Category: Speeches

Lindsay Hoyle – 2022 Statement on Parties at Downing Street

The statement made by Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons, in the House on 19 April 2022.

Before we come to today’s business, I wish to make a short statement. I have received letters from a number of hon. and right hon. Members, including the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer), the Leader of the Opposition, requesting that I give precedence to a matter as an issue of privilege. The matter is the Prime Minister’s statements to the House regarding gatherings held at Downing Street and Whitehall during lockdown. The procedure for dealing with such a request is set out in “Erskine May” at paragraph 15.32.

I want to be clear about my role. First, as Members will appreciate, it is not for me to police the ministerial code. I have no jurisdiction over the ministerial code, even though a lot of people seem to think that I have. That is not the case. Secondly, it is not for me to determine whether or not the Prime Minister has committed a contempt. My role is to decide whether there is an arguable case to be examined.

Having considered the issue, and having taken advice from the Clerks of the House, I have decided that this is a matter that I should allow the precedence accorded to issues of privilege. Therefore, the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras may table a motion for debate on Thursday. Scheduling the debate for Thursday will, I hope, give Members an opportunity to consider the motion and their response to it. The motion will appear on Thursday’s Order Paper, to be taken after any urgent questions or statements—hopefully, there will not be any. I hope that this is helpful to the House.

19/04/2022
Matt Warman – 2022 Speech on the Computer Misuse Act 1990

The speech made by Matt Warman, the Conservative MP for Boston and Skegness, in Westminster Hall on 19 April 2022.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Dr Wallis) on securing this debate. I myself put in for a debate on this issue a while ago, but the gods obviously smile more on Bridgend than they do on Boston. Nevertheless, I welcome this opportunity to debate the issue.

I thank the Minister and his officials for several meetings that he and I have had about this issue relatively recently. All were prompted, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend said, by CyberUp and by Kat Sommer, who deserves to be cited in Hansard for her persistence, among many other things.

This is an important but technical issue. I will be honest and say that I am not completely certain that the Computer Misuse Act 1990 is broken, but I am certain that it can be improved, by one means or another. That is because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend said, the structure of the cyber-security industry has changed since the Act came into force, and is different from almost any other part of the national security set-up. If we were to ask whether academics have a right to interrogate systems for the purposes of research, we would definitely say yes. If we were to ask whether businesses have the right to interrogate those same systems, we would assume that it was for commercial purposes and that it was important to have different rules.

It is also a sector where a lot of very small-scale research is done by individuals—some of them literally in their bedrooms. There is a very diverse set of people looking for loopholes and vulnerabilities. Uncovering those vulnerabilities—be they in banks, businesses or any other area where we all rely on the internet—is categorically in the public interest, even if it may also be in the interests of businesses, researchers or people looking for bounties given by large businesses to uncover those vulnerabilities. Those businesses realise that it is in their interests to provide the maximum security to their customers or users.

That gets to the heart of why the Computer Misuse Act matters. On the one hand, it seeks to prevent hacking and other things that we do not want to see done by people with malign intent; but on the other hand, it risks fettering the ability of people with the public interest at heart to solve issues that we would all like to see solved. Admiring the problem is the easy bit; the hard bit is trying to work out what we should do about it.

There are a couple of things that we should not do. We should not introduce a blanket public interest defence for anyone who goes looking for things that might subsequently be perceived as a loophole or bug in a system. To do that would potentially give carte blanche to anyone who got caught, allowing them to claim that they were going to fess up about it, rather than benefit from it themselves. A public interest defence that goes too far should be avoided. I find it hard to imagine how a public interest defence might be constructed that does not, inadvertently or otherwise, go too far.

The other thing that we should not do—notwithstanding the figures that my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend quoted—is assume that cyber firms of any sort should not be mindful of legislation such as the Computer Misuse Act. Of course, if someone is doing research they should consider what is legal. It is a good thing, not a bad thing, that it is a factor for consideration for those who are engaged in the cyber-security industry. We should be mindful of how we can fix the Act, rather than just sweep it away altogether. I come to a point that was made a moment ago; those issues can probably be addressed through enhanced guidance that provides a degree of legal comfort to the unsurprisingly risk-averse lawyers who work for cyber firms and others. Such guidance would not provide carte blanche to people who might have malevolent intent.

Criminals will not be looking at the CMA and wondering whether what they are doing is legal; by definition criminals are not bothered about whether they are breaking the law. However, there is an important grey area, and we should not create an unintended opportunity for people to defend themselves in court. I implore the Minister to continue his work on the review of the Act, which is really important, but with some minor legislative tweaking we could provide the comfort that the industry rightly asks for and could continue to secure the excellent reputation that Britain has and, as the hon. Member for Strangford said, that Belfast has, for being a world-leading cyber power. We can build on that success because the CMA is an example of a bit of legislation that, although very old, has largely stood the test of time for a lot longer than many might think.

I will close by simply saying that the principles embedded in the CMA are not bad ones. Whenever it comes to legislating for the internet, we should realise that the internet has not necessarily reinvented every single wheel, and principles that apply offline can be applied online. In this case, they need a little bit of updating, but I do not think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater, as the hon. Member for Strangford said.

19/04/2022
Jim Shannon – 2022 Speech on the Computer Misuse Act 1990

The speech made by Jim Shannon, the DUP MP for Strangford, in Westminster Hall on 19 April 2022.

It is a pleasure to speak in this debate, Sir Mark. I commend the hon. Member for Bridgend (Dr Wallis) for setting the scene so well. I look forward to contributions from others, especially the Minister. From previous experience of dealing with the Minister, and of partnership and co-operation with him, I believe that his answers will be helpful to us. Whether we are technically-minded or otherwise, we all recognise the key issues to which the hon. Member for Bridgend has referred. Why is this issue so important? It is because, as the hon. Gentleman has said, stakeholders have expressed deep and real concerns about the poor security of many devices. I will speak first about individuals and companies, and then probably take my arguments a wee bit beyond that.

Insecure devices can compromise privacy or be hijacked and used to disrupt other uses of the internet. That happens every day in my constituency and across the whole United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The Government set in motion a strategy, which was first mooted in 2016, that set a date of 2021 for most online products and services to be cyber-secure by default. Will the Minister in his response tell us whether those targets have been met, and if they have not, when will that happen? DCMS has proposed a voluntary code of practice. I certainly would have liked to have had something mandatory in the system. Perhaps the Minister will indicate whether that is his and the Government’s intention.

I cannot profess to be technically-minded, but my staff are. They tell me that it is possible to access personal and confidential data, including on bank accounts, through our phones. That is why the debate is vital and why we need to seek from the Minister the reassurance that the protections that people need and want are in place. There is not a week in my constituency when people do not come to me about such issues. If someone phones an individual and talks about that individual’s bank account, it is not their bank. If someone phones and asks personal questions about confidential data, they are not legitimate.

In the recess, I watched a consumer programme which highlighted a scam that looked so convincing—what was happening looked absolutely correct to the untrained eye—but the experts looked into the issue and were able to help the person who was being scammed to thwart the scammer. As I have said, there is not a week when I do not hear about a scam. Usually, they are against elderly people, but also against others those who inadvertently give out details and lose their savings. Just a few months ago, a gentleman in my constituency was scammed. The appearance of legitimacy and truthfulness meant that he did not fear that it was a scam, but he lost £20,000, which has never been retrieved.

Cyber-attacks are one of the most common types of crime experienced by individuals in the UK. According to national crime statistics, some 2.4% of adults in 2017 and a higher percentage today will have experienced cyber-attacks, including on their personal computers, which is what this debate is about; I thank the hon. Member for Bridgend for setting the scene.

User behaviour is a factor in the poor cyber-security of consumer devices, whether by the individual or the system that they use. The 1990 Act needs to be reviewed to provide greater protection. Some user behaviours include using default, weak or reused passwords. What can we do? We need to establish good practice in the industry, improve the cyber-security of consumer products, adopt a vulnerability disclosure policy, make software updates available for stated lengths of time, and inform consumers on setting up, managing and improving the security of household connected devices, as in the DCMS’s own code of practice, which was published some time ago.

UK infrastructure must be protected. The Government have identified cyber as one of the top six tier 1 threats. Cyber-crime costs the UK some £1.27 billion per year, with about 60 high-level cyber-attacks a month, which indicates the magnitude of the problem. Many of the 60 high-level cyber-attacks a month threaten national security, which is also why this debate is important.

The hon. Member for Bridgend referred to Ukraine. Russia launched a cyber-attack on Ukraine’s electricity network back in 2015. Some quarter of a million people were impacted by that attack, which I think he also referred to. That example shows that even six or seven years ago, before the war, cyber was being used as an instrument of war by Russia, and indicates how much cyber-attacks can disrupt and compromise. Cyber-attacks are a method of warfare, which is why I support the hon. Gentleman’s call for legislative change.

I will make a plug, as I always try to do in these Westminster Hall debates. The Minister will be well aware that Belfast is a cyber-security stronghold and is very much at the forefront of cyber-security development. Belfast has become a capital of security. Any new cyber legislation must not prevent cyber-security experts from doing what they do best, which is finding the loopholes in programs.

Much consultation must take place to ensure that the Government do not tie the experts’ hands or throw the baby out with the bathwater. After all, the experts are combating criminal activity, and abuse and aggression from foreign powers such as Russia and China. Will the Minister confirm that any legislation that is proposed will entail working with companies—for example, cyber-security companies in Belfast and Northern Ireland—to enable their excellent progress to continue?

I fully support the motion tabled by the hon. Member for Bridgend. I look forward to hearing the contributions from the two Opposition spokespersons, and particularly to the Minister’s response. I hope that he can give us the reassurances we seek, so that we can continue to be at the forefront of cyber-security in Belfast, as we are throughout the whole of the United Kingdom.

19/04/2022
Jamie Wallis – 2022 Speech on the Computer Misuse Act 1990

The speech made by Jamie Wallis, the Conservative MP for Bridgend, in Westminster Hall on 19 April 2022.

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the Computer Misuse Act 1990.

Before I begin, I draw Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, and in particular to my stakeholding in a firm that has offered digital forensic services in the past, but which I understand does not plan to offer such services at least for the next three to five years.

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Mark. I am grateful to have secured this important debate of national security significance, especially considering this morning’s headlines about the potential spyware attack on No. 10. The need for this debate has become more urgent of late, especially considering the barbaric and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, which has placed a spotlight on the pressing requirement to strengthen the UK’s cyber-security.

The UK Government have achieved a great deal in developing our cyber-capabilities, spearheading the creation of the National Cyber Force and putting aside a total of £2.6 billion for cyber and IT, which is a significant funding increase on previous years. I strongly welcome the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport working more closely with cyber-security firms, through £850,000 of funding to support the establishment and activities of the UK Cyber Cluster Collaboration.

Given this Government’s strong record developing our cyber-capabilities, it is surprising that 32 years after its introduction as a private Member’s Bill, the Computer Misuse Act 1990 remains the primary piece of legislation covering cyber-crime in the UK. I am sure we all agree that the technological landscape has altered drastically over the last 30 years. Our existing legislation must urgently be updated to reflect those monumental changes. When the 1990 Act came into law, Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister, the first website was yet to be published and I was just a toddler.

The CMA was brought into law to criminalise unauthorised access to computers. In other words, hacking without permission became illegal, irrespective of motive or intent. However, the CMA came into force before the modern cyber-security industry, which now employs more than 52,000 people across 1,800 firms. In 2022, the methods used by cyber criminals and cyber-security professionals are often very similar—sometimes the same. Individuals who work in cyber-security are frequently required to perform actions for which explicit authorisation is difficult, if not impossible, to obtain.

Contemporary defensive cyber research into computer system vulnerabilities and threat intelligence often involves the scanning and examination of compromised victims and criminal systems to lessen the impact of future attacks—pre-empting what such a hack might resemble to prevent its success. It strikes me as woefully naive to think that criminals will explicitly authorise access to their systems. To do so would be akin to a policeman asking permission to arrest an individual.

British cyber-security professionals are at risk of being taken to court for obtaining actionable intelligence, which means that as a country we are dissuading vital research from being conducted at a time when countries such as Russia and China are increasingly deploying hostile technologies against us and our allies. Consequently, even though the CMA has been amended several times since 1990, its major flaw is that it fails to allay fear of arrest and/or prosecution among cyber-security professionals as they carry out essential threat intelligence research against cyber criminals and agents of rogue states.

We find ourselves in a perverse situation where industry specialists who are acting in the public interest—often dealing with issues that are critical to our national security infrastructure—are at risk of being designated a criminal. Even with responsible policing, the CMA can still be used by non-state bodies to pursue individuals through the civil courts, causing considerable financial and emotional injury to well-intentioned professionals. If situations such as these remain possible, future generations of cyber professionals could be deterred from pursuing a highly rewarding career, precisely at a time when we should aspire for Britain to continue its reputation as a global cyber leader.

In urging for reform of the CMA, I have worked closely with the CyberUp campaign, which argues for updating the law and makes the case that failure to reform is holding back our cyber defences and preventing the upskilling of our workforce. In the “Time for reform?” report published by the CyberUp campaign and techUK in November 2020, analysis of a survey showed that the industry overwhelmingly suggested that the CMA was not fit for purpose. More than nine in 10 respondents said that they

“did not believe that the Computer Misuse Act represented a world leading example of 21st century cyber crime legislation.”

With Russia frequently targeting infrastructure through cyber-attacks, it is becoming increasingly urgent that we resolve the contradictions in the CMA. We need only look at the 2017 Russian state-sponsored NotPetya virus, which caused billions of pounds-worth of damage, to appreciate how devastating such attacks can be. At the epicentre of this digital hydrogen bomb in Ukraine, national transport infrastructure ground to a halt, people were unable to withdraw money from ATMs and even the radiation monitoring system at Chernobyl went offline. The current situation is an immense security risk.

The national cyber strategy, which was published in December 2021, sets out a commitment to improving our resilience to cyber-threats, but currently the strategy is clearly hamstrung because of the CMA. I have spoken to threat intelligence researchers from leading UK cyber-security companies, who have stated that they come up against CMA-related barriers three times a week on average. In those situations, researchers must seek guidance on whether they can investigate without breaching the provisions of the Act. In 80% of such cases, investigations cannot be undertaken. Where investigations can go forward, there is a significant benefit, with the average number of victims who can be identified, and thus warned and supported, varying between a handful and often up to hundreds per investigation.

We can extrapolate the figures to try to develop a national picture of what is going on. Using data obtained in the DCMS sectoral analysis 2022, the list of CREST threat intelligence providers and statistics from the DCMS cyber breaches survey 2021, we can surmise that the CMA is an active consideration in relation to at least a hundred, but potentially up to 3,000 investigations, each week across the UK in cyber-threat intelligence firms; that is, of course, assuming that all the other firms are similarly conscientious about staying on the right side of the law. That means that up to 2,400 investigations could be abandoned due to sensitivities around the CMA, which in turn could mean that up to 1 million victims remain unidentified and thus under threat from cyber criminals. Financially, it is estimated that the outdated CMA is costing our economy at least £30 million a week.

Our digital economy is being held back by a law that came into existence when less than half a percent of the population used the internet. We need to make the case that Britain, with its impressive track record in computing, networking and cyber, is a fantastic place to invest, create jobs and upskill our workforce. As it stands, we risk losing out to global competitors with more liberal legislative regulations, such as France, Israel and the United States.

What practical changes need to be made to the CMA for it to be well placed to rise to the challenges of 2022 and beyond? Industry representatives have directly conveyed to me a strong desire to see the inclusion of a statutory defence for cyber-security professionals who are acting in the public interest. Although I understand the need to ensure an effective balance between protecting legitimate cyber-activity and being able to prosecute genuine criminals effectively, one thing that struck me in my meetings with industry representatives was that even among those who felt relatively at ease about the prospect of prosecution, there remained a strong and genuine fear of arrest, which would involve the seizure of their work devices—the tools of their trade—and cause significant stress to individuals who are proud of their contributions to keeping Britain safe.

Currently, the only protections in the Act, beyond a few cases where a warrant is obtained, are extendable only to actions undertaken with explicit authorisation. Consequently, for the law to work for 21st-century Britain and its need to defend itself from cyber-attacks, reform should include a legal mechanism and clarify legal ambiguities in order to put professionals at ease.

Sir Paul Beresford (Mole Valley) (Con)

I apologise for not being here at the very beginning. My hon. Friend is absolutely correct about a statutory defence, but I understand that that could be achieved without changing the current legislation, particularly if it were done in co-ordination with the Crown Prosecution Service.

Dr Wallis

It is important that we respond directly to the concerns of the cyber-security professionals; this is what they have asked for. Meaningful engagement with them will lead to a potential compromise. There is also a need to balance how we act against genuine cyber criminals, and I think that meaningful engagement and working with them will be the way to find that suitable compromise.

Updating the CMA has widespread cross-party support, with the all-party parliamentary internet group first calling for reform of the CMA in 2004—18 years ago. Since then, the Intelligence and Security Committee’s Russia report has recommended that the CMA should be updated in response to the heightened risk of malignant Russian cyber-activities.

Although cyber professionals across the country and I greatly appreciate the announcement by the Home Secretary last year of a review looking at the CMA, progress has seemingly been slow. Some 66% of respondents to the Government’s call for information had concerns over the existing legal protections of the CMA, so I hope that the Minister will update us as to whether the review is being expedited, especially considering that there has been an increase in hostile cyber-actions undertaken by rogue states and given this morning’s headlines on potential spyware attacks on No. 10. I would also be grateful if the Minister would meet myself and others from the campaign to discuss the matter further. I look forward to hearing contributions from hon. and right hon. Members.

19/04/2022
Liz Truss – 2022 Comments on Indonesia

The comments made by Liz Truss, the Foreign Secretary, on 19 April 2022.

Indonesia is the world’s fourth most populous country, a strong democracy with a vibrant economy and a vital part of our efforts to defend freedom, peace and stability.

Deeper ties are a win-win, delivering jobs and opportunities for British people while ensuring an open, secure and prosperous Indo-Pacific.

19/04/2022
James Cartlidge – 2022 Comments on Court Decisions Made Available On-line

The comments made by James Cartlidge, the Justice Minister, on 19 April 2022.

As we continue to build a justice system that works for all, the National Archive’s new service is a vital step towards better transparency. It will ensure court judgments are easily accessible to anyone who needs them.

Our first official Government record of judgments is a modern one-stop-shop that will benefit everyone, from lawyers and judges to academics, journalists and members of the public.

19/04/2022
Grant Shapps – 2022 Comments on Rail Ticket Pricing

The comments made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Transport, on 19 April 2022.

For the first time ever, operators across the rail industry are coming together to help passengers facing rising costs of living by offering up to 50% off more than a million tickets on journeys across Britain.

There’s no better time to visit friends, family or just explore our great country, so book your tickets today.

19/04/2022
Denis MacShane – 2004 Comments on the Political Situation in Belarus

The comments made by Denis MacShane, the then Minister of State for Europe, in the House of Commons on 20 July 2004.

The failure of the Belarussian Government to adhere to European standards in respect of human rights, freedom of expression and democracy in Belarus remains a matter of concern to the Government. It is too early to assess the likely conduct of the elections. We have made clear to the Belarussian Government that we expect the authorities in Minsk to ensure that the elections are free and fair and that international observers will be invited.

18/04/2022
Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Statement on the Situation in Ukraine (17/04/2022) – 53 days

The statement made by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, on 17 April 2022.

Ukrainians!

Our defenders!

Today, Christians of the Western rite celebrate Easter. The happiest Christian holiday. A holiday of the victory of life over death.

The Ukrainian Catholic community unites millions of people. And I sincerely wish everyone peace. I wish you to keep the light of soul even in this dark time of war against our state. To keep it to see how good will soon surely defeat evil for the sake of our country, and how the truth will overcome any lies of the occupiers.

A wonderful gift for the holiday was made by our team at the “Invictus Games”, in which veterans and servicemen take part. On the first day of the competition, which started in the Netherlands, the Ukrainians won “gold”, “silver” and “bronze”.

Rodion Sitdikov won the “gold” in the shot put. Artem Lukashuk and Ivan Heretsun brought Ukraine “silver” and “bronze” in long jump. Thank you guys from all of us, from all Ukrainians!

This is always important, and now it is extremely important. To glorify our flag, to perform the Ukrainian national anthem and to honor our heroes.

But whatever the day and whatever the holiday, the task remains the same for everyone in power. Work not even one hundred, but two hundred percent to ensure our defense. Provide Ukraine with weapons, financial support and all other supplies.

I began this day with a meeting with the military and government officials on the situation in combat zones. Russian troops are preparing for an offensive operation in the east of our country. It will begin in the near future. They want to literally finish off and destroy Donbas. Destroy everything that once gave glory to this industrial region. Just as the Russian troops are destroying Mariupol, they want to wipe out other cities and communities in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

We are doing everything to ensure defense. We are in constant contact with partners. We are grateful to those who really help with everything they can. But those who have the weapons and ammunition we need and delay their provision must know that the fate of this battle also depends on them. The fate of people who can be saved.

The 53rd day of the war is over, and we have been waiting for answers to some points in our weapons inquiries for 53 days. And some answers are formulated so that delivery can begin only in May. I speak directly in such cases: every delay in weapons, every political delay is a permission for Russia to take the lives of Ukrainians. This is how Russia interprets it. That should not be the case in reality.

Constant shelling of our city of Kharkiv continues. Today, Russian troops hit, in particular, the streets of Culture, Shevchenko and Darwin. Apparently, these are especially dangerous words for Russia – “culture”, “Shevchenko”, “Darwin”. This is something that threatens its existence. As of this moment, the list of dead from this strike includes five Kharkiv residents and at least 15 wounded.

In the last four days alone, 18 people have been killed and 106 have been wounded by the Russian shelling of Kharkiv. This is nothing but deliberate terror. Mortars, artillery against ordinary residential neighborhoods, against ordinary civilians.

The democratic world must also react to what the occupiers are doing in the south of Ukraine – in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions. Torture chambers are built there. They abduct representatives of local authorities and anyone deemed visible to local communities. They blackmail teachers. They steal money provided for paying pensions. Humanitarian aid is blocked and stolen. They create starvation.

The occupiers are also trying to tear off the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, following the example of the so-called DPR and LPR. This territory is being transferred to the ruble zone and subordinated to the administrative machine of Russia.

All this requires greater speed from Western countries in preparing a new powerful package of sanctions. The answer to the attempted “ruble occupation” of the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions must be full coverage of the Russian banking and financial systems by sanctions. Because they are part of the occupation machine.

Of course, the need for an embargo on oil supplies from Russia is growing every day. Everyone in Europe and America already sees Russia openly using energy to destabilize Western societies. Russia’s bet on chaos in fuel markets should not succeed.

And today I really want to support once again all those who are fighting for Ukraine in the cities and communities of the south of our state. Who protect our national symbols. Who protect our freedom. Every manifestation of such a struggle makes it difficult for the occupiers to carry out their task.

Sabotage the orders of the occupiers. Do not cooperate with them. Protest. It is necessary to hold on so that Russia does not manage to distort life in other cities of Ukraine, like it did in Donetsk and Luhansk.

I spoke today with Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund Kristalina Georgieva. On ensuring the financial stability of Ukraine and on preparations for the reconstruction of our state after the war. We touched upon specific areas of possible cooperation with the IMF both in the near future and in the next few years. I am confident that progress in our relations with the fund will be tangible. And I want to thank Mrs. Kristalina for her personal and significant support.

Prime Minister of Ukraine Denys Shmyhal reported today on the implementation of the order on additional social assistance due to the war.

First. Every displaced person can receive financial assistance for living. Every month it is 2 thousand hryvnias for an adult and 3 thousand hryvnias for a child. It is possible to apply for this in the nearest administrative services center, bodies of social protection, and starting from Wednesday – in “Diia”.

Second. People are being evacuated from the war-torn areas. The government is deploying special locations to ensure temporary accommodation for people and provide financial assistance immediately at railway and bus stations.

Third. Applications for destroyed or damaged housing are being collected through “Diia”. Be sure to apply if you have lost an apartment, house or if they have been damaged by shelling.

Fourth. I urge employers, no matter how difficult it may be, to try to employ displaced persons. Now every job saved and every extra job is helping protect the state in war.

For each displaced person whom the business hires, the company will receive co-financing of labor costs from the state. This is 6,500 hryvnias. The application can also be submitted on the “Diia” portal.

Traditionally in the evening I signed decrees on awarding our heroes. 188 servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were awarded state awards. 553 warriors of the National Guard. 64 border guards. 5 police officers, 26 employees of the State Emergency Service.

6 defenders of Ukraine were awarded the title of Hero of Ukraine.

And finally. Another congratulation – also for our heroes, for Ukrainian firefighters.

Today is the Day of Firefighters. And I sincerely congratulate everyone who protects the security of our people, our land from fire. Who is at war almost every day even in peacetime.

Thank you for your service!

Thank you for saving us!

Glory to Ukraine!

18/04/2022
Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Statement on the Situation in Ukraine (16/04/2022) – 52 days

The statement made by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, on 16 April 2022.

Dear free people of the most beautiful country!

A country that has a future. That’s true. This is what motivates us to fight now. On the battlefield and around the clock on the diplomatic, information and economic fronts. This is what allows us to plan our lives after the war. Our Ukrainian free, sovereign and democratic future. Definitely – peaceful. Definitely – with development.

Today I held a meeting dedicated to the reconstruction of our cities. Of course, this is a huge amount of work. But still less than defending the state in war. Than that we all – all Ukrainians, our army and all our people – are already really doing. So don’t be afraid of the scale.

What is important in our project of reconstruction of Ukraine? The task is not only to physically rebuild the houses, apartments, bridges and roads, businesses and social infrastructure that were destroyed by Russian troops. Not just to give people back everything they lost and give them a new foundation in life.

Now it is a historic moment. The moment when we can solve many old problems of the whole environment of our life once and for all. When we can make quality urban planning where it did not exist. We can take into account real traffic flows. Guarantee energy saving, environmental friendliness of materials, inclusiveness. This is when it comes to the organization of living space and the quality of reconstruction.

But there is also justice. Housing queues have existed for decades and never ended. This has been the case since Soviet times. Millions of people know how difficult it is to get a home, earn money for their own apartment, build a house. It has always been especially painful for the military, law enforcement, and public sector workers. For those who work for society and receive very little from the state for it.

Last year, I set a task for the government – to do everything possible to provide all veterans, who were waiting in line, with housing this year. Next, we planned to provide all our military with housing. And now we are actually expanding last year’s task to the whole state and refining it so that it would be a real modernization of Ukrainian cities and Ukrainian communities. And we combine this with the housing energy modernization program. As a result, there will be several stages.

Today, I set a task to provide temporary housing to all our IDPs at the first stage. Those whose house was destroyed by war. Temporary housing until we rebuild their homes. Or until people receive compensation in square meters or money.

In the second stage, we restore what the occupiers tried to destroy. All affected cities and communities.

And at the third stage, we provide housing for all those who have defended or are defending the state, who have worked or are working in the interests of society, and do not have their own housing. It can no longer be the case that a person devotes his whole life to military service, but retires without having his own apartment. It can no longer be the case that a son or daughter is defending Ukraine in the war, and a father and mother do not have their own housing and are forced to live in a rented apartment or look for other options. It can no longer be the case that a doctor or nurse, teacher or law enforcement officer spends his whole life honestly and stays in a dormitory for decades, if not for life.

The government, all central authorities together with local authorities must ensure this. And they will ensure. Everyone in Ukraine has the right to their own housing, their own home or their own apartment. The right to a safe and comfortable living space that will be designed for anyone.

All those whose homes were destroyed by the occupiers, and all those who were waiting in line for many years. All our people who deserve to live in a modern environment.

To implement this project, we are already involving leading architects, the full potential of the state and international support. The participation of companies, partner countries, international donors can be added. I have absolutely no doubt that we will be able to do this. It will be possible not only to restore that was destroyed, but also to restore justice for those whose right to housing has been violated.

We also discussed the issue of memorializing what Ukrainians experienced during this war. They discussed how to preserve parts of this experience so that it would always remind all generations of our people of the brutal and senseless invasion Ukraine has been able to fend off.

As one of the examples, a project of a memorial complex is being prepared, which will tell the story of the destroyed bridge in Kyiv region, which connected Irpin and Bucha with Kyiv. The story of people, who escaped from Russian invaders to Kyiv using this bridge and this road.

I met today with servicemen of the State Service for Special Communications and Information Protection. I handed over awards.

The contribution of special communications servicemen to our defense, to our path to victory and peace, cannot be overestimated. Their work should be mentioned more often, they should be thanked more loudly.

Since the first day of the war, we have had stable communication both within our country and with Ukraine’s partner states. I am sincerely grateful to everyone who provides it!

I spoke today with Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson and Prime Minister of Sweden Magdalena Andersson. On defense and other support for Ukraine. On toughening the sanctions policy against Russia. On the situation in various areas of hostilities in Ukraine, and especially on Mariupol. And about options to help city defenders and civilians.

The situation in Mariupol remains as severe as possible. Just inhuman. This is what the Russian Federation did. Deliberately did. And deliberately continues to destroy cities. Russia is deliberately trying to destroy everyone who is there in Mariupol.

There are only two ways to influence this. Or the partners will give Ukraine all the necessary heavy weapons, planes, and, without exaggeration, immediately. So that we can reduce the pressure of the occupiers on Mariupol and unblock it. Or – a negotiating path, in which the role of partners should also be decisive.

I want to be heard right now: there has not been a single day since the blockade of Mariupol that we have not sought a solution. Military or diplomatic – anything to save people. But finding this solution is extremely difficult. So far, there is no one hundred percent valid option. This applies to both military options and the negotiation process.

Although we have heard many intentions from those who wanted to help and who really in positions of international influence, none of them have been realized yet. However, we will not abandon these efforts. And every day either I, or Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces Valeriy Zaluzhny, or other military, or head of our negotiating team David Arakhamia – in touch with our defenders of Mariupol. Every day.

Traditionally, before the evening address, I signed a decree on awarding our defenders. 186 servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. 13 servicemen of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Two officers of the Security Service of Ukraine. And one fighter of the National Guard.

Eternal glory to all who defend the state!

Eternal memory to everyone who died for Ukraine!

Glory to Ukraine!

18/04/2022