish their tax returns so that we can all see how much tax they are declaring and how they got from their cash profit to that tax bill? That would improve transparency and confidence in the system.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): The United Kingdom’s position on taxpayer confidentiality is hardly unique. Indeed, it is the mainstream approach. Knowing what a company’s tax liability might be depends on a detailed understanding of the whereabouts of its assets and activities, and not all of that information would necessarily be apparent from a straight tax return. As I have said, there is greater transparency now because companies have to set out their strategies, which has never been the case before.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): The principle of taxpayer confidentiality is not new. It has existed for as long as we have had a tax system. If the hon. Gentleman wants to make a case for abandoning it, he ought to consider what the overall consequences would be for the attractiveness of the UK as a place in which to do business. Let me add that, without fully understanding the whereabouts of a company’s assets and activities, no one is in a position to make a judgment about how much tax it should pay. HMRC is able to do that, and HMRC is bringing in more money than ever.
HMRC and Google (Settlement) — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Macroeconomics
David Michael Gauke (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend has made an important point. The way in which to change the culture of multinational companies—and, indeed, we have already started to see signs of such a change—is to take the action that we have taken in implementing the BEPS recommendations and introducing a diverted profits tax. Those are the achievements of this Government.
Child Refugees in Europe — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Social Welfare
Eric Pickles (Conservative, Centre-right): It is important not to stretch the analogy with the Kindertransport too far. We need to remember that on the last train, which was disrupted by the war, only two of the children survived and the rest, along with their families, were killed. However, there are some clear parallels that we need to address. We need to remember the enormous contribution that the Kindertransport made to this country: distinguished doctors, surgeons and Members of both Houses were saved by it I am pleased that the Prime Minister is looking at this matter again. He is quite right to try to keep children in the region, but to use one of those phrases, we are where we are. There are children at risk, and I urge the Government to look carefully at that. After all, today is 25 January. A month ago, we were celebrating that great Christian festival of children, and I hope that that spirit lingers beyond Boxing day.
Child Refugees in Europe — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Social Welfare
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): I have already set out the additional funding that DFID has committed to support those across Europe and how some of that money is being provided to UNICEF, for example, to look at how we can best support children in that overall approach. I want to underline the fact that UNICEF itself has emphasised "the importance of first and foremost assessing the individual situation of unaccompanied children, and their best interests, before any actions are taken; noting that in these situations children who may appear unaccompanied are in fact being supported by family members, or others, and decisions on how they are cared for should take this into account." That is precisely the approach the Government are taking.
Child Refugees in Europe — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Government Operations
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): I will certainly try to do so, Mr Speaker. As I indicated to the House in response to the urgent question last week, I expect the highest standards from all contractors, including no stigma being attached to those under their care. If there is evidence to suggest that that is not the case, it will be treated with the utmost seriousness.
Child Refugees in Europe — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: International Affairs
Alexander John Gervase Chalk (Conservative, Centre-right): This is of course an extremely difficult issue, and our hearts go out to the poor children in the Jungle in Calais. But we need to be careful about confusing the clear message of the UK’s aid effort that it is in children’s best interests to remain in the region, where hundreds of millions of pounds of UK aid is available, and not encourage them into the clutches of evil traffickers who frankly do not care if they live or die.
Child Refugees in Europe — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Law and Crime
James Peter Brokenshire (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend has made his point concisely and well. It is that risk of the exploitation of people traffickers that we have at the forefront of our minds. Equally, social media is being used to sell false hope and false opportunity, putting lives at risk.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Social Welfare
John Simon Bercow (Conservative, Centre-right): With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: New clause 2—Attainment and development of children— "(1) In discharging the duty under section 1(1), the Secretary of State must have regard to narrowing the attainment and development gap between young children— (a) of different genders; (b) of different ethnic backgrounds; (c) of different socio-economic backgrounds; (d) living in different regions; and (e) who do and do not have a disability (2) Within 12 months of the passing of this Act the Secretary of State must lay before both Houses of Parliament a report containing an evaluation of the impact of discharging the duty under section 1(1) on narrowing the attainment and development gap between young children— (a) of different genders; (b) of different socio-economic backgrounds; (c) of different ethnic backgrounds; (d) living in different regions; and (e) who do and do not have a disability." This new clause would require the Secretary of State, in discharging her duty under this Act, to have regard to the attainment and development gap between different groups of children. The Secretary of State would also have to publish a report on the impact of discharging her duty on such gaps. Amendment 1, clause 1, page 2, line 8, at end insert— "(4A) Regulations under subsection (4) must provide for victims of domestic violence who have left paid employment in order to escape such violence to continue to be eligible for 30 hours of free childcare per week under section 1." This amendment seeks to ensure that provision is made for people who are suffering domestic violence who leave paid employment in order to escape their situation to continue to receiving 30 hours of free childcare per week. Amendment 2, page 2, line 8, at end insert— "(4A) Regulations under subsection (4) must set out in what circumstances a parent or partner who is a student nurse will be considered to meet any conditions relating to paid work." This amendment seeks to ensure that provision is made for student nurses to be eligible for 30 hours of childcare per week under this Act.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Social Welfare
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): All parties at the last general election promised to increase the free entitlement. Labour promised to increase it from 15 hours to 25 hours for working parents. The Conservative party promised to increase it from 15 hours to 30 hours for working parents. Who would she have included or excluded from Labour’s definition of working parents?
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Labor
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Lady mentioned the hon. Member for North West Durham (Pat Glass), who, at the end of the Committee stage, said it was a good Bill and that she could find nothing in it with which to disagree. I hope, in their handover, they had that discussion. The eligibility criteria are very straightforward. Eligibility will be judged on income. If someone is under 25 and earning the national living wage, they will need to earn £107 a week. If they are over 25 and earning the national living wage, which the Government are introducing, the calculation will be the national living wage times the number of hours they can work. It is very straightforward.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Labor
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Lady for being so generous in giving way. The Conservative party promised at the election to increase the average funding rate and it is delivering on that promise. The Labour party did not promise to increase the hourly rate. If the hon. Lady is arguing that the funding rate is not enough, will she tell us what the Labour party considers to be the right funding rate for the entitlement?
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Social Welfare
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Lady raises important questions about parents on zero-hours contracts and how they will be monitored. The first point is that parents on zero-hours contracts are self-employed; they are all entitled to the childcare under this scheme. HMRC will check the income levels, and in the case of the self-employed will know how much they earn over a period of time. In addition, and more importantly, there is a grace period so that if someone falls out of work for a period they will not lose their childcare.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Labor
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful for the opportunity to hold this important debate, and I once again welcome the hon. Member for Darlington (Jenny Chapman) to her position. The amendments that have been tabled raise a number of interesting issues, which I shall deal with in turn. Let me say at the outset, however, that extending the 15 hours to 30 hours is primarily a work incentive. That is why the first 15 hours are universal, but the second 15 hours are based mainly on economic eligibility criteria. In judging and evaluating the impact of the policy we should bear in mind the work incentive.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Education
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): The hon. Lady is right to ask the questions. However, I shall resist the new clause, and the main reason is that a number of evaluations, which she has asked for, are under way. There are important programmes, as I shall explain, that focus on reducing the gap between disadvantaged children and other children New clause 1 asks us to evaluate the impact of the new entitlement for working parents. That is extremely important and I hope that Members will be reassured to know that we have a very strong evidence base about the impact of free early education entitlements. We know, from studies such as the effective pre-school, primary and secondary education project that early education has a significant impact on child outcomes. Children attending high-quality provision for two or three years before school have a seven or eight-month developmental advantage in literacy compared with their peers The Department for Education has commissioned another longitudinal study, if the hon. Member for Darlington will listen: the study of early education and development, which follows 8,000 two-year-olds from across England to the end of key stage 1. It looks at how childcare and early education can help to give children the best start in life and at what is important for high-quality childcare provision. The study is being carried out by NatCen Social Research, working with Frontier Economics, the University of Oxford and 4Children, on behalf of the Department.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Education
Felicia Jane Beatrix Drummond (Conservative, Centre-right): Will my hon. Friend congratulate Portsmouth, where children do extremely well in their early years? The chief inspector’s report of April 2015 ranked Portsmouth as 12th out of 150 authorities, which is a massive improvement and great for the good development of children, who are entitled to free school meals at the age of five.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Education
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend makes a very good point. The quality of early years provision has improved significantly; 85% of early years settings are now rated good or outstanding. The previous Government introduced the common inspection framework for early years education, which has raised the bar and will continue to do so over the course of this Parliament Regular surveys commissioned by the Department also provide rich data. These include the childcare and early years provider and parent surveys. The provider survey collects information about childcare and early years providers, including the composition and qualifications of the workforce. The parent survey collects data on parents’ use of childcare and early years provision and their views and experiences.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Social Welfare
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): The Government will be spending £6 billion a year from 2019-20 on early years and childcare. The suggestion that we will be doing that without measuring or evaluating it is simply not true. The question is where we carry out this evaluation and whether it needs to sit in primary legislation. Had the hon. Gentleman been listening, he would have heard me explain that we currently have a survey following 8,000 two-year-olds across England, so what he is asking for is already under way. We do not need primary legislation to evaluate the impact of the important investment to achieve very important goals in this sector The latest early years foundation stage profile data reveal that an increasing proportion of children are achieving a good level of development at age five—66% in 2015, compared with 52% in 2013. That is an impressive 14.6 percentage point increase over the past two years. I know that there is more we can do to understand the impact of this extended entitlement. However, as drafted, the proposed amendments are not workable. They call for an evaluation of the impact of discharging the Secretary of State’s new duty within 12 months of the Act coming into force, which is far too soon to make any judgment about impact. That would not be adequate time to collect the data, assess the impacts and produce a report.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Social Welfare
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): Every three and four-year-old is entitled to 15 hours of free childcare. The question is who is entitled to the second 15 hours. [Interruption.] If Opposition Members will bear with me, I will answer the question. Lone parents are entitled to it, as are self-employed parents and parents looking after disabled children. I will seek inspiration from the officials’ box specifically on kinship carers. But the issue is that everybody gets the first 15 hours if they work, and the second 15 hours is a work incentive. If people are not working, they do not need that amount of childcare.
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Social Welfare
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): Under the current regime, kinship carers will get three hours of respite care a day for five days of the week. Is the hon. Gentleman seriously arguing that he wants more than three hours of respite care a day? If so, why was that not in the Labour party’s manifesto?
Childcare Bill [Lords] — House of Commons, 2016-01-25
Topic: Education
Samuel Phillip Gyimah (Conservative, Centre-right): Again, the hon. Lady has made a very good point. If the children of kinship carers need additional care, the early years pupil premium that was introduced by the Conservative-led Government will ensure, to the tune of £50 million, that any additional educational needs are funded. That is a completely different issue from that of how many hours of childcare are needed.