(Bishop Auckland)
(Lab):...Then there is a footnote to list the overseas
countries and territories that have that special relation with
the United Kingdom:
“Anguilla, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, South Georgia and
the South Sandwich Islands, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena
and Dependencies, British Antarctic Territory, British Indian
Ocean Territory, Turks and Caicos Islands, British Virgin
Islands and Bermuda.”
New Clause 1
Public registers of beneficial ownership of companies in the
British overseas territories
(1) For the purpose of preventing money laundering, the Secretary
of State must provide all reasonable assistance to the
governments of—
(a) Anguilla;
(b) Bermuda;
(c) the British Virgin Islands;
(d) the Cayman Islands;
(e) Montserrat; and
(f) the Turks and Caicos Islands,
to enable each of those governments to establish a publicly
accessible register of the beneficial ownership of companies
registered in that government’s jurisdiction...
...The situation in the Cayman Islands is similar. We have
an exchange of beneficial ownership information—a central
register—but it is done in secret. They are on the European
Union’s greylist. The Turks and Caicos have a private
register. Like the British Virgin Islands, they were given more
time by the European Union because they were affected by the
hurricanes. Bermuda has a private register and is on the European
Union greylist. The legislation is in place for Montserrat, but
no register has been set up. Mind you, Montserrat does not have
any particular financial expertise, so it does not matter very
much...
(Oxford East)
(Lab/Co-op):...There is also concern about having
the resource necessary to implement more transparency. I strongly
agree with what the hon. Member for Ochil and South Perthshire
said in that regard. That is why our new clause calls for support
for the overseas territories to implement the changes. We do not
want to end up in a situation similar to what happened in
the Turks and CaicosIslands, where there
were repeated warnings that there were problems but nothing was
done until it got to such a height that there had to be what some
would say was a very draconian response. We do not want to get to
that situation; we want to see change. I will go on to explain
what happened in the Turks and Caicos Islands in a
moment, because colleagues need to know about that. We have not
yet talked about the instances where Britain has exercised its
relationships and the levers it possesses...
...Let me turn to where the UK has used its
available levers to achieve change in a consensual, and sometimes
respectful, manner. Colleagues have mentioned that there are
different governance arrangements, which is correct. In some
areas, Governors are directly responsible for the oversight of
the financial sector, so surely in Anguilla, Montserrat and
the Turks and Caicos Islands there should be
a quick move in that direction. As I understand, Montserrat has
committed to implementing this public register, but in other
territories that is the role of financial services commissions,
which in turn are in contact with the UK Government. It would be
helpful for the Committee to understand exactly how the
Government are using their influence over those commissions to
try to seek this necessary change...
...My final case relates to the broad concerns that were raised
about governance on the Turks and Caicos Islands. There had been
rumours about those concerns for a long time, and the problems
meant that the individuals living on those islands were having
their due stolen from them because public resources were being
dealt with corruptly. Unfortunately, it took a very long process,
until eventually the Foreign Affairs Committee investigated the
territories—including the TCI—and the FCO Minister at the time
was forced to bring about change.
The Minister for Europe and the Americas (Sir Alan
Duncan): Unfortunately for the hon. Lady, she seems
unaware that I was the Minister responsible for Turks and Caicos,
as a Minister in the Department for International Development at
the time. The reasons she cited for our intervention are
completely inaccurate. There was a growing financial deficit of
£30 million, forecast to be £60 million and then £90 million—it
would have been half a billion pounds within a very short time.
On that basis, we stepped in and parachuted in a chief financial
officer to get the public finances back into shape. It was a
great success and is a good example of us intervening in a
perfectly proper way in co-operation with the Governor and the
Government there...
To read the whole debate, CLICK
HERE
