Criminal Finances Bill — New Clause 19 — The Culture of the Banking Industry and Failure to Prevent the Facilitation of Tax Evasion — 21 Feb 2017 at 17:00

Kelvin Hopkins MP, Luton North voted for a review into the extent to which banking culture contributed to the failure to prevent the facilitation of tax evasion in the banking sector.

The majority of MPs voted against a review into the extent to which banking culture contributed to the failure to prevent the facilitation of tax evasion in the banking sector.

MPs were considering the Criminal Finances Bill[1].

The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: The Culture of the Banking Industry and Failure to Prevent the Facilitation of Tax Evasion and stated:

  • (1) The Secretary of State must undertake a review into the extent to which banking culture contributed to the failure to prevent the facilitation of tax evasion in the banking sector.
  • (2) The review must consider, but shall not be limited to, the following issues—
  • (a) the impact of culture change on decision making senior executive and board level;
  • (b) the pressure on staff to meet performance targets;
  • (c) how allegations of tax evasion are reported and acted on.
  • (3) The review must set out what steps the UK Government intends to take to ensure that banking culture is not facilitating tax evasion.
  • (4) In carrying out this review, the Secretary of State must consult—
  • (a) devolved administrations;
  • (b) HMRC;
  • (c) the Serious Fraud Office;
  • (d) the Financial Conduct Authority;
  • (e) interested charities, and
  • (f) anyone else the Secretary of State deems appropriate.
  • (5) The Secretary of State shall lay a copy of the review before the House of Commons within six months of this Act receiving Royal Assent."

==

Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con294 (+2 tell) 0090.0%
DUP4 0050.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 30100.0%
Lab0 175076.1%
LDem0 7077.8%
PC0 2066.7%
SDLP0 30100.0%
SNP0 50 (+2 tell)096.3%
UUP2 00100.0%
Total:300 241084.9%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive