All 2 Debates between Kit Malthouse and James Cleverly

Wed 11th Oct 2017
Finance Bill
Commons Chamber

Committee: 1st sitting: House of Commons

Integrated Review Refresh

Debate between Kit Malthouse and James Cleverly
Monday 13th March 2023

(1 year, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Kit Malthouse Portrait Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Given that the biggest killer of our people, the most frequent breaches of our border and, arguably, the most significant impact to the integrity of our economy result from the work of overseas organised criminal gangs, why is there hardly any mention of them in this document? Where is the resource to allow the National Crime Agency to deal with threats that are felt on the streets of the Secretary of State’s constituency and mine every day?

James Cleverly Portrait James Cleverly
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My right hon. Friend is right to say that organised criminal gangs have an international component. This document is predominantly but not exclusively focused on state-level threats. However, I assure him that the role of international organised crime gangs is very much part of our interactions with our interlocutors internationally. We did not have the opportunity to put every single element of what we do internationally into this review, and of course a large of part of what he refers to lies within the home affairs area of responsibility. However, we liaise closely to ensure that we discuss with international interlocutors the threat posed within the UK by international criminality.

Finance Bill

Debate between Kit Malthouse and James Cleverly
James Cleverly Portrait James Cleverly
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Lady for informing me of that. I am more than happy to look in more detail at that definition, because I do not have it at my fingertips, but putting it in the Bill would present to unscrupulous employers something that looks like an invitation to use this as a back-door route to avoid the tax that should rightly be paid upon severance. It would be unwise for that to go through, because it would send exactly the opposite signal to what we are trying to achieve with the relevant clauses elsewhere in the Bill, which is to say, “If you play by the rules, fine.” The vast majority of people who receive severance pay have no need to concern themselves and neither do the vast majority of businesses. The only individuals who should be a little distressed by what is going through in the Bill are the very small number of companies that have abused the severance payment structures to avoid paying the tax that is fair. I have little sympathy for those companies. If they play by the rules, we are on their side. If they seek to bend or break the rules, I have no sympathy whatsoever.

Kit Malthouse Portrait Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I am seeking to ensure my hon. Friend understands that this does not benefit the companies; this is of benefit to individuals who take advantage. There is no tax benefit to the companies because it is income tax that is payable. [Interruption.] Well, there is national insurance—employers’ NI.

James Cleverly Portrait James Cleverly
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. There is little direct financial benefit to the company—