§ Viscount Waverleyasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will take into account the final destination of goods, as opposed to their transit destination, when calculating the figures by country for the United Kingdom's trade exports; and whether they will consider altering the relevant Customs forms to accommodate this.
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, Her Majesty's Customs and Excise is the department responsible for collecting and recording trade statistics on the movement of goods with other countries. The UK's export statistics are produced by Customs on the basis of the declared final country of destination and that approach is reflected in Customs forms at present.
§ Viscount WaverleyMy Lords, the Government will wish to avoid distorted decision-making. Therefore, is the noble Lord aware that approximately 45 per cent of Britain's official figures are affected by the entrepôt factor which affects our country league tables, our bilateral relations, direction of effort, general policy and resource decision-making in all government departments?
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, the noble Viscount is not correct. He refers to entrepôts, by which I assume he is referring to places such as Rotterdam and Antwerp and places outside the European Union. When goods are exported to a final destination via Rotterdam, Antwerp or any other entrepôt, it is the final destination, not the entrepôt, which is recorded on the forms. The export trade statistics are therefore correct.
§ Lord SaatchiMy Lords, is the Minister aware that the noble Viscount, Lord Waverley, touches on a key point and one which has involved the Government being criticised by a long list of complainants about the way in which the Government have used statistics, including in recent months the OECD, the Treasury Select Committee and only today the All-Party Agriculture Committee of another place? Will he reconsider the offer which I made him last week; namely, that that surely could be one area at least in which the parties could co-operate to ensure that government statictics are beyond the reach of those 118 who would in any way distort them for political purposes? Our three parties could work together in that one area for the benefit of Parliament as a whole.
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, I am not sure whether or not the noble Lord is accusing the Government of distorting the statistics. He shied away somewhat from a final accusation. There is no reason to suppose that the government statistics are distorted in any direction. I appreciate that a number of people—notably, Mr Norris McWhirter—who think that because goods are first exported to European Union countries and then on to other destinations, the final destination is not properly recorded and that, therefore, the proportion of our export trade which is with the European Union is incorrect. There is no reason to suppose that that is the case. There is no reason why anybody should declare a wrong final destination unless, of course, those are goods which must be exported on licence. In that case, there is always the motivation for fraud. But if the noble Lord can show me any evidence that the Customs figures are distorted, I shall be pleased to discuss it with him.
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords, I ask the noble Lord whether he accepts that for Customs declaration purposes, the distinction between final destination and transit destination is strictly relevant to all licensed goods and in particular armaments? I do not suggest improper usage of any forms, but if that is relevant for licensed goods such as armament exports, why should it not be relevant also to other goods?
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, I do not want to rub salt into any Conservative wounds, but it is a fact that there have been occasions in the past when arms exports have been wrongly declared as going to Singapore rather than to their final destination of Iraq. Noble Lords opposite will be aware of that fact and of ministerial involvement in it. Those are the only occasions that I can think of where there is any motivation for declaring other than the true final destination. The port of export, the transit port, is not declared on European Community forms used by Customs and Excise.
§ Lord Pearson of RannochMy Lords, when one considers the re-export of materials and goods to the European Union, the goods which are exported to Rotterdam and Antwerp for onward transmission outside the European Union and the investments made through the Netherlands for tax reasons—the so-called Netherlands distortion—does the Minister accept that that takes us to a figure of only some 10 per cent of our gross domestic product or of our economy which is involved in trade with the European Union at all? If so, does the noble Lord accept that it makes a nonsense of the Prime Minister's often repeated claim that over 50 per cent of our trade lies with the European Union?
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord Saatchi, the noble Lord is shying away from quite making an accusation that our export 119 trade statistics are distorted. If he wants to make that accusation and if he wants me to debate it with him, I am happy to do so. In the absence of any such evidence, I repeat that goods which are exported to destinations outside the European Union via Rotterdam, Antwerp or anywhere in the European Union are recorded in our statistics by their country of final destination and not as going through Antwerp or Rotterdam.