UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2021

  • Tim Farron – 2021 Speech on the Integrated Rail Plan

    Tim Farron – 2021 Speech on the Integrated Rail Plan

    The speech made by Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale, in the House of Commons on 8 December 2021.

    It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for High Peak (Robert Largan), who made a thoughtful contribution concerning his constituency.

    The integrated rail plan for the north is a real disappointment to many people, not least people from Cumbria, the furthest north-west county in England. When we leaf through the 162 pages of that document, we find not a single mention of the county of Cumbria. That is a reminder that when we talk about the north and levelling up the north, it feels to many of us that the rural north—rural communities generally, but specifically those in the far north-west of England—is not thought of and is very much overlooked.

    The cancellation of part of HS2 is deeply troubling, but of course the more troubling cancellation is that of Northern Powerhouse Rail. If one understands the north of England, one understands that what we really need is not to get to London a bit quicker, but to have greater capacity and to get from east to west more quickly. That has been overlooked by the Government. It is a betrayal of the north, yes, but more than that it is a betrayal of their lack of understanding of the north, which is more telling.

    I want to focus on a couple of things in my community. First, we appreciate that the HS2 line is not going to go further into Lancashire and into Cumbria, but nevertheless the trains will. I am deeply concerned that there are no plans for any of those HS2 trains to stop in the biggest visitor destination in the country apart from London, namely my constituency—the Lake district. That should be put right.

    We have a railway line from the main line at Oxenholme that takes us to Windermere—the Lakes line. It is a very short line, and it would be one of the cheapest electrifications in the country if only it were done. Sadly, the Government have cancelled that. I am, however, encouraged by recent conversations with the Rail Minister about the possibility of a passing loop at Burneside, which would give us the opportunity to effectively dual the line again—that was our Beeching cut back in the ’60s and ’70s. Doing that would double the capacity on the Lakes line and massively increase the number of people who could come to the Lake district and not come by car. That would be a huge positive.

    It is worth bearing in mind that there are many small things that are huge to us. At Staveley, the first station in the Lake district, there are 42 steps to get up to the station. Friends of mine who have disability issues, are elderly or need to use prams simply cannot use their local station, so I call on the Government to consider very carefully funding access to Staveley station.

    We have a world-class visitor destination in the Lake district, with what feels at the moment like a third-class rail connection. That is why I ask, finally, that the Government reconsider the electrification of the line from Oxenholme to Windermere, and of the Furness line from Lancaster to Barrow through my constituency. That would be a positive, carbon-neutral thing to do, and it would be a massive boost to tourism and to local communities. It would be a good, effective use of public money after this disappointment.

  • Robert Largan – 2021 Speech on the Integrated Rail Plan

    Robert Largan – 2021 Speech on the Integrated Rail Plan

    The speech made by Robert Largan, the Conservative MP for High Peak, in the House of Commons on 8 December 2021.

    First, I associate myself with the excellent speeches of my hon. Friends the Members for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Andrew Jones) and for Blackpool North and Cleveleys (Paul Maynard), two experienced former rail Ministers who set out why they welcome the integrated rail plan while perhaps hoping that it had gone further in some areas. I completely agree with every word of both of their speeches.

    One area of the IRP that I really welcome is the continued commitment to the £137 million upgrade to the Hope Valley line running between Manchester and Sheffield. That is important for several reasons. First, the line is one of the worst performing in the country in terms of reliability and punctuality, so this extra capacity to improve reliability and frequency and help freight get out of the quarries and into market is a really positive step, along with, finally, the retirement of the Pacers and their replacement by the new class 195 trains, and the much-needed reforms to rail franchising. That £137 million investment in our railways, combined with the £228 million new Mottram bypass and Glossop spur road, which is due to start construction in 2023, represents the biggest investment in transport infrastructure in the High Peak in my lifetime at least.

    On top of that, it is important to ensure that local passengers on the stopping stations on the Hope Valley line, such as Hope, Edale, Bamford, New Mills and Chinley, also benefit from this, and that we link up the bus services from those stations to destinations. That is why the Hope Valley explorer bus pilot is such a positive step forward. I also welcome the commitment to look at electrification of the line.

    I also want to talk about HS2, which benefits the High Peak directly. I am very pleased that the western leg and extension is going ahead. That will free up capacity on the Stockport corridor of the west coast main line through to Manchester Piccadilly, a big bonus for those travelling there from places including Buxton, Whaley Bridge, Chapel-en-le-Frith and New Mills.

    However, we do need to go further. That is why I continue to campaign for a railway station for Gamesley, one of the most deprived places in the country. It has one of the lowest car ownership rates but atrocious transport links, including a bus service that ends at 5 o’clock in the evening. That desperately needs sorting out. We also need to replace the loss of the 236 bus, which means that at the moment people in Glossop have no connection and no direct bus route through to Tameside Hospital and Ashton College. I really hope that gets fixed too.

    Overall, there are lots of really positive things in the integrated rail plan for us to welcome. I would like to see it go further in other places, but the key now is that we get on and deliver it, and that we get spades in the ground as soon as possible. I look forward to the start of the construction of the upgrade to the Hope Valley line within the next few months.

  • Tom Pursglove – 2021 Statement on Right to Work Policy for Asylum Seekers

    Tom Pursglove – 2021 Statement on Right to Work Policy for Asylum Seekers

    The statement made by Tom Pursglove, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 8 December 2021.

    Following the October 2018 publication of the Lift the Ban coalition’s report into asylum seeker right to work policy, which concluded that amending the policy could generate £42 million per year for the Government, the former Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Sajid Javid), committed to a review. Today I would like to announce the findings of that review.

    For clarity, current asylum seeker right to work policy allows asylum seekers to apply for permission to work if a decision on their asylum claim has been outstanding for 12 months or more, where the delay is no fault of their own. If granted permission to work, asylum seekers may then apply for jobs on the shortage occupation list.

    Lift the Ban’s report recommended relaxing policy to allow asylum seekers to work after six months, with no restrictions on access to the labour market such as limiting eligible jobs to the shortage occupation list. In July 2020, a follow-up to their 2018 report was published with the same policy recommendation but with updated estimated benefits to the Government of £98 million per year. A further update in summer 2021 revised this further upwards to £180.8 million per year.

    The Home Office has carried out a comprehensive review of the Lift the Ban report; however, our evidence indicates the assumptions underpinning the recommendations are highly optimistic. Having considered a wide range of available evidence the Home Office believes that a more realistic set of assumptions would present a more nuanced picture. In particular, the Home Office believes that a more realistic set of assumptions would consider the following:

    demographic characteristics (such as family groupings and likelihood of care responsibilities impacting access to the labour market)

    how employment rates for migrant groups tend to increase gradually over time

    the propensity for part-time employment

    the likelihood that any employment is more likely to be close to the minimum or living wage rather than the UK median wage.

    In addition, a significant proportion of the fiscal benefits calculated by Lift the Ban are predicated on an assumption that once asylum seekers are granted access to the workforce they will no longer require financial support. The Home Office believes that given the likelihood for part-time and insecure employment this benefit is unlikely to fully materialise. This is because it expects that the administrative cost associated with moving asylum seekers on and off support as they cycle through periods of employment and support will be substantial.

    The Home Office has therefore concluded that the fiscal benefits arising from a relaxation of the right to work policy are likely to be significantly lower than the figures claimed by Lift the Ban. In light of wider priorities to fix the broken asylum system, reduce pull factors to the UK, and ensure our policies do not encourage people to undercut the resident labour force, we are retaining our asylum seeker right to work policy with no further changes.

    It is key this policy continues to protect our immigration system from those lodging unfounded asylum claims in an attempt to avoid work visa rules, particularly at a time when dangerous journeys made by small boat are increasing.

    Ultimately we must ensure asylum claims are considered without unnecessary delay. Our resources are therefore better deployed to pursuing an ongoing programme of transformation and system improvement initiatives that will speed up decision making, reducing the time individuals spend in the system awaiting an interview or decision.

    We recognise there are extraordinary circumstances affecting certain parts of the labour market at present. In response to these, we are offering time-limited visas to 4,700 HGV drivers in the food supply chain, 5,500 poultry workers, and 800 butchers to ease supply chain pressures this year. We will look at how the sectors concerned make use of these routes which were created in response to their requests.

    The Government continue to support industries in solving such issues in the long term through making roles more attractive to UK workers, with better pay and working conditions.

  • Julia Lopez – 2021 Statement on Telecoms Diversification

    Julia Lopez – 2021 Statement on Telecoms Diversification

    The statement made by Julia Lopez, the Minister for Media, Data and Digital Infrastructure, in the House of Commons on 8 December 2021.

    I would like to update the House on a package of measures and policy interventions we are announcing today to progress the Government’s 5G diversification strategy and the recommendations of the telecoms supply chain diversification taskforce.

    Following a 5G diversification taskforce recommendation, the Government have worked closely with industry to confirm a date by which 2G and 3G networks will be switched off. The Government can now confirm that the mobile network operators do not intend to offer 2G and 3G mobile networks past 2033 at the latest. The Government welcome that some individual operators will switch off their networks, particularly their 3G networks, earlier than this date, and will announce their own plans about when and how they intend to do this. The Government welcome the responsible switching off of these networks, and will continue to work with network operators to ensure a smooth transition that meets the needs of business users and consumers, including vulnerable groups.

    The Government are also announcing, together with UK mobile network operators, a joint ambition for 35% of the UK’s mobile network traffic to be carried over open and interoperable radio access network (RAN) architectures by 2030. The RAN is the part of the network that communicates directly with our devices, typically visible in the radio masts we see across the UK. Most networks today are characterised by closed “black boxes” in which all of the components are highly integrated and provided by a single, highly scaled vendor. “Opening” the RAN seeks to disaggregate these components and functions, lowering barriers to entry and promoting innovation. The Government welcome the steps taken by operators and suppliers to position the UK as a leader in the development of open and interoperable RAN technology and are pleased to commit £250 million of investment to support and accelerate this programme of work.

    As part of this work to promote interoperable RAN, the Government will be providing just over £36 million of investment to fund projects that span key technology challenges to Open RAN adoption as part of the Future RAN Competition (FRANC). This investment will also support industry, academia and local authorities across the UK to realise the benefits of high-speed networks and create new commercial opportunities. Finally, the Government are investing a further £15 million in the SmartRAN Open Networks Interoperability Centre (SONIC Labs) to expand it into a fully-fledged interoperability testing facility that will break down barriers and support industry in developing interoperable solutions. This investment will enable the lab to expand its programme of interoperability testing and international engagement. These projects will be subject to final grant funding agreement.

    The interventions demonstrate the Government’s commitment to delivering their diversification strategy and building lasting and sustainable supply for the infrastructure that underpins our entire digital economy. The Government will continue to update the House as this work progresses. Full details of the announcement will be published on www.gov.uk today.

  • Boris Johnson – 2021 Press Conference on Covid-19

    Boris Johnson – 2021 Press Conference on Covid-19

    The press conference held by Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, at Downing Street on 8 December 2021.

    As soon as we learned of the new Omicron variant,

    this government acted

    introducing targeted and proportionate measures as a precaution, whilst our scientists discovered more.

    And we’re learning more every day.

    We do not yet know Omicron’s severity, its exact rate of transmission,

    nor indeed the full effectiveness of our vaccines against it.

    But since I last spoke to you, it’s become increasingly clear that Omicron is growing much faster than the previous Delta variant,

    and it’s spreading rapidly all around the world.

    568 cases have been confirmed through genomic sequencing across every region of the UK,

    and the true number is certain to be much higher.

    Most worryingly, there is evidence that the doubling time of Omicron in the UK could currently be between two and three days.

    And while there are some limits to what we can learn from South Africa,

    Because of the different rates of vaccination and different rates of previous infection –

    we are seeing growth in cases here in the UK that mirrors the rapid increases previously seen in South Africa.

    And South Africa is also seeing hospitalisations roughly doubling in a week,

    meaning that we can’t yet assume Omicron is less severe than previous variants.

    So while the picture may get better,

    and I sincerely hope that it will –

    we know the remorseless logic of exponential growth could lead to a big rise in hospitalisations, and therefore sadly in deaths.

    And that is why it is now the proportionate and responsible thing to move to Plan B in England

    while continuing to work closely with our colleagues in the Devolved Administrations –

    so we slow the spread of the virus,

    buy ourselves the time to get yet more boosters into more arms, and especially in the older and more vulnerable people,

    and understand the answers to the key outstanding questions about Omicron.

    So first, we will reintroduce the guidance to work from home.

    Employers should use the rest of this week to discuss working arrangements with their employees

    but from Monday you should work from home if you can. Go to work if you must but work from home if you can.

    And I know this will be hard for many people, but by reducing your contacts in the workplace you will help slow transmission.

    Second, from this Friday we will further extend the legal requirement to wear a face mask to most public indoor venues, including theatres and cinemas.

    There will be of course exemptions where it is not practical, such as when eating, drinking, exercising or singing.

    Third, we’ll also make the NHS Covid Pass mandatory for entry into nightclubs, and venues where large crowds gather

    including unseated indoor venues with more than 500 people,

    unseated outdoor venues with more than 4,000 people

    and any venue with more than 10,000 people.

    The NHS Covid Pass can still be obtained with two doses but we will keep this under review as the boosters roll out.

    And having taken clinical advice since the emergence of Omicron, a negative lateral flow test will also be sufficient.

    As we set out in Plan B, we will give businesses a week’s notice, so this will come into force in a week’s time,

    helping to keep these events and venues open at full capacity,

    while giving everyone who attends them confidence that those around them have done the responsible thing to minimise risk to others.

    As Omicron spreads in the community, we will also introduce daily tests for contacts instead of isolation,

    so we keep people safe while minimising the disruption to daily life.

    And of course we will take every step to ensure our NHS is ready for the challenges ahead.

    But the single biggest thing that every one of us can do,

    is to get our jabs

    and crucially to get that booster as soon as our turn arrives.

    One year to the day since the UK became the first country in the world to administer a Covid vaccine into the arms of Margaret Keenan,

    we have opened up the vaccine booster to all those over 40,

    and we are reducing the gap between second dose and booster to a minimum of just three months.

    Our heroic NHS staff and volunteers have already done almost 21 million boosters,

    including reaching 84 per cent of all the eligible over 80s.

    But we need to go further and faster still,

    because our scientists are absolutely confident that your immune response will be stronger if you have been boosted.

    And while you are at it – please get your flu jab too.

    Let’s do everything we can to protect ourselves and our loved ones this winter – and to reduce the pressures on our NHS.

    As we learn more, so we will be guided by the hard medical data around four key criteria:

    the efficacy of our vaccines and our boosters,

    the severity of Omicron,

    the speed of its spread,

    and the rate of hospitalisations.

    We will constantly monitor the data and keep it under review.

    And of course we must be humble in the face of this virus

    But if and indeed as soon as it becomes clear that the boosters are capable of holding this Omicron variant,

    and we have boosted enough people to do that job

    then we will be able to move forward as before.

    So please everybody play your part – and get boosted.

  • Nadine Dorries – 2021 Speech at the Summit for Democracy

    Nadine Dorries – 2021 Speech at the Summit for Democracy

    The speech made by Nadine Dorries, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport on 8 December 2021.

    Hello everyone,

    First, can I just say that I’m delighted to be representing the UK at this important summit.

    It’s important because – as President Biden has said – democracy isn’t a given. Every generation has to fight for it.

    As one of the world’s oldest democracies, the UK has a real dog in this fight, as the Americans like to say.

    And in 2021, in what is officially the “Digital Age” of mankind, much of that battle is now waged online.

    So I want to take this opportunity to talk a little about democracy and technology.

    About the huge benefits that tech has brought to free nations all over the world.

    But also ultimately, what we’re doing in the UK – and with countries around the world – to ensure the tech revolution is a democratic one.

    Only last week, I welcomed government officials from around the world to London, for the Future Tech Forum.

    And while we were there, we had some really honest and frank conversations about the challenges we’re currently facing.

    I think it’s important, as always, to remind ourselves that tech has done so much to improve our lives…

    …to make us more prosperous and more productive, to connect us with friends and family all over the world.

    But given the vast power of tech today, there’s also, unfortunately, vast potential for it to be used to cause harm.

    Algorithms can send dangerous misinformation and poisonous abuse all over the world in seconds.

    Authoritarian governments can use tech to track, to intimidate, and to repress.

    It’s on all of us to mitigate those risks, and make sure that tech reflects our liberal, democratic values.

    Until now, governments around the world have been a little on the back foot with all of this.

    The pace of change in tech is so fast, we’re often playing catch-up.

    But from what I saw at the Future Tech Forum, there’s now real political will – and real momentum – across the globe to set some solid ground rules: ones that will define the next chapter of tech.

    And the UK is helping to write those rules.

    A few months ago, we published our draft Online Safety Bill.

    This is a truly groundbreaking piece of legislation.

    It’s one of the most comprehensive attempts to regulate big tech companies, like Facebook and Twitter and TikTok for the very first time.

    And we’ll be going further than any other country to hold them accountable for what’s on their platforms and to enshrine protections for freedom of expression.

    But like a lot of countries, including the U.S., we’re also looking at how our democratic values can be baked in from the start – which brings me to the theme of this event.

    Of all the democracy-affirming technologies, we’re particularly interested in ones that can help us use personal or sensitive data responsibly.

    And so the UK government is actively exploring the role of privacy-enhancing technologies, or PETs, to support confidential data sharing, access and use.

    The US and UK have both been doing cutting edge work in this area.

    But we felt we needed to go further.

    And so today I am very pleased to announce that together, the US and UK are launching a joint prize challenge next year on privacy-enhancing technologies.

    These technologies can help democracies unleash the power of data and AI to tackle big societal challenges – from financial crime to the race to Net Zero – while respecting fundamental rights like privacy.

    We’re both very hopeful that this new prize challenge will give the R&D of these particular technologies a big boost – and we’re looking forward to updating you all on our progress at next year’s Summit.

    By working together on projects like this, democracies can make sure that tech serves citizens, rather than seeking to control them.

    Tech is global by its nature. It doesn’t recognise borders – and neither should we.

    By teaming up, we can ensure our version of the tech revolution – one that is open and democratic – prevails.

    Which is why, as I said at the start, summits like this are so important.

    And with that, I’ll hand back to the moderator for the panel session.

  • Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Comments on Storm Arwen

    Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Comments on Storm Arwen

    The comments made by Kwasi Kwarteng, the Business and Energy Secretary, on 9 December 2021.

    I’m extremely grateful to the thousands of engineers, volunteers, Armed Forces personnel and emergency responders who worked tirelessly to get nearly one million people reconnected to power. They did so with unbelievable professionalism in the face of one of the most extreme weather events in recent years.

    While I’m pleased all affected customers are now back online, it is completely unacceptable so many were left without power for so long. There is an urgent need to identify and resolve a number of issues which came to light during the Storm Arwen response, and the review I’ve commissioned, alongside Ofgem’s, will ensure any failings are addressed.

  • Vicky Ford – 2021 Statement on Ukraine

    Vicky Ford – 2021 Statement on Ukraine

    The statement made by Vicky Ford, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, in the House of Commons on 7 December 2021.

    I thank my hon. Friend for the close interest that he takes in foreign affairs. We are deeply concerned by Russia’s pattern of military build-ups in and around Ukraine, and we are closely monitoring the situation. The UK is very clear: any military incursion by Russia into Ukraine would be a strategic mistake, and the Russian Government should expect significant strategic consequences. The cost of an incursion would be catastrophically high.

    At the meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers in Riga last week, and at the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe Ministerial Council, the Foreign Secretary, alongside our allies, made crystal clear our commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Foreign Secretary repeated that support bilaterally to her Ukrainian counterpart last Wednesday, 1 December, and to her Russian counterpart on Thursday 2 December. The Prime Minister has also spoken to President Zelensky on a number of occasions, to reiterate the UK’s support. He raised the issue of Russia’s aggression towards Ukraine directly with President Putin when they spoke ahead of COP26.

    Our vocal support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is backed by our actions. The Foreign Secretary will host Foreign Minister Kuleba in London tomorrow for the first UK-Ukraine strategic dialogue. Diplomatically, we operate at the heart of the international community’s efforts. Hon. Members will be aware that President Biden is meeting President Putin later today. Yesterday, our Prime Minister met President Biden, and the leaders of France, Germany, and Italy, to ensure that a joint message will be given to President Putin. We have also helped to frame international sanctions against Russia, deepened NATO’s partnership with Ukraine, and led efforts in the UN and OSCE to hold Russia to account.

    Militarily, we are providing defensive military support, primarily through Operation Orbital, the UK’s training mission to Ukraine, and since it launched in 2015 we have trained more than 20,000 members of the Ukrainian armed forces. The UK is one of the largest contributors to the OSCE special monitoring mission to Ukraine, and that is playing a critical role in providing impartial reporting on the situation on the ground in eastern Ukraine. Earlier this year, we reaffirmed our commitment to that in the integrated review.

    Last year alone, we allocated £40 million in official development assistance and other funding in support of programmes that support prosperity, resilience and stability in Ukraine. We have also deepened our bilateral ties with Ukraine, in particular through our political free trade and strategic partnership agreement. In conclusion, the UK is unwavering in our support of Ukraine’s sovereignty, and its territorial integrity, including of its territorial waters, within its internationally recognised borders. Russia should uphold the OSCE principles and commitments that it freely signed up to, which it is violating through its ongoing aggression against Ukraine.

    Mr Speaker

    Can we try to stick to the time that is allocated in future, please? Minister, are you listening?

    Vicky Ford indicated assent.

    Bob Seely

    We may be weeks away from a major war in eastern Europe. First, will the Government confirm that the 1994 Budapest memorandum commits the UK and others to respecting Ukraine’s territorial integrity? What do the Government believe those treaty obligations amount to? Secondly, does the Minister agree that the tools for preventing war are few, but one of them is an insistence that Nord Stream 2 does not go ahead, and an insistence that gas continues to flow through Ukraine and, indeed, Poland? Do the Government understand that the potential to cut Russia out of the SWIFT international payments system, Iran-style, may amount to a devastating economic blow? In the case of war, is the UK prepared for Russian actions in cyber and espionage, aimed at the UK, and in the UK?

    Finally, regardless of whether Russia invades this month or this year, do the Government accept the assessment that Putin will probably try to achieve three things in his last decade in power—first, dismembering Ukraine, whose borders, as he said this summer, he no longer respects; secondly, shattering the unity of NATO; and thirdly, cementing Russia’s identity as a state opposed and viscerally hostile to the west, rather than allied with it? What can the Government do in the long term to militate against these dangerous outcomes?

    Vicky Ford

    My hon. Friend raises a lot of questions. The UK position on Nord Stream 2 has not changed. We have repeatedly aired our concerns about the construction of Nord Stream 2, which would undermine European security by allowing Russia to tighten its grip on those nations that rely on its gas. Nord Stream 2 would divert supplies away from Ukraine, and the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine is regarded as a deterrent against further Russian aggression, so it is a vital part of Ukraine’s national security.

    We have already put in place a number of sanctions against those responsible for the illegal annexation of Crimea. We are co-ordinating with international partners, but as my hon. Friend knows, we never speculate about future sanctions, because to do so would undermine their effectiveness.

    Let us be very clear: we stand by Ukraine, and we are considering an extension of purely defensive support to Ukraine to help it defend itself. Putin needs to de-escalate now and return to diplomatic channels.

    Mr David Lammy (Tottenham) (Lab)

    I welcome the Minister’s comments. It is important at moments such as these that we send the united message from all sides of this House that the UK is resolute in our support for the sovereignty, the independence and the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Ukrainians want a democratic future; they want to choose their own path and their own political destiny.

    It is essential that, alongside our NATO allies, we make it crystal clear to the Russian Government that any attempt to further undermine Ukraine’s integrity will be met with a strong, consistent and resolute response. We welcome the diplomatic steps that have been taken already, and recognise the importance of the forthcoming dialogue between President Biden and President Putin.

    With that in mind, what reassurance are we providing to NATO allies in eastern Europe? Does the Minister believe that this is part of a wider pattern of dangerous behaviour by Russia, with tensions raised in Ukraine, Belarus and Bosnia? Will she engage with the incoming German Government to discuss the cancellation of Nord Stream 2 in order to ensure that Russia is not able to increase Europe’s energy dependency or weaken our unity?

    As well as working with our allies, we must ensure that we are doing all we can at home to challenge the Russian Government’s behaviour. We know that the UK continues to be a soft touch for corrupt elites and the dirty money that helps sustain the Putin regime. More than 18 months after the Russia report was published, none of its recommendations has been fully implemented. Will the Minister commit to taking those steps?

    Vicky Ford

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman for demonstrating the united front in this country in supporting the people of Ukraine—we are absolutely united in standing by Ukraine at this time. To demonstrate Ukraine’s resilience, we need a co-ordinated, increased approach not just defensively but economically, and we especially need support for Ukraine on the energy front. That is precisely why we are working with our NATO partners and other leading allies and why the Prime Minister spoke to not only President Biden but the leaders of France, Germany and Italy yesterday.

    We have repeatedly aired our concerns about the construction of Nord Stream 2 and its implications for European security, and we will continue to do so. The right hon. Gentleman will also know that we have already put in place a number of sanctions, and we always stand ready to put in place sanctions against those responsible for human rights and other abuses. We have put in place sanctions against those who led the illegal annexation of Crimea, and we will continue to work with international partners on that front.

    Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)

    I recently visited Ukraine with Foreign Office Ministers as part of the Crimea forum, as set out in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.

    Does my hon. Friend agree that the current situation is not only an early foreign policy challenge but an opportunity for the new German Government to set out their future policy with regards to Russian aggression? Does she also agree, as she mentioned in her statement, that it is through unity that we send a message to Russia? The United States, the United Kingdom and the whole European Union—particularly France and Germany—need to send a united, robust, clear and unequivocal message to Putin that any aggression will be met with severe penalties.

    Vicky Ford

    My right hon. Friend is absolutely right: any Russian incursion into Ukraine would be a strategic mistake, and the costs of such an incursion would be catastrophically high. This needs to be a co-ordinated effort between partners to maximise its impact. I have no doubt that the incoming German Government will have a key role to play, and that is precisely why the Prime Minister spoke to the leaders of France, Germany, Italy and the US yesterday to make sure that the message being given by President Biden to President Putin today is a co-ordinated one.

    We were very clear in the integrated review that Russian actions pose an acute and direct threat to the national security of the UK and its allies, and we have shown that we take that threat seriously. The current relationship with Russia is not the one that we want, but we will continue to respond to, and call out, Russian aggression wherever it occurs.

    Alyn Smith (Stirling) (SNP)

    I will not have been alone in being chilled by today’s Financial Times article mentioning an essay written by Vladimir Putin that ends with the words:

    “For we are one people”

    when talking about Ukraine and Russia. Well, that is not what international law says. We have seen this pattern of behaviour from the Russian state in cyber-attacks in Latvia, in the use of migrants on the Polish border to foment a crisis, in Bosnia and in the continued illegal annexation of parts of eastern Ukraine. There must be consequences to further action, and the Scottish National party will be part of that coalition. I am glad to hear of the international co-ordination that is going on.

    I have two concrete proposals and a plea. We have heard already—we have not had an answer—that the SWIFT payment system and Nord Stream 2 must be on the table. Magnitsky sanctions will do so much, but we are dealing with people who do not greatly care, so there must be an elevation of the sanctions available.

    I have just pledged SNP support for UK Government actions, so I am not trying to make a political point. However, we are two years out from the publication of the Intelligence and Security Committee’s Russia report. There is credible evidence of dirty Russian money washing around the UK’s democracy, and the Conservative party in particular. There are Members of the House of Lords who I do not believe should be there, and there must be consequences at home as well as abroad. When will we see serious action on implementing the Russia report recommendations? Vigilance must start at home, as well as abroad.

    Vicky Ford

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support for the UK Government. He raises a number of issues. On disinformation, we have seen time and again from the Russians transparent attempts at disinformation and at providing a pretext for reckless and illegal military action.

    On tackling illicit finance and dirty money, this Government continue to step up our activity both domestically and internationally to tackle illicit finance entering our country. We cracked down on illicit finance through the groundbreaking legislation introduced in 2017, the Criminal Finances Act, and we published our economic crime plan in 2019. However, we are going further in tackling dirty money. The National Crime Agency has increased the number of investigations into corrupt elites. Let me be clear: serious criminals, corrupt elites and individuals who seek to threaten the security of the UK and its allies are not welcome here. I am afraid I cannot comment on the SWIFT payment system, as I understand it is also a US issue.

    Mr John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)

    Does my hon. Friend agree that the UK has a special responsibility as a signatory of the Budapest memorandum, which guaranteed the territorial integrity of Ukraine? Indeed, Russia was also a signatory. Will the Government look to increase the support we give not just to the Ukrainian forces in the Donbass region, but to those defending the Ukrainian ports on the Black sea from any possible incursions from Russian-occupied Crimea?

    Vicky Ford

    Russia is very clearly in breach of the commitments it signed up to under the Budapest memorandum through its failure to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and through its use of force against Ukraine. We remain willing to engage in consultations, as provided for under that memorandum, as we did back in March 2014 in Paris after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea. Russia is refusing to engage, despite the fact that the memorandum obliges it to do so in circumstances where the memorandum is questioned.

    We will stand by the people of Ukraine. We are considering extending the support we are giving to Ukraine to help it defend itself, but I need this to be clear: there is nothing in that support that could be construed as offensive or as a threat towards Russia. NATO is a purely defensive organisation and itself poses no threat to Russia.

    Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)

    The difficulty is that Russia under Putin has behaved with extraordinary consistency. If we look at what it did in Georgia and its activities in Greece, in North Macedonia and in Republika Srpska, in so many different places it has engaged in a deliberate act of semi-war, trying to engineer difficulties in each of those democracies. Do we not need to match that consistency with internal consistency of our own, tackling the dirty money in the British public and ensuring that the whole of our democratic and political system is safe from assault by the Russians?

    Vicky Ford

    I have been very clear, and it is very clear in the integrated review, that Russia’s actions pose an acute and direct threat to the national security of not only the UK but its allies. We maintain functional channels of engagement with the Russian Government to ensure we can make points to them on those issues, and as a fellow permanent member of the UN Security Council we engage with them, but that does not mean we do not call them out. The Foreign Secretary met Foreign Minister Lavrov last Thursday, 2 December, when she absolutely restated the UK’s support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and urged the Russians to de-escalate the situation. The Ministers also discussed Belarus, Iran and Afghanistan.

    Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Melton) (Con)

    Ukraine, Bosnia, Ethiopia, the Solomon Islands—the time for a cross-Government atrocity prevention strategy is now. Will the Minister please advise whether we have seen any build-up of Russian troops around Mariupol to block off the Black sea? Will she also confirm that, if Republika Srpska and Russia try to use hostilities in Ukraine to hide aggression in Bosnia, we will stand firm behind our friends in both Ukraine and Bosnia?

    Vicky Ford

    We are monitoring the situation very closely and are deeply concerned by the pattern of Russian military build-ups on the border of Ukraine and the illegally annexed Crimea. We call on the Russian Government to uphold the OSCE principles and commitments: they signed up to them and they should uphold them, but they are violating them through their aggression towards Ukraine. We stand by both the people of Ukraine and the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as I made very clear from this Dispatch Box just last week.

    Tony Lloyd (Rochdale) (Lab)

    The Minister has made clear, I think in the same words that President Biden used, that there would be “catastrophic” consequences were there to be any Russian invasion of Ukraine, but one thing we know is that we already have Russian-activated troops in the Donbass region. They may not wear Russian uniforms, but they come under Russian control. If we see a hybrid attack on Ukraine, will there be catastrophic consequences then? That is the really important issue.

    Vicky Ford

    The Russians should stop supporting those who are trying to destabilise Ukraine in the Donbass region.

    Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury and Atcham) (Con)

    I completely agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight (Bob Seely) that the Budapest memorandum means we have a special obligation towards Ukraine. Can the Minister give us an update on the membership action plan, the prelude to NATO membership? When Poland joined in 1999, we were told it was a step too far; when Romania joined NATO in 2004, we were told it was a step too far. Is not now the time to start a debate on whether we can give our Ukrainian allies membership of this important defence pact?

    Vicky Ford

    We stand firm in our support for Ukraine’s NATO membership aspirations, in line with the 2008 Bucharest summit declaration, in which NATO allies agreed that Ukraine will become a member of the alliance. Allies have reiterated that commitment at every summit since.

    Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)

    The White House statement released yesterday after President Biden’s call with his European counterparts did not mention sanctions. Although I appreciate they are not a magic bullet, significant sanctions might serve as an effective deterrent. Can the Minister confirm that on yesterday’s national security call, the Prime Minister pushed for significant and co-ordinated sanctions? Can she also confirm that any such sanctions would target those in Putin’s inner circle, limiting their ability to travel and potentially cutting off access to US, UK and EU banking and credit card systems?

    Vicky Ford

    We never speculate on future sanctions designations; to do so could undermine their effectiveness if they are put in place. However, we are closely monitoring the situation. We have taken action against Russia for its illegal annexation of Crimea, in co-ordination with international partners. We worked closely with the EU, the US, Australia and Canada to impose costs on those facilitating Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol through sanctions. We will continue to work closely with international partners to ensure that those sanctions remain in place as long as Russia’s illegitimate control of the peninsula continues.

    Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Con)

    President Putin is clearly testing us. If there is a strong enough reaction, he may back off this time, but the softer our response, the more likely he is to go. That makes this an important test of our ability to engage in collective action. We need to reach and make public a consensus on specific sanctions that would apply in the event of Russian action. At the moment, I hear from the Minister and the other world leaders stern words, but not specific sanctions that will apply in the event of Russian aggression.

    Vicky Ford

    Let me be very clear: the Russian Government’s intent is to destabilise Ukraine. Beyond that, we cannot speculate, but we are monitoring the situation closely. We are deeply concerned, but it is critical that we avoid miscalculations. We call on the Russian Government to abide by their international commitments—the commitments to which they have signed up. Any military incursion would be a strategic mistake by the Russian Government and they should expect massive strategic consequences, including severe economic sanctions.

    Hilary Benn (Leeds Central) (Lab)

    Experience shows that President Putin respects only strength of purpose and resolve. Many Members have raised the issue of the SWIFT system. I am not asking the Minister whether that is a sanction that the Government are proposing to take, but I would like to know how that decision would be reached. When Iran was excluded from the SWIFT system in 2012, it required an EU regulation to make SWIFT do that, because SWIFT is incorporated under Belgian law. Would such a regulation be required this time if the UK Government and other Governments decided to proceed with excluding Russia from the SWIFT payment system?

    Vicky Ford

    I cannot comment on hypotheticals. Let me just say again that any military excursion would be a terrible miscalculation and the Russian Government should expect massive strategic consequences, including severe economic sanctions.

    Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)

    I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight (Bob Seely) on being granted this urgent question, but may I express my disappointment that this matter has had to be raised in an urgent question and that the Government have not volunteered a statement? There was a NATO Foreign Ministers’ meeting last week. We have a crisis in the Balkans. We have Russia spiking our gas supplies. We have Russia creating the migration crisis in Belarus, and we have Russia on aggressive military manoeuvres around Europe with its massively renewed military hardware. When will the Government take on board the fact that we are in a hybrid war against Russia now and that there needs to be a comprehensive and united western response, because, at the moment, NATO is weak and divided?

    Vicky Ford

    We have been very clear about the threat that Russia poses not only to our own security, but to the security of our allies as well. That is precisely why the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister have been working so closely with our friends and allies. The priority of our foreign policy is to build that network of liberty with our friends and allies, working on the defence not only of our own country, but of that of our allies. We absolutely stand by those on the Russian borders, including those facing the situation in Belarus, the Baltic countries and Poland—which I discussed only last week—as well as our friends in Ukraine.

    Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)

    Given that our energy strategy, which stems from the climate policies followed by the EU and the UK, has made us dependent on Russian oil and gas, does the Minister not accept that President Putin, with his ability to use energy blackmail against the west, has no belief that we can implement effective sanctions against Russia?

    Vicky Ford

    We have continually voiced our concerns about the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and we will continue to do so. It has serious implications for undermining European security, especially energy security, and as a destabilising tool. It allows Russia to tighten its grip on those nations that rely on Russian gas. We will continue to voice our serious concerns about this reliance on Russian gas.

    Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)

    If Ukraine had been a member of NATO, there would now be a grisly roll call of British Army dead. Economic sanctions, yes, but will the Minister confirm that the frozen steppes of eastern Ukraine, with all its historical complexities, are not worth the life of a single British soldier? Like it or not, Russians know that, for 300 years, Crimea was part of Russia. It is almost entirely Russian speaking, as is eastern Ukraine, so we should be aware of Russian opinion. We may not agree with it, but let us not be dragged into any military confrontation.

    Vicky Ford

    It is vital that we stand by countries that share our vision of being free and democratically run. That is why we are unwavering in our support of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, why we are working with NATO partners and why we are considering an extension of purely defensive support to Ukraine to help it defend itself. Defending itself against any Russian incursion will be vital, but let me remind Members what I have said again and again: making an incursion into Ukraine would be a massive strategic mistake for Russia.

    Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)

    This is an extremely concerning situation both in Ukraine and across other parts of our continent. May I urge the Minister and the British Government to do all that they can to ensure that NATO speaks with one voice? Russia feeds off mixed messages and, while we have a very strong voice coming out of the United States, the NATO Secretary-General, Stoltenberg, is saying that NATO has no obligation to defend Ukraine. Those are the mixed messages that do not help. What more can Her Majesty’s Government do to ensure that the alliance speaks with one voice?

    Vicky Ford

    The hon. Member is right: it is vital that we speak with one voice, which is why our Prime Minister was speaking with the leaders of the US, Germany, France and Italy yesterday. The message is clear: any incursion by Russia into Ukraine would be a strategic mistake. The costs of such an incursion would be catastrophically high and result in massive strategic consequences, including economic sanctions.

    Mrs Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)

    The Minister has said several times during this session that any incursion into Ukraine would be catastrophic for Russia and a big strategic mistake. Can she confirm that all diplomatic channels are being used, as well as economic sanctions that may come in, and that we are doing our very best to make sure that Ukraine is safe as a sovereign country?

    Vicky Ford

    The UK is at the forefront of the international community’s efforts. The issue is that Russia needs to de-escalate now and return to diplomatic channels.

    Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)

    As well as being concerned about the situation in Ukraine, I know that the Minister is also concerned about the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and about the involvement of Russia in Belarus. Does she think that there is a need for the Prime Minister to speak not just to individual Governments, but collectively to NATO and collectively to the European Union to make sure that we have a truly united front?

    Vicky Ford

    We were raising all those issues at NATO last week to make sure that there is a consistent approach on the situation not only in Ukraine, but in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Belarus.

    Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)

    Do our treaty obligations under the Budapest memorandum include the forward deployment of NATO troops to defensive positions in theatre if invited by the Ukraine Government?

    Vicky Ford

    We have signed the Budapest memorandum. The Russians have signed the Budapest memorandum. Russia is clearly in breach of its commitment under that memorandum.

    Stephen Kinnock (Aberavon) (Lab)

    Foreign policy begins at home—our ability to project influence around the world depends on the credibility, integrity and transparency of our Government and our economy here at home—and yet London is awash with dirty Russian money, and the Government have failed for almost two years to implement the recommendations of the Russia report. Will the Minister explain why the Government are dragging their feet on that, because it connects directly to our ability to achieve the objectives that she set out on Ukraine and beyond?

    Vicky Ford

    I absolutely refute the suggestion that we are dragging our feet. We already have a number of sanctions in place. We work with our international partners—we are a leading voice, for example at NATO last week—and we will continue to do so. I will not comment on specific future sanctions, because to do so would make them ineffective. However, I have made it very clear that any incursion into Ukraine by Russia would be a massive mistake and would lead to severe consequences, including severe economic sanctions.

    Crispin Blunt (Reigate) (Con)

    I welcome my hon. Friend’s tone and particularly the training of the 21,000 members of the Ukrainian armed forces by our armed forces as an important game-changer over the past five years. However, in return for our very strong support, will she continue to remind the Ukrainian authorities that they need to address the issues of corruption and human rights in their country so that we can be properly proud in giving them full support?

    Vicky Ford

    The UK stands up for human rights and against corruption all across the world.

    Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)

    I agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) that Putin has consistently responded to strength and taken advantage of weakness. Although the Minister has continually told us today that she is being very clear, the extent of any British boots on the ground in defence of the Ukrainians is unclear, as are the sanctions that she will propose. Will she be a bit clearer about the defensive posture that we may ask members of the British armed forces to take in Ukraine in support of a country that we all wish to express our support for?

    Vicky Ford

    The UK and our allies are providing a range of support to Ukraine, including through work that is enhancing Ukraine’s defence capability. It is really important that we continue to reiterate that the support is fundamentally defensive in nature and that neither NATO nor Ukraine pose any aggressive threat to Russia.

    Stuart Anderson (Wolverhampton South West) (Con)

    As we see the build-up of troops on the Ukraine-Russian border, I would be keen to know whether the grey zone sub-threshold attacks, such as cyber and disinformation, are also increasing at the same pace. What do the Government have in place to deal with those attacks to ensure that we control the threat?

    Vicky Ford

    I will not comment on intelligence matters from the Dispatch Box.

    Luke Pollard (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) (Lab/Co-op)

    Russia’s actions are deliberate, not accidental, and they are against a clear strategy and sequence. The threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty is clear, but so is the threat to our NATO allies in the Baltic states. Will the Minister set out very clearly that the article 5 protection of our NATO allies in the Baltic states stands firm and will be unquestionable, and that Britain will not renege on our enhanced forward presence, which is protecting the Baltic states from any Russian aggression?

    Vicky Ford

    The UK stands by our NATO allies in the Baltic states.

    Ms Nusrat Ghani (Wealden) (Con)

    The Foreign Secretary has tweeted that

    “allies stand with Ukraine and will defend the frontiers of freedom and democracy.”

    Will the Minister confirm that we will use every tool to ensure that our NATO allies stand just as steadfast in ensuring that Ukraine is protected, including in relation to the suggestion that Putin will deploy 175 Russian troops to the area?

    Vicky Ford

    Let me be very clear: we are standing with our NATO allies. And there is a very clear message from our allies: any incursion by Russia into Ukraine would be a massive strategic mistake.

    Dave Doogan (Angus) (SNP)

    I recently returned from the Lithuanian-Belarus border, where I saw at first hand the malign behaviour of Russia on Europe’s borders. We understand that this situation is clearly very grave and I am not sure that that was reflected in the Foreign Secretary’s photo opportunity with a tank in Estonia. If the issue is taken very seriously, can we get a grip on the Putin wallets running amok in London, with free rein to do whatever they like? That is how we will get some attention to the situation.

    Vicky Ford

    The Foreign Secretary flies the flag for freedom and stands by our troops.

    Jason McCartney (Colne Valley) (Con)

    I am very proud to represent a vibrant Ukrainian community in my Colne Valley and neighbouring Huddersfield constituency, and I will celebrate Ukrainian Christmas with that community in January, as I do every year. It will be watching what we are saying here today very closely. Will the Minister again reaffirm that we will work with our NATO allies to send out an unequivocal message that we steadfastly support the sovereignty of Ukraine?

    Vicky Ford

    We stand with our NATO allies in steadfastly supporting the sovereignty of Ukraine, and I take this opportunity to wish them a very happy Christmas—lucky you, getting two Christmases.

    Margaret Ferrier (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) (Ind)

    Ukraine and NATO are concerned that Russia will seize the Suwalki corridor by pushing migrants into the area and stoking unrest. That would allow Russian forces to join Belarus. What assessment have the Government and allies made of the likelihood of that scenario, and what humanitarian support would be provided to migrants caught in the fold?

    Vicky Ford

    We have no doubt that there is Russian action in Ukraine and in other countries that attempts to destabilise Europe, NATO and our allies. We are absolutely clear in our integrated review that Russian actions pose an acute and direct threat to national security. As I said from the Dispatch Box last week, we are providing humanitarian aid to those caught up in the middle of the crisis.

    Rob Butler (Aylesbury) (Con)

    I very much welcome the Minister’s strong statement of support for Ukraine today. Will she confirm that the firm deterrent and clear warnings that she is giving in this Chamber about President Putin’s behaviour towards Ukraine are also being delivered directly to the Kremlin in a manner that cannot be misunderstood?

    Vicky Ford

    It is very important that we speak with one voice with our allies. That is why the Prime Minister spoke to President Biden and the leaders of France, Germany and Italy yesterday. We are all giving that same clear message on the call that will happen between Biden and President Putin this afternoon: any military incursion by Russia into Ukraine would be a massive and strategic mistake.

    Antony Higginbotham (Burnley) (Con)

    The focus on physical incursions into Ukraine by Russia shows that we still have a lot to learn about its way of operating. Will the Minister confirm that when we look at the defensive options that we might be able to provide to Ukraine to help them to deter that threat, we will also look at cyber-security and information, because that is where the Russians are now operating?

    Vicky Ford

    It is very helpful to have the Minister for the Armed Forces right beside me today, so that it can be very clear that we are considering responses in all domains.

    Gareth Davies (Grantham and Stamford) (Con)

    As part of our response to this situation and a potential disinformation campaign, will my hon. Friend support a strengthening of our £23 million counter-disinformation and development aid package to Ukraine, which can help Ukrainians to discern fact from Russian fiction on social media?

    Vicky Ford

    I am obviously not able to comment on particular projects from the Dispatch Box today, but as I have said, we stand by the people of Ukraine. We are already providing a range of support to Ukraine to help it to enhance its defence capability, and we will continue to assess that situation alongside our NATO allies.

  • Metropolitan Police – 2021 Statement on Downing Street Christmas Party

    Metropolitan Police – 2021 Statement on Downing Street Christmas Party

    The statement made by the Metropolitan Police on 8 December 2021.

    We are aware of footage obtained by ITV News relating to alleged breaches of the Health Protection Regulations at a government building in December 2020.

    It is our policy not to routinely investigate retrospective breaches of the Covid-19 regulations, however the footage will form part of our considerations.

  • Anne Marie Morris – 2021 Comments about Allegra Stratton Laughing About Christmas Party

    Anne Marie Morris – 2021 Comments about Allegra Stratton Laughing About Christmas Party

    The comments made by Anne Marie Morris, the Conservative MP for Newton Abbot, on Twitter on 8 December 2021.

    Clearly there were rules in place that most of us were diligently following (despite how difficult they were) and they decided to break them. It’s not on and, at the very least, they should admit their blatant error and apologise for breaking the rules they imposed on society.