Tag: Margaret Hodge

  • Margaret Hodge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Margaret Hodge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2015-11-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will ensure that any agreement on a central registry of beneficial ownership in the Turks and Caicos Islands will include access for the public with legitimate reason.

    James Duddridge

    I refer the Right Honourable Lady to the answer given by my Hon Friend the member for Hertfordshire South West (David Gauke), the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to questions 10437, 10438 and 10448, which sets out the criteria we expect the Overseas Territories to meet in relation to their central register of company beneficial ownership, or similarly effective system.

    We are in discussions with the Turks and Caicos Islands authorities on this and are offering technical assistance as they develop their proposals.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, how many times her Department has used the services of (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what (i) work was undertaken and (ii) the cost to the public purse was on each such occasion.

    Rory Stewart

    Detail on all DFID spend is available via our departmental website.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Attorney General, if he will publish a list of all secondees to the Law Officers’ Departments from (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what the role was of each of those secondees.

    Robert Buckland

    There have been no secondees from any consulting firm to the Attorney General’s Office, Government Legal Department, Crown Prosecution Service or Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate in the last three financial years.

    The Serious Fraud Office had one KPMG employee with them on secondment in 2015-16 covering a Principal Investigator role as an accountant on an operational case team.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what steps his Department takes when the register of persons with significant control reveals a criminal record.

    Margot James

    The register of PSC would not reveal a criminal record as it is not something that PSC are required to declare.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Margaret Hodge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2015-11-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the time taken for Montserrat to respond to his Department’s consultation on a public register of beneficial ownership.

    James Duddridge

    I refer the Right Honourable Lady to the answer given by my Hon Friend the member for Hertfordshire South West (David Gauke), the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to questions 10437, 10438 and 10448, which sets out the criteria we expect the Overseas Territories to meet in relation to their central register of company beneficial ownership, or similarly effective system. We are in discussions with the Montserrat authorities on this and are offering technical assistance as they develop their proposals.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, if she will publish a list of all secondees to her Department from (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what the role was of each of those secondees.

    Rory Stewart

    DFID has not seconded any individuals from PWC, Deloitte, Ernst & Young, KPMG in the last 3 years. Nor have we seconded any individuals from any other consulting firm in the same period.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Attorney General, how many times the Law Officers’ Departments have used the services of (a) PwC, (b) Deloitte, (c) Ernst and Young, (d) KPMG and (e) other consulting firms in the last three financial years; and what (i) work was undertaken and (ii) the cost to the public purse was on each such occasion.

    Jeremy Wright

    The Government Legal Department (GLD) and the Attorney General’s Office have not procured any consultancy advice or support in the last three years.

    GLD has used two of the firms specified to provide support to litigation cases involving the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The table below shows the amount spent with PwC and KPMG.

    Supplier

    2013/14 Total Value (Net)

    2014/15 Total Value (Net)

    2015/16 Total Value (Net)

    PwC

    £1,187,975

    £1,221,674

    £603,938

    KPMG

    £241,920

    £308,576

    £208,364

    Over the past three financial years Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service (HCMPSI) has spent £47,440 on consultancy services to provide general advice and support to the Chief Inspector and £6,662 to assist with a review of the shape and size of HMCPSI.

    The table below sets out payments made for the past three financial years by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) to the above firms and the reason for payment. None of these payments were for consultancy services. The SFO have engaged some other firms who provide consultancy services but in all cases this was for forensic accounting or expert witness services in support of our investigations rather than consultancy.

    Supplier

    2013/14 Total Value (Net)

    2014/15 Total Value (Net)

    2015/16 Total Value (Net)

    Deloitte

    –

    £8,732

    –

    PwC

    £12,500

    £1,259

    £8,262

    KPMG

    –

    £4,800

    –

    The Deloitte spending related to data recovery. PwC and Ernst & Young expenditure related to payment to an expert witness for an SFO case.

    The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has not incurred any expenditure with PwC, Ernst and Young or KPMG in the last three financial years.

    he CPS has incurred expenditure with Deloitte. However, records of each separate engagement are not maintained and the department is therefore unable to confirm the number of times Deloitte’s have been engaged.

    Central records of total CPS expenditure are maintained and expenditure with Deloitte’s for each of last financial years is shown in the table below.

    Deloitte LLP Milton Keynes

    Year

    £’s

    2013/14

    9,661

    2014/15

    20,952

    2015/16

    26,347

    Total

    56,960

    The payments relate to building works and associated services in respect of three offices the CPS has lease agreements on and where Deloitte’s act on behalf of the properties landlords.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    Margaret Hodge – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2016-10-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, with reference to the register of persons with significant control, how many companies have registered a shell company in an offshore tax haven as the persons with significant control of that company since 6 April 2016.

    Margot James

    Companies House does not hold figures on the number of companies that have registered a shell company in an offshore tax haven as their PSC. Companies can legitimately register a company as their PSC if that company meets the conditions of control, is the first legal entity in a company’s ownership chain and they are subject to their own disclosure requirements.

    A full explanation of the rules can be found in BEIS guidance.

    “

  • Margaret Hodge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Margaret Hodge – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Margaret Hodge on 2015-11-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the progress made by the Turks and Caicos Islands in meeting the Prime Minister’s ambition for a public register of beneficial ownership since June 2013.

    James Duddridge

    I refer the Right Honourable Lady to the answer given by my Hon Friend the member for Hertfordshire South West (David Gauke), the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to questions 10437, 10438 and 10448, which sets out the criteria we expect the Overseas Territories to meet in relation to their central register of company beneficial ownership, or similarly effective system.

    We are in discussions with the Turks and Caicos Islands authorities on this and are offering technical assistance as they develop their proposals.

  • Margaret Hodge – 2022 Speech on UK Companies Involved in Russia

    Margaret Hodge – 2022 Speech on UK Companies Involved in Russia

    The speech made by Margaret Hodge, the Labour MP for Barking, in the House of Commons on 7 December 2022.

    Mr Speaker, thank you very much for granting this urgent question. I thank the Minister for his reply. However, after listening to it, I would simply say to him that the Government have constantly talked about taking back control, and if there is one issue on which they should take back control it is this: ensuring that no British company invests in Russia.

    Today is the 286th day of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. In February, three days after the war started, BP said it

    “will exit its 19.75% shareholding in Rosneft”,

    Russia’s main oil company. Despite this promise, BP remains one of the largest shareholders. According to the excellent research by Global Witness, it is set to receive £580 million in dividends on the back of bumper profits fuelled by the war. Does the Minister agree with me that it is utterly shameful that a large, publicly listed British company profits from the sale of oil that is funding Putin’s war?

    Does the Minister further agree with the words of Mr Ustenko, President Zelensky’s economic adviser? He wrote to BP and said:

    “This is blood money, pure and simple, inflated profits made from the murder of Ukrainian civilians.”

    BP’s claim that it is locked in as a shareholder is both laughable and easily solved. To put this into perspective, BP’s dividends are equivalent to over one quarter of the total military and humanitarian aid provided by the UK Government to Ukraine.

    Does the Minister agree with Mr Ustenko that BP and any other company still invested in Russia’s fossil fuels must donate the entirety of its wartime profits to the victims of the war? Does he further agree that it is our duty to ensure that companies are not damaging Britain’s national interest? Will this Government therefore work to persuade BP to donate the entirety of its Russian dividends to the reconstruction of Ukraine, and if that fails, will the Minister commit to acting and forcing it to do so through a special windfall tax?

    James Cartlidge

    I am grateful to the right hon. Lady and pay tribute to her for her long-standing record of holding Governments to account on issues such as sanctions and international finance—I was previously Justice Minister when we had the strategic lawsuits against public participation issue. She has been very active, including across party lines.

    I entirely understand why people feel so strongly on this subject, and I feel strongly too—what Putin has done in Ukraine is appalling—but I am not going to comment on a specific UK company or taxpayer or their commercial decisions. I have set out the range of measures we are taking, and it is important to stress that while we all want companies that have committed to divesting to do so, there are of course issues. I do not say this with specific prejudice to any individual, firm or company, but, for example, should a firm divesting from Russia by selling its shares sell them in such a way that they returned to an individual entity that was sanctioned, there would rightly be condemnation of that. This is not a straightforward process—and I repeat that I do not say that in reference to any specific company.

    I totally agree that we should do everything possible to support the people of Ukraine, and we can be very proud of the enormous effort our country has made. The right hon. Lady rightly talked about our duty, and I believe we have a duty to support Ukraine. We are second only to the United States in the amount of aid we have given to the people of Ukraine, now totalling over £6 million, and, as I understand it, we have been training its soldiers—22,000 of them—since 2015. This country has done its bit in relation to Ukraine. We are proud of that, and of course we want to do more and go further, which is why we work with our partners; that is why only on Monday we announced a decision in partnership with G7 states and Australia in relation to Russian oil across the piece. We have a record of taking decisive action, and in terms of the Treasury, of the most powerful sanctions against Russia on record, which is hitting its economy. We of course have no dispute with the Russian people, who will feel the impact of that, but we are doing everything possible, bar direct military action, to support the people of Ukraine.