Parliamentary Debates House of Commons Official Report General Committees

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT GENERAL COMMITTEES Public Bill Committee TAXATION (CROSS-BORDER TRADE) BILL Seventh Sitting Thursday 1 February 2018 (Morning) CONTENTS CLAUSES 23 TO 29 agreed to. SCHEDULE 7 agreed to. CLAUSES 30 TO 38 agreed to. Adjourned till this day at Two o’clock. PBC (Bill 128) 2017 - 2019 No proofs can be supplied. Corrections that Members suggest for the final version of the report should be clearly marked in a copy of the report—not telephoned—and must be received in the Editor’s Room, House of Commons, not later than Monday 5 February 2018 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2018 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 255 Public Bill Committee1 FEBRUARY 2018 Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill 256 The Committee consisted of the following Members: Chairs: †MS KAREN BUCK,MRS ANNE MAIN † Blackman, Kirsty (Aberdeen North) (SNP) † Reynolds, Jonathan (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/ † Chapman, Douglas (Dunfermline and West Fife) Co-op) (SNP) † Rowley, Lee (North East Derbyshire) (Con) † Dakin, Nic (Scunthorpe) (Lab) † Rutley, David (Lord Commissioner of Her Majesty’s † Davies, Chris (Brecon and Radnorshire) (Con) Treasury) † Dodds, Anneliese (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op) † Stride, Mel (Financial Secretary to the Treasury) † Dowd, Peter (Bootle) (Lab) † Stuart, Graham (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of † Hair, Kirstene (Angus) (Con) State for International Trade) Hardy, Emma (Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle) † Sturdy, Julian (York Outer) (Con) (Lab) † Wragg, Mr William (Hazel Grove) (Con) † Hill, Mike (Hartlepool) (Lab) † Kwarteng, Kwasi (Spelthorne) (Con) Colin Lee, Gail Bartlett, Committee Clerks † Menzies, Mark (Fylde) (Con) † Morris, Grahame (Easington) (Lab) † attended the Committee 257 Public Bill CommitteeHOUSE OF COMMONS Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill 258 Public Bill Committee Clause 30 GENERAL PROVISION FOR THE PURPOSES OF IMPORT Thursday 1 February 2018 DUTY (Morning) Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op): I beg to [MS KAREN BUCK in the Chair] move amendment 81, in clause 30, page 18, line 9, at Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill end insert— “(2) No regulations may be made under this section after the 11.30 am end of the period of two years beginning with exit day. (3) In this section, “exit day”has the meaning given by section 14(1) Clause 23 (interpretation) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and subsections (2) to (5) of that section apply to the term under APPROVALS AND AUTHORISATIONS GRANTED UNDER this section as they apply to the term in that Act.”. REGULATIONS This amendment limits the duration of the delegated power under Clauses 23 and 24 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 30 to the period ending two years after the United Kingdom leaves the European Union. Clause 25 DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION The Chair: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP): I beg to Amendment 131, in clause 30, page 18, line 9, at end move amendment 117, in clause 25, page 17, line 2, leave insert— out “1998” and insert “2018”. “(2) No regulations may be made under this section unless a This amendment seeks to provide that the powers of disclosure cannot draft has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, the be exercised in breach of the updated data protection framework to be enshrined in the Data Protection Bill as enacted. House of Commons.”. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, This amendment requires regulations under Clause 30 to be subject to the affirmative procedure. Ms Buck. Amendment 117 is a tidying-up amendment. The Scottish Law Commission raised the point that the Clause stand part. relevant data protection legislation for the purposes of Amendment 132, in clause 32, page 19, line 32, after the Bill will be the Data Protection Act 2018, not the “regulations” insert “under section 30 and”. Data Protection Act 1998. The amendment would simply This amendment is consequential on Amendment 131. make a technical change to ensure that the correct legislation is used. Anneliese Dodds: It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Buck, and a pleasure to see the rest of the The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mel Stride): Committee. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Buck. Clause 25 permits disclosures for customs Our amendments would qualify the powers in clause 30 duty purposes, but makes it clear that disclosures that that enable the Treasury to make, by regulation, a wide would contravene the Data Protection Act 1998 are not range of provisions relating to the imposition of import permitted. Amendment 117 would provide instead that duty.In particular,amendment 81 advocates the inclusion disclosures that would contravene the Data Protection of a sunset clause, whereby no regulations can be made Act 2018—currently the Data Protection Bill—were under clause 30 after the end of the two-year period, not permitted. beginning with exit day, when the UK is set to leave The Government intend that data protection safeguards the EU. will need to be complied with when powers under the The Government suggested on Tuesday that the Bill are exercised. Given that the Data Protection Bill is Opposition’s contributions had been on the theme of not yet in law, it would be inappropriate to refer to it in greater parliamentary accountability, for which I suspect this Bill, but I am happy to assure the Committee that many of our constituents would thank rather than the Government are committed to ensuring appropriate criticise us. Today, one of our themes will be the use of data protection safeguards and will therefore seek to sunset clauses where appropriate. I hope the Minister make the appropriate amendments at the appropriate will listen to our arguments with an open mind. time. In the meantime, I ask the hon. Lady to withdraw It is not just the Opposition who have argued for the her amendment. use of sunset clauses in the Bill and more generally. The House of Lords Committee that examined the subject Kirsty Blackman: If the Government amended the also recommended their greater use. My hon. Friends Bill to specify “appropriate data protection legislation”, will elaborate on that point later. I will point out the rather than “the Data Protection Act 1998”, that would Government’s inconsistent approach to this Bill compared fix the problem and ensure that the correct legislation is with the use of sunset clauses in other areas. used. I am sure that the Minister has listened, so I will The European Union (Withdrawal) Bill commits to not press the amendment to the vote, but I hope the ensure that delegated powers in many of the areas it Government will make reasonable changes on Report covers will not be available in perpetuity but only for the or at another stage. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the period necessitated by leaving the EU, and yet even that amendment. approach is not adopted here. The Enterprise and Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Regulatory Reform Act 2013—not necessarily an Act Clause 25 ordered to stand part of the Bill. that I would otherwise support, because of its negative Clauses 26 to 29 ordered to stand part of the Bill. impact on health and safety regulation—appropriately Schedule 7 agreed to. suggested that sunset clauses could be a helpful mechanism 259 Public Bill Committee1 FEBRUARY 2018 Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill 260 to ensure that provisions are kept up to date. That the regulations necessary to deliver an effective import commitment was placed into guidance on the conduct regime into the future. It allows the Treasury to respond of impact assessments, which advocates that as necessary to any future developments that might “opportunities to use sunset clauses should be explored where have a bearing on import duty. appropriate.” The power will play an important part in ensuring we The use of sunset clauses was a core element of the have the ability to address any circumstances that arise better regulation agenda. In theory, the Government in the future that might require modification in the are still committed to that, although I was pleased to UK’s import duty regime, conceivably beyond the term hear from the Prime Minister that she will remove some of the period that the hon. Lady has suggested. It is for elements of it, such as the one in, two out rule. that reason that the power in the clause is not subject to There are many other historical parallels. Sunset a time limit. Amendment 81 seeks to impose just such a clauses applied to legislation used during the first and time limit of two years following exit day. If it were second world wars, and to legislation dealing with a accepted, there would be a risk of limiting the Treasury’s heightened terrorist threat. The lack of a time limit on capacity to make or require changes to the UK’s import some temporary legislation passed in the second world duty regime in the future. war exposed Governments to legal action in the late To pick up on a specific point raised by the hon. Lady 1970s, when they tried to implement new control orders about the Lords Committee and its assessments around on the export of goods using the temporary legislation sunsetting, it should be noted that the aims of this Bill that had never been repealed. are somewhat different from some of the other Brexit Bills I am not saying that sunset clauses are never abused. that were referred to in that report.

Load more