UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Sammy Wilson

  • Sammy Wilson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Sammy Wilson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sammy Wilson on 2014-01-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many (a) laundering plants and (b) millions of litres of fuel were seized in the UK by HM Revenue and Customs in each of the last 10 years.

    Nicky Morgan

    Figures are only available for the years 2010-11 and onwards. The number of laundering plants and millions of litres of fuel seized in those years was as follows.

    Year

    Laundering Plants

    Fuel (millions litres)

    2010-11

    23 (20 NI 3 GB)

    2.74

    2011-12

    29 (NI figure only)

    2.44

    2012-13 to Dec 13

    26 (22 NI 4 GB)

    2.63

    HMRC fights fraud on a wide range of fronts, from special units performing thousands of roadside checks to raiding laundering plants. HMRC has also recently concluded the evaluation of a possible new marker for rebated fuel, which will make it harder to launder marked fuel and sell it at a profit.

    HMRC uses several avenues to tackle fraud: criminal prosecution, civil action (such as seizing fuel or pumps), civil penalties and strong regulatory controls.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Sammy Wilson – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sammy Wilson on 2015-10-22.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much his Department has spent to date on legal fees in respect of the case against the Aggregates Levy brought by the British Aggregates Association.

    Damian Hinds

    The lawfulness of the Aggregates Levy been challenged in the UK and European courts for over thirteen years by the British Aggregates Association. No court has ever found the levy to be unlawful.

    The legal challenges have also caused many years of uncertainty for industry, and have prevented the government from making any significant changes to the levy.

    The government’s legal costs are not finalised and are continuing to rise. This should be viewed against over £4 billion (and rising) in levy revenue that the government’s defence is protecting.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2022 Question on “Obsessive Pursuit of Net Zero”

    Sammy Wilson – 2022 Question on “Obsessive Pursuit of Net Zero”

    The question asked by Sammy Wilson, the DUP MP for East Antrim, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2022.

    In the relentless and obsessive pursuit of net zero, the Government are now adopting policies that are contradictory and, in some cases, dangerous. We are going to import billions of pounds-worth of natural gas from countries who frack that gas, yet we are turning our back on the natural resources we have in our own country, sacrificing revenue, jobs and energy security. We are going to rely more on wind and solar power, the earth metals for which are in the hands of autocratic regimes, especially China. We are importing wood from America to burn in a power station in the United Kingdom at a cost of billions to electricity consumers. Those policies might be welcomed by the chattering classes, but does the Prime Minister understand the bewilderment, frustration and anger of those who struggle to pay their electricity bills and worry about energy security?

    The Prime Minister

    I agree with the right hon. Gentleman about importing liquified natural gas, which is why I am keen to encourage more exploitation of our domestic oil and gas resources in the North sea. He and I are aligned on that. We have conducted a new North sea licensing round, leading to about 100 new licensing applications. That will increase jobs in the UK and our energy security, and that is the right thing to do.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Sammy Wilson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sammy Wilson on 2014-06-24.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how much has accrued to the Exchequer in VAT receipts from the sale of sanitary products in each of the last five years; and if he will review the applicability of such a tax with existing equality legislation.

    Mr David Gauke

    VAT receipts from the sale of sanitary products, subject to the reduced rate of VAT, are estimated to have been approximately £15m in each of the last five years.

    VAT rules apply the standard rate of 20 per cent to most goods and services. While there are exceptions to this standard rate, these are strictly limited under EU VAT law.

    One such exception is that female sanitary products can be subject to a reduced rate of VAT. Since 2001, the UK has therefore applied a 5 per cent reduced rate of VAT, the lowest permissible under EU law, to the supply of sanitary products.

    The application of VAT in the EU, including rates and flexibilities afforded to member states in this regard, is governed by EU law. It means, for example that the Government cannot apply a zero rate tofemale sanitary products. That would require a change to EU VAT legislation, which would require a proposal from the European Commission and the unanimous agreement of all 28 member states.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Sammy Wilson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sammy Wilson on 2014-06-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will make it his policy to research the use of non-slip surfaces for man-holes in order to reduce the number of accidents involving motor cycles.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    There are various types of manhole covers on the market that have enhanced skid resistance. In addition, the Institute of Highways Engineers has produced guidance on locating manhole covers to reduce the risk to they pose to motorcyclists. As such, the Department currently has no plans to commission research on these issues.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2022 Speech on the Personal Conduct of Suella Braverman

    Sammy Wilson – 2022 Speech on the Personal Conduct of Suella Braverman

    The speech made by Sammy Wilson, the DUP MP for East Antrim, in the House of Commons on 26 October 2022.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2022 Speech on the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill

    Sammy Wilson – 2022 Speech on the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill

    The speech made by Sammy Wilson, the DUP MP for East Antrim, in the House of Commons on 27 June 2022.

    I welcome this Bill, which is long overdue. It delivers on some of the promises that were made to get devolution restored in Northern Ireland but on which no action has been taken for the last 18 months. It is important for people to understand that it is essential for the restoration of devolution in Northern Ireland that the protocol issue is dealt with. That is because the very basis of devolution in the Belfast agreement is destroyed by the protocol. Unionist parties believe that the protocol is designed for the destruction of our place within the United Kingdom, that it is damaging our economy and hurting individuals, and that if the Assembly is up and running and the protocol is not dealt with, Unionist participation in the Assembly would mean that we had to facilitate the implementation of the agreement and acquiesce in other parties facilitating and implementing the protocol, which we believe is designed for our destruction. No other party in this House would enter a coalition arrangement—don’t forget, this is a mandatory coalition; we have to be there—where it was obliged to support, facilitate and undertake policies to which it was totally opposed. That is why devolution will not be restored until the protocol issue is dealt with.

    Much has been said today about having flexibilities in the checks on goods, but it is not just about that. The whole issue of the protocol is that it undermines democracy in Northern Ireland. It imposes foreign law on Northern Ireland and on companies that do not even trade with the EU. It is not necessary for them to comply with that law, yet the protocol requires them to do so.

    Paul Girvan (South Antrim) (DUP)

    It is worth noting that not one Unionist party has approved the protocol. We are all united against it. The protocol has virtually created an economically united Ireland, and the EU is party to driving that forward with the Republic of Ireland in the negotiations, which has created a major problem. Not one constituency in this Parliament does not have people who are finding it difficult to supply goods to businesses in Northern Ireland.

    Sammy Wilson

    My hon. Friend makes an important point. Only the Social Democratic and Labour party has suggested tonight that there are no problems with the protocol. Every other party now accepts that, to one degree or another, there are problems caused by the protocol, which is one of the issues we have faced in these negotiations. The Irish Government, through their Foreign Minister, have patronisingly come to Northern Ireland to tell us, “You don’t really know what you’re talking about. There isn’t a problem.” Of course that has fed through to the EU negotiators, which is one reason why it is important that we have this Bill.

    I have listened to Labour Members ask, “What about article 16?” The first people to squeal if the Government had invoked article 16 would have been the Labour party. The hon. Member for Walthamstow (Stella Creasy) talked about consulting the people of Northern Ireland, but she did not care too much about consulting on abortion. Now she is, as a Labour Member, appealing to the toffs down the other end of the building to defeat this Bill.

    Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)

    Order. I think the right hon. Gentleman is talking about Members of the other place.

    Sammy Wilson

    I am.

    Stella Creasy

    Would the right hon. Gentleman be opposed to bringing more representatives of the Northern Irish political parties into the joint working groups to solve this problem? Is he actually saying that he does not want a voice in this and that he just wants to shout?

    Sammy Wilson

    The people of Northern Ireland recently spoke in an election, and the Unionist population made it quite clear that they will not accept the protocol.

    Angus Brendan MacNeil

    On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson) for setting the parliamentary precedent that we are now allowed to refer to the House downbye as the “House of toffs.” I think that is a rather good suggestion.

    Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)

    The hon. Gentleman will find it was corrected to “Members of the other place” or even “noble Members of the other place.” Toffs? No.

    Sammy Wilson

    I do not know whether “noble toffs” is acceptable, Mr Deputy Speaker.

    Members have argued that surely we can do this by negotiation, so let us look at the record. The EU has said not once or twice but every time that it will not renegotiate the text of the protocol. The EU has said it every time it has visited Northern Ireland and every time it has met Government representatives. In fact, the EU has now gone further and is taking us to court to impose more checks.

    The result of removing the grace periods would be to increase the number of checks per week for goods coming into Northern Ireland from 6,000 to 25,000. This is hardly flexibility from the EU. Indeed, the EU recently wrote to the Government to demand checks on not only goods but people on ferries or airplanes from GB into Northern Ireland. The EU is demanding that people’s personal baggage is searched to make sure they are not bringing in sandwiches or whatever else. Constituents told me this week that such searches have already started in Cairnryan. This is not flexibility but a hardening of attitude by the EU.

    Whether by triggering article 16 or through negotiation, we all know what the outcome will be, and that is why the Government have had to take this unilateral action. The Government are not abandoning their obligations. In fact, they are honouring their obligations in two ways. First, they are honouring their obligation to the EU in so far as the single market will be protected by the goods going through the red lane, by the imposition of fines on firms that try to avoid the checks and by the requirement on firms in Northern Ireland that want to trade with the EU to comply voluntarily with all EU regulations. That safeguards the EU market, so we are living up to our obligations to the European Union.

    At the same time, the Government are living up to their obligation to the people of Northern Ireland, because the green lane or free lane—or whatever they want to call it—enables goods to come into Northern Ireland without any checks. It does not require the imposition of EU law on the 95% of firms in Northern Ireland that do not trade with the Irish Republic, and it ensures that judgments on whether the law has been broken are made by courts in the United Kingdom, albeit with reference to decisions made by the European Court of Justice.

    If one looks at this Bill objectively, rather than through the eyes of those in this House who think we should have remained and still want to act almost as agents of the EU, it will help to restore devolution, it will ensure the integrity of the United Kingdom and it will protect the European single market.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2020 Speech on the Future Relationship with the EU Bill

    Sammy Wilson – 2020 Speech on the Future Relationship with the EU Bill

    The speech made by Sammy Wilson, the DUP MP for East Antrim, in the House of Commons on 30 December 2020.

    I am glad that in two days’ time we will be finally leaving the EU. That is something that my party and I personally campaigned for, and it is something that would probably not have happened had it not been for the votes and crucial debates in this House when remainers tried to undermine the result of the referendum.

    I have to say that today that euphoria is tinged with sadness, because the deal that the Prime Minister has struck will not apply equally to all parts of the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland will not enjoy all the benefits of this deal. Indeed, we will still find ourselves tied to some of the restrictions of EU membership that the rest of the United Kingdom has been freed from. We welcome the limitations that have been placed on the withdrawal agreement and the mitigations that have been made to it, but unfortunately the withdrawal agreement is still an integral part of the Government’s policy and an integral part of this deal. This deal commits the Government to implementing not only this agreement but supplementary agreements, and they have to do it in good faith.

    We therefore find that the detrimental impacts of the withdrawal agreement—that Northern Ireland will still be subject to some EU laws made in Brussels; that those laws will be adjudicated by the European Court of Justice; and that there will be barriers to internal trade within the United Kingdom between Northern Ireland and GB, and GB and Northern Ireland—are already being manifested. GB companies are indicating that they will no longer supply to Northern Ireland. VAT on cars will increase in Northern Ireland. From 1 January 2021, second-hand cars in Northern Ireland will be 20% dearer as a result of VAT rules applying, and a whole range of other things.

    Jim Shannon

    Does my right hon. Friend agree that there seems to be no protection for the single market regulations, in particular for banking and investment firms? There is not even the option for firms in Northern Ireland to apply for authorisation to the equivalent of the Financial Conduct Authority. Does he feel that that is an anomaly that needs to be addressed?

    Sammy Wilson

    Of course, it is not only in those areas. The Prime Minister talked about the way in which, because there was no longer any need for regulatory conformity, the UK could free itself to develop FinTech, biosciences and agricultural practices. Because Northern Ireland will still remain under some of the EU regulations, we will, in many ways, not be able to benefit from those new and exciting opportunities.

    Having said that, Northern Ireland will still be part of the United Kingdom. I know that people have said that this deal will drive a wedge into the Union. A wedge can only be driven into the Union when the people of Northern Ireland decide that they no longer wish to remain part of the UK. When it comes to a choice between joining the Irish Republic—a small nation which will bob about in the future storms of economic chaos—and being anchored to the fifth-largest economy in the world, which will prosper under Brexit, I believe that that choice will be an easy one for the people of Northern Ireland.

    What I would say to the Prime Minister, though, is that there will be economic damage as a result of our exclusion from this agreement, but there are opportunities. There is a joint committee, there is a review of the agreement, there is the fact that we now have parliamentary sovereignty, and there is the fact that the Government can act unilaterally to undo economic damage. We will continue to press you and your Government, Prime Minster, to live up to your promises that Northern Ireland will not be disadvantaged as a result of the deals you have done.

    Let me finally say that we will not be voting for this deal today, and I think the reasons are obvious. We are excluded from many of its benefits. That does not mean we have any common cause with the petulant remainers in this Parliament who want to undo the referendum; it is because we are disappointed Brexiteers. It is because we are people who believed that the United Kingdom should leave and should leave as a whole, and that is not happening, and for that reason we will not be voting for this deal today.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2020 Speech on EU Negotiations

    Sammy Wilson – 2020 Speech on EU Negotiations

    Below is the text of the speech made by Sammy Wilson, the DUP MP in East Antrim, in the House of Commons on 4 June 2020.

    May I say at the very start that we support the Government in getting this deal done by the end of this year, and in honouring the commitment that has been made, including in manifestos to the people of the UK?

    I could rehearse the things that we in Northern Ireland want to see undone in this withdrawal agreement. Of course, it is most damaging to the Northern Ireland economy and Northern Ireland businesses—it puts burdens on them and puts additional administrative checks on them—and, indeed, it leaves Northern Ireland open to anti-competitive dumping by EU countries. However, I want to widen this today. Many people see the Northern Ireland protocol as something that simply affects Northern Ireland: “It was unfortunate; we had to do it; we had to get a deal through; we don’t like parts of it, but given the special circumstances, it was the best we could do.” The point of the Northern Ireland protocol is this: it is the back door through which the EU is going to continue to undermine the sovereignty of this Parliament.​

    The Minister congratulated the hon. Member for Stone (Sir William Cash) on the fact that he has worked tirelessly to restore the sovereignty of this House. This withdrawal agreement and the protocol undermine and continue to undermine the sovereignty of this House. It does that through article 10 of the Northern Ireland protocol, which insists that the state aid rules will apply not to Northern Ireland, as paragraph 40 of the Government’s Command Paper suggests, but to the United Kingdom as a whole. Any state aid that the Government of the United Kingdom give to any firm that trades in Northern Ireland, as this therefore has an effect on possible trade by those firms through Northern Ireland into the rest of the EU, will be subject to EU laws, and the final adjudication on that, according to article 12 of the Northern Ireland protocol, will be by the European Court of Justice.

    Let me give an example about any support that the Government give. Nissan has been mentioned today. If the Government decide they are going to help Nissan to develop battery cars, as Nissan sells cars in Northern Ireland, other car makers in Europe could challenge that, and the final adjudication on it will be not in the British courts, but in the European Court of Justice. That could extend to almost any activity, and for that reason it is important, if the Government are to live up to the commitment in the third part of their motion, that they address the withdrawal agreement. In the Command Paper, they see the withdrawal agreement as temporary anyway. They see it going along with a future trade arrangement.

    Sir William Cash

    Did my right hon. Friend notice the remarks that I made at the end of my speech with respect to the question of the Northern Ireland protocol?

    Sammy Wilson

    I did, and I appreciated the point that was made. It is important that this is revisited, and not just for the good of the economy and businesses in Northern Ireland. It is essential that it is addressed for the sovereignty of this Parliament and for the freedom of this Government to use fiscal policy, monetary policy and any kind of state support policy for the whole of the United Kingdom.

    There is hardly a business in GB that does not trade with Northern Ireland, so either they do not invest in or do not trade in Northern Ireland, or else they will find that they are subject to EU laws, and any Government policy addressed to them would be perceived as giving an advantage. By the way, that advantage only has to be theoretical, according to EU law. The effect does not have to be real, it does not have to affect sales—in theory, it does have to affect sales—and it does not have to be substantial; it can be a very small proportion of help or a very small proportion of the market. This is a huge foot in the door.

    I say to the Government that, during the scrutiny of and in the reports on this, we want to see what has been done. The withdrawal agreement must not be seen as set in stone if the Government, in their own Command Paper, see it as temporary anyway, albeit with the consent of the Northern Ireland Assembly. They also have to address the issue of how the withdrawal agreement impacts on sovereignty and on the ability of this Government to conduct their own economic policy in the United Kingdom.

  • Sammy Wilson – 2020 Speech on Covid-19

    Sammy Wilson – 2020 Speech on Covid-19

    Below is the text of the speech made by Sammy Wilson, DUP MP for East Antrim, in the House of Commons on 11 May 2020.

    May I, on behalf of my party, express our sympathies to those who have lost loved ones during this health crisis, and to those in the health service who have, manfully and womanfully, worked hard to ensure that lives are saved?

    We welcome the Government’s measures, and the announcements made in the Chamber today and by the Prime Minister last night. It is, of course, very difficult to balance the economic needs of the country with the imperative to safeguard people’s health. With hindsight, many people might criticise some of the things that the Government have done, but I believe that the decisions that were taken have had success in reducing the death toll and helping many businesses to survive, and we welcome many of the measures to be introduced.

    I believe that dealing with the virus and how we get out of lockdown should be approached on a UK-wide basis. Of course there are going to be different nuances and conditions in different regions of the United Kingdom. For example, in Northern Ireland we have a different ​school year from other parts of the United Kingdom, so some of the education measures may well be different. The peak of the virus is also different in different regions, so that may lead to different timings. Nevertheless, a UK-wide approach is important.

    A number of Members have already mentioned the fact that we share a common border with the Irish Republic. Surprisingly, despite the Good Friday agreement and the emphasis that the Irish Government have placed on it, at every step of this crisis they have not consulted the Administration in Stormont. When they had the lockdown, they did not consult. When they relaxed some of their measures, they did not consult. They are even taking a different approach to quarantining people who come in from outside Ireland and would eventually finish up in the United Kingdom. I think it is important that we have a UK-wide approach. We appreciate the co-operation that there has been on a weekly basis with the Administration in Stormont by Westminster.

    Looking forward is the important thing, because many businesses are concerned about what happens when the lockdown stops and this situation finishes. We see a number of issues. First, there has to be no cliff edge, but a tapering of the job retention scheme, which has been so vital to ensuring that workers have some money on which they can live and that employers do not have to lay off vital workers and then have to recruit them again.

    Secondly, various sectors of the economy have been hit far more than others. Tourism in Northern Ireland is an important sector of the economy, and it will take some time for it to ramp up. It is important that we look at sectoral support.

    Thirdly, many companies have already taken on additional debt through the bounce back loans and the coronavirus business interruption loan scheme, but they are debt-heavy, and there needs to be some reconsideration of how that leverage is reduced and debt replaced with equity. The banks have an important role to play in that, and I hope the Government will work with the banks. It is important that we work our way out of this together. I will finish, because I see you are rising to your feet, Madam Deputy Speaker.