Skip to main content

1-20 of 50 results for subject:Disqualification

Member X
David Howarth

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More
Howarth, David (50)

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

I am not too sure whether that point works, given that new clause 85 is a deeming clause. The person concerned would therefore be treated for tax purposes as resident and domiciled, regardless of the facts.

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
505 c119
House
House of Commons

I do not want to harp on about bishops to any great extent, as I did so last time we discussed the Bill. However, surely it is possible for a bishop to claim to be non-domiciled on the grounds of having foreign income and then take advantage of that position...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
505 c118
House
House of Commons

That point is fine, but my point was that the way the Minister is doing things, the individuals concerned are being forced to pay tax, even though they do not want to be domiciled in this country.

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
505 c128
House
House of Commons

I do not accept the premise of the hon. Gentleman's argument, because I do not know how we would measure a percentage of laws. Nor do I accept that laws passed in Europe are not passed by this country—that is also wrong, because this country passed an Act of Parliament...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
505 c122
House
House of Commons

I, too, welcome the Government's movement on the subject and support the proposal. However, I fear that they have chosen the wrong method to bring about a result that hon. Members of all parties want. I ask the Government to think again about that method because it does not reach...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
505 c120-2
House
House of Commons

I remind the hon. Gentleman that we are talking about people in the legislature—Members of Parliament and Members of the House of Lords. I rather doubt that a person living in Sicily would take into account the chances of becoming a Member of the House of Lords when deciding whether...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
505 c123
House
House of Commons

I do not think the Liberal Democrats have ever said it was a good idea for someone who had no connection with a local authority area to stand for election to that local authority. Perhaps I am expressing some Whig principles, but we have stood by those principles for a...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
505 c122
House
House of Commons

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that point and simply add this: the fact that people were seeking to avoid tax is important, not whether they actually ended up paying tax on one basis or another. The Liberal Democrats made a slightly different proposal that did not involve the deeming...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 February 2010
Reference
505 c123
House
House of Commons

I am not saying that all deals are shoddy, but this particular deal was one that excluded us and, as has been explained, was a method of getting a Bill through the House that did not go far enough from our point of view. We have been consistent in our...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c708
House
House of Commons

That was a fascinating defence, but I am not sure that I was convinced by it. The essence of the argument seems to be that there is a link between the bishops' professional discipline and their place in the Lords, so I suppose that that does provide a difference between...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c777
House
House of Commons

To deal with the final point made by the right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg), I should like to seek the opportunity to press amendment 94 to the vote, if the occasion so arises. I also gratefully adopt his arguments for that amendment. I...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c760-1
House
House of Commons

That "immediately" was said in 1911. The hon. Gentleman says that they did not mean it. The Liberals did mean it then, although there might well have been an internal compromise within the parliamentary party not to attempt to go further and to put that promise into the Act.

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c705
House
House of Commons

I suspect that the factions on women having the vote and on going further on House of Lords reform might well have been the same; the Cabinet was also split on that. I listened to the hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) and the Secretary of State, and...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c705
House
House of Commons

We were happy to take part in those discussions, but we were frustrated all the way through that one discussion had to lead to another discussion and then to another discussion. The Liberal Democrats have been clear about our policy since 1911, and the fact that everybody else seems to...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c706
House
House of Commons

The right hon. and learned Gentleman is right that there is that difference of opinion, but it seems to me that we have never got to that important part of the debate. However, we are not talking about that issue, but about the abolition of by-elections for the hereditary peers....

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c706
House
House of Commons

The trouble with that argument is that it assumes that economic management is a matter of legislation; I am sure that the hon. Gentleman, above all others, does not agree with that. Economic management is a matter of Government policy away from the legislative process. Constitutional reform is a separate...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c706
House
House of Commons

I accept that point, but there is a logical connection between our position on this issue and our position on disestablishment. That is not part of this Bill—more is the pity, although perhaps it covers enough issues already. In any case, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment....

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c777
House
House of Commons

Brussels.

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c763
House
House of Commons

That, of course, is another reason why the House of Lords is a splendid place, and its virtues should be preserved in any reform. For all those reasons, I urge the Government to re-adopt this policy. I shall be fascinated to hear whether they have indeed done a U-turn on...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c761
House
House of Commons

Well, "young" is a relative term. The average age in the House of Lords is 68. We do not want the House of Lords to be full of people who have an eye to a future political career at very high level. It is a virtue of the present House...

Member
David Howarth (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
504 c761
House
House of Commons