---

Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base

The Minister has essentially enunciated a continuation of the policy advocated by the previous Administration. In fact, this common consolidated corporation tax base proposal has been around for a decade or so. In that time there has not been a massive change in policy, which is interesting, because I had anticipated that, in her quasi-Thatcherite mode, the Minister would say, ““No, no, no!”” to this proposal—but she did not. As I said, it is interesting that the motion is quite carefully worded. It specifically mentions ““reasoned opinion””, ““subsidiarity and proportionality”” and so forth, but if passed it would not actually instruct the House of Commons to reject the directive as drafted. I suspect—on this point I was thinking of intervening on the hon. Lady, but I thought I would let her finish—that it might be more to do with the Liberal Democrat position on this issue. [Interruption.] The Minister rolls her eyes, but there are no Lib Dems here so it is difficult to put them on the spot. Hon. Members will be interested to hear the Lib Dems' official policy on a common consolidated corporate tax base. In their 2009 document, they stated that they would ““address the variability issue”” on cross-border corporation tax"““by developing a medium and long-term statement of business tax policy, covering a minimum two parliament timeframe. This statement would…identify areas for greater international co-operation on tax policy. A clear area for co-operation is in the movement towards a harmonised tax base in the EU, often referred to as a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base””." So, there is a loud voice—muscular and visible, as we now know—in the coalition arguing vociferously in favour of a common consolidated corporate tax base. I say that for the benefit of the House, because it is important that hon. Members know the facts. Given that the motion was published only this morning on the Order Paper—hon. Members did not really have notice of exactly the Government's proposition, which is quite ridiculous—and that all 298 pages of the supporting papers were published only yesterday, I am not surprised that many hon. Members have not yet woken up to the opinion being taken of the Government on this matter.