BOT Tricky Questions Flashcards
Given that illegitimate finances are likely a small percentage of the funds stored offshore, obliging individuals to reveal their identities is disproportionate.
Even if the percentage of illicit finance stashed away in offshore havens is small, the impact is not.
(Talk about the harm caused)
They constitute a threat to privacy and put individuals at risk.
It is entirely possible to safeguard individuals who are vulnerable or at risk on a case by case basis.
(Talk about UK PSC register)
It is not beyond the wit of governments to protect vulnerable people who are real risk of harm from being named in a public register. The UK’s PSC register manages this quite well.
It doesn’t take a register to show that someone is wealthy, it is often very plain to see. In other cases, such as income and asset declarations of public officials in Balkan countries, research has confirmed that no security risks materialised following implementation.
Transparency should be the norm, if there is an overwhelming case for privacy in exceptional cases, then privacy should be granted.
They undermine the economic development of island states.
Who is benefiting? Many would argue that it’s a small group of people who are involved in or connected to the services industries based there. If this is so lucrative, why is there still poverty in some of these places?
Moreover, what about the poverty being driven around the world by public officials looting funds meant for health and education and infrastructure - in places like Equatorial Guinea.
The problem with the current economic model is that it’s the money laundering model. That might be OK for a small number of citizens living in those territories but it is not OK for the worl’s citizens who suffer because of corruption.
But no one else is doing it!
We agree that standards do need to be adopted globally, but the harm is such that we cannot wait for universal agreement. We need to begin with those jurisdictions which create the most risk. Moreover, if no one makes the first move, nothing will change.
But aren’t the private registers already more effective?
Private registers only be effective in clamping down on malfeasance and error in cases which are brought to the attention of law enforcement. Public registers, which can easily be reviewed by investigators the world over, by journalists, and by citizens, will better incentivise accurate reporting and ensure constant verification across the board (i.e. they have a stronger deterrent effect).
The BVI and others have already committed to share information
· The BVI has committed to establishing a searchable register but this is only accessible to the BVI Government. The UK authorities have to go through the BVI and do not have direct access to search and browse through a set of aggregated data.
· There are many reasons why public central registers are preferable.
Public registers would be expensive to set up
The UK Government should help with that?
