Commission statement on Lord Laidlaw and tax residency
In the light of today's media stories, the Commission are
publishing the following relevant draft paragraphs from our forthcoming
annual report which cover the Commission's dealings with Lord Laidlaw
over his tax residency:
The Commission looks at residency as part of its vetting process. It
considers that, as a matter of principle, individuals who are appointed to
the House of Lords should have their main home in the United Kingdom so
that they can devote the time necessary to make an active and effective
contribution to the work of the House. The Commission also requires that
nominees must be resident in the UK for tax purposes.
During spring 2004, the Commission vetted a list of party-political
nominees. One of the individuals on the list, Irvine Laidlaw (now Lord
Laidlaw of Rothiemay), was not resident in the UK. Following an exchange of
correspondence and a face-to-face meeting, the Commission accepted
assurances from Lord Laidlaw that he would become resident in the UK for
tax purposes from April 2004. On the basis of this assurance the Commission
found no objection to his appointment. The Commission would have taken a
different view on Lord Laidlaw’s nomination if it had known that he would
not be resident in the UK for tax purposes from April 2004. In June 2004 he
was appointed to the House of Lords.
Lord Laidlaw has not become resident in the UK for tax purposes.
In 2005, as a result of a review of its vetting process, the Commission
took the decision that in future it would decline to scrutinise nominees
who were not already resident in the UK for tax purposes. It will continue
to ask all nominees to confirm that they will remain resident in the UK for
tax purposes.
