Tag: Speeches

  • Suella Braverman – 2022 Statement on Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill

    Suella Braverman – 2022 Statement on Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill

    The statement made by Suella Braverman, the Home Secretary, in the House of Commons on 13 October 2022.

    I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

    Following Putin’s unconscionable invasion of Ukraine we acted immediately, cracking down on dirty money in the UK by passing the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022. I am very grateful for the way that the whole House got behind that effort and I hope we can come together on this Bill, too. I am very grateful to the shadow Front Bench for its constructive engagement on the Bill and to party colleagues for their considerable input. I hope we can send a united message that dirty money, fraudsters and gangsters are not welcome in the UK.

    Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)

    I just wonder why it took a war in Europe for action to take place on this matter, why for years and years and years the right hon. and learned Lady’s Government and their predecessors did nothing about it, and whether it had anything to do with the millions going into Tory party coffers from Russian oligarchs?

    Suella Braverman

    I am not sure what point the hon. Gentleman is making. Important strides are being taken forward in the Bill and we should all be getting behind the swift action the Government took in response to the invasion of Ukraine. I am very grateful that we were able to pass that legislation and take powers in the Act earlier this year, which included taking the groundbreaking action of sanctioning hundreds if not thousands of Russian individuals and entities, freezing assets and really excluding the influence of Russian finance in the UK. I am proud of that effort and I hope that he is too.

    Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op) rose—

    Suella Braverman

    If I can just make some progress, I will come back to the hon. Gentleman.

    Having acted immediately in response to Putin, we promised to go further. The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill will bear down even further on kleptocrats, criminals and terrorists, strengthening the UK’s reputation as a place where legitimate business can thrive but economic crime cannot. Economic crime is a serious problem. It threatens our prosperity, national security and global influence. The UK has one of the world’s largest and most open economies, and it is an extremely attractive place to do business. That is a good thing, but it also exposes us to economic crime, such as money laundering, corruption, the financing of organised crime and terrorism, and a growing range of state threats.

    Stephen Doughty

    I thank the Home Secretary for giving way. One issue I have raised with Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Ministers directly relates to the use of cryptocurrency and different mechanisms for those trying to evade sanctions or commit other crimes. There is a particular issue around mixers and tumblers—that is what they are called. The US Treasury took very, very severe action on this in August this year. My understanding is that we are yet to take that action. Will she look urgently at these issues with her colleagues in the Treasury and the FCDO to ensure that we bear down very strongly on those who are using crypto to avoid detection by our criminal investigation agencies?

    Suella Braverman

    The hon. Gentleman raises a really important and valid point. The Bill will go some way to dealing with cryptocurrency, but he is right that cryptoassets are increasingly being used for malign and terrorist purposes. We intend to crack down on that and will be bringing forward a Government amendment that will mirror the changes in Part 4 of this Bill in counter-terrorism legislation, but we are very happy to review that further.

    The Government have already undertaken unprecedented action to stop kleptocrats and criminals.

    Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

    Just last year, as everyone in the House will remember very well, the Police Service of Northern Ireland seized £215 million from a money laundering scheme that started in eastern Europe, came right across into the United Kingdom and ended up in Northern Ireland. The Home Secretary said clearly that money laundering will be addressed directly. In Northern Ireland we seem to have a problem in relation to that. Will she enter into discussions with the Finance and Justice Ministers back home in Northern Ireland to ensure that they can work together to beat money laundering everywhere?

    Suella Braverman

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that point. I am very happy to build further and closer engagement with Northern Ireland on this particular issue. In the case of anti-money laundering and other investigations, and prosecutions in relation to standalone money laundering cases or where money laundering is the principal offence, the agencies have recovered considerable amounts. £1.3 billion has been recovered in those cases since 2015-16 using the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 powers. That is good progress, but of course there is further to go and, as I said, I am very keen to engage more closely.

    Catherine West (Hornsey and Wood Green) (Lab)

    On the agencies, does the Home Secretary accept that it has taken an awfully long for the Government to get around to reforming Companies House, which is very open to abuse and which the Royal United Services Institute has been mentioning for years now as a danger to our national security?

    Suella Braverman

    I am very pleased that we are taking this action now. I take on board the point that this has been a long-standing matter that Members and Administrations have been talking about for some time. There has been progress over several years. We have the National Economic Crime Centre and new legislation, so there are greater powers, but I am focused on ensuring that the reforms in the Bill are implemented as quickly as possible. On reforms to Companies House, we seek to ensure that the level of change is balanced to avoid causing any confusion for legitimate customers and to ensure effective implementation. So yes, speed is essential, but not at the expense of undue disruption.

    Some of the action we have already undertaken includes being the first G20 country to establish, in 2016, a public register of domestic company beneficial ownership; the publication of the economic crime plan in 2019 and the progress made against it; and establishing, as I said to the hon. Lady, the National Economic Crime Centre and the combating kleptocracy cell in the National Crime Agency. The Bill is just one component of a wider Government approach to tackling economic crime, including fraud. It sits alongside the National Security Bill and the Online Safety Bill, and the forthcoming second economic crime plan and fraud strategy.

    Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)

    One of the areas this place will struggle to scrutinise is golden visas. It has now been four years since that review was commissioned. We understand it is ready, yet we have not seen it to be able to scrutinise it and hold the Government to account on it. Will the right hon. and learned Lady be the Home Secretary who finally releases that review?

    Suella Braverman

    When it comes to golden visas, I was very proud of the action the Government took in relation to Russian individuals following the invasion, where we stopped the sale of golden visas to particular individuals—

    Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)

    The sale? You were selling them?

    Suella Braverman

    The issuance—excuse me—of golden visas to particular individuals from Russia. I agree that there is further work we can do and I am very keen to look at it.

    Chris Bryant

    I think the Home Secretary said the sale of tier 1 visas, as if the Government or the Conservative party were somehow selling these things. Is it not absolutely shocking that 10 of the people the Government sanctioned this year were people to whom the Conservative Government had given tier 1 visas? We were inviting crooks and Putin’s cronies to come into this country, make their lives here and carry on their criminal activities here.

    Suella Braverman

    I think the hon. Gentleman will find that this has actually been a long-standing issue for Administrations of both colours, and we have been vulnerable for some time. However, I am incredibly proud of and make no apology for the robust, tough and unapologetic action that this country took in response to the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. That includes, along with the EU and the US, sanctioning thousands of Russian individuals and entities; taking aggressive, prohibitive action to stop them taking part in the UK financial system; freezing the assets of all Russian banks; barring Russian firms from borrowing money; and, importantly, ensuring that we take a strong stance to affect and disable, to a degree, the Russian economy. That is how we will win this war, not by cheap political points.

    Chris Bryant

    Look, some of us have been battling on this for a very long time. Some of us said in 2014 that if we did not sanction Putin properly then, he would not only take the Crimea, but try to take the whole of Ukraine. Some of us fear that the Government’s refusal to act in this area is part of what has emboldened Putin. The biggest problem is that, in many cases, the UK’s sanction regime has been much weaker than that of other countries. The Home Secretary is wrong: we have not sanctioned all the Russian banks. There are still others to be sanctioned. We have sanctioned 20% of the people who have been sanctioned by the United States of America. For most of the people we have sanctioned, we are relying on EU legislation—we are just copying it. Honestly, I think she needs to do her work a bit more carefully.

    Suella Braverman

    No, I disagree. I will not repeat the points that I have made, but I am very proud of our record. The action was tough, unprecedented and far-reaching, and I am very glad that other countries followed suit soon after.

    The Bill includes essential reforms of Companies House and measures to prevent the abuse of limited partnerships. It creates additional powers to seize cryptoassets more quickly and easily. The Bill will enable more effective and targeted information sharing to tackle money laundering and economic crime.

    Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)

    Late last year, NatWest was fined £265 million for facilitating money laundering through its UK branches. Sacks of cash, literally, were being taken into NatWest branches. Despite the £265 million fine, no person at NatWest has personally been held to account. Does my right hon. and learned Friend not agree that these fines are simply a cost of doing business, because this is profitable business? The only way in which we will clamp down on this is to hold individual executives at the top of organisations to account and, if necessary, put these people in jail.

    Suella Braverman

    I agree with my hon. Friend, who has a huge amount of expertise and has achieved a huge amount in Parliament to crack down on fraud and economic crime. I will come to the Bill’s anti-money laundering measures, so I will have to detain him a bit longer until I get there. I agree, however: we have to make sure that we can build on the regime, powers and law enforcement frameworks that are in place. We can go further.

    Dame Margaret Hodge (Barking) (Lab)

    If the Home Secretary does agree with what was said by the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake), with whom I have worked closely on these matters, why is she not reforming corporate criminal liability in the Bill to bring into effect the very change that he has promoted?

    Suella Braverman

    I accept what the right hon. Lady says, but the Government have already taken steps to establish the case for change on corporate criminal liability. In 2020, we commissioned the Law Commission to undertake a detailed review of how the legislative system could be improved to appropriately capture and punish criminal offences committed by corporations, with a particular focus on economic crime. The Law Commission published that paper on 10 June 2022. The Government are carefully assessing the options that were presented and are committed to working quickly to reform criminal corporate liability.

    Jim Shannon

    I thank the Secretary of State for generously giving way again. I understand that 929 companies registered with Companies House were identified as taking part in 89 economic crime incidents, which amounted to £137 billion of potential economic damage. I know that the Secretary of State, like me and others in the House, is keen to ensure that we get the change we want, but will that mean that that can no longer happen in relation to Companies House?

    Suella Braverman

    We want to ensure that there are more restrictions on who can register with Companies House so that we prevent the abuse of the regime. As I said, we have one of the most open, liberal and business-friendly economies, but we are exposed to some degree. The reforms in the Bill very much address the issue that the hon. Member raises.

    Furthermore, the Bill introduces a regulatory objective into the Legal Services Act 2007; removes the statutory cap on the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s fining power for disciplinary matters relating to economic crime offences; extends pre-investigation powers to all Serious Fraud Office cases; and streamlines the process for updating the UK’s high-risk third country list. The Bill will also ensure that we have more effective and targeted information sharing to tackle money laundering and economic crime. It provides new intelligence-gathering powers for law enforcement and removes regulatory burdens on businesses. Altogether, the Bill is a formidable tool in the fight against illicit finance.

    The Government have consulted widely on the Bill and won broad support from business and professional groups, law enforcement agencies and civil society. We are, of course, working closely with the devolved Administrations on this legislation, as the Bill contains several provisions that engage devolved powers in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

    I will now set out the Bill’s measures in more detail, turning first to Companies House reform. Companies House is one of the foundations of the UK’s business environment. It operates the UK’s open and flexible corporate registration framework. The UK’s business community enjoys a simple system for creating and maintaining companies and other legal entities. Information on those entities is made available for the benefit of investors, lenders, regulators and the public. The companies register was accessed 12 billion times last year. Inevitably, that makes it a target. In recent years, the Companies House framework has been manipulated, particularly with the use of anonymous or fraudulent shell companies and partnerships. That gives criminals a veneer of legitimacy to help them to commit crimes, ranging from grand corruption and money laundering to fraud and identity theft.

    We will reform the role of Companies House and improve the transparency of UK companies. The Bill will ensure that we can bear down on the use of thousands of UK companies and other corporate structures as vehicles for economic crime, including fraud, international money laundering, illicit Russian finance, corruption, terrorist financing and illegal arms movements. These are the most significant reforms to the UK’s framework for registering companies in 170 years. We will introduce identity verification for new and existing directors.

    Kevin Hollinrake

    It is very good news that we are moving from a register to a regulator. On the capacity of Companies House to do that, there are around 5 million companies in the UK, with probably two directors on average, and 500,000 companies are registered every year. Does Companies House today honestly have the capacity to properly verify the ID of all those directors?

    Suella Braverman

    Resourcing the agencies and organisations, such as Companies House, to better fight the threat of fraud and economic crime will be part of the equation. I am pleased to be in constant discussion with the various agencies, although, obviously, Companies House is the responsibility of other Departments. However, we have to ensure that it has the tools, operationally and from a resource point of view, to be able to carry out its legal duties.

    Yvette Cooper (Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford) (Lab)

    The Home Secretary is being generous in giving way. The point about institutions being able to carry out enforcement is immensely important. As well as Companies House, there is also an issue for the National Crime Agency. She may be aware that her predecessor asked the National Crime Agency to draw up plans for 20% staffing cuts. Has the Home Secretary now ruled that out?

    Suella Braverman

    Last year’s spending review settlement set out that the economic crime levy would provide funding totalling approximately £400 million over the spending review period. Law enforcement activity on economic crime is conducted by a number of agencies, including the National Crime Agency, as the right hon. Lady says. I want to ensure that those agencies have the proper resources, personnel and tools to be at the forefront of fighting crime effectively.

    Catherine West

    Will the Home Secretary give way?

    Suella Braverman

    I will make some progress. As hon. Members have said, I have been very generous, but I am struggling to get through my speech. I know that everybody wants to speak, so I will take no more interventions for now.

    We will introduce identity verification for new and existing directors, beneficial owners and those who file information with Companies House. That will improve the accuracy of Companies House data and will ensure that we know who is really acting for and benefiting from companies.

    Chris Bryant

    Will the Home Secretary give way on that point?

    Suella Braverman

    I am sorry, but I will not.

    The powers of the registrar of companies will be broadened, making the registrar a more active gatekeeper for company creation and a custodian of more reliable data. The registrar will receive new powers to check, remove or decline information that is submitted to or already on the company register. The Bill will improve the financial information on the register so that it is more reliable, complete and accurate, and enables better business decisions. Companies House will be given more effective investigation and enforcement powers, including by enabling it proactively to share information with law enforcement bodies about higher-risk corporate bodies, or where there is evidence of anomalous filings or other suspicious behaviour. To protect individuals from fraud and other harm, we will also enhance the protection of personal information and addresses provided to Companies House.

    We will introduce broader reforms to clamp down on the misuse of corporate entities. These reforms will support enterprise by enabling Companies House to deliver a better service for more than 4 million UK companies. They will help us to maintain our swift and low-cost routes for company creation. They will also improve the collection of data to inform business transactions and lending decisions across our economy.

    Catherine West

    The Witanhurst property, a 500-room mansion in Highgate, is the second largest property in the UK after Buckingham Palace. Its ownership is contested, so it has not been seized. Will the Bill cover such difficult and anomalous situations? Local residents feel that people should be brought to account. Considering the links with the regime in Russia, there is no way that that house was bought in an honest way.

    Suella Braverman

    Without knowing the details of that case, what is clear is that the reforms to Companies House will ensure not only that more investigation and enforcement powers are afforded to it, but that there will be new powers for checking, removing and declining information submitted to the company register if there are grounds for concern.

    Chris Bryant

    The Home Secretary is being generous in giving way; I am very grateful. I warmly welcome all these changes to Companies House, for which some of us have been arguing for a very long time. My anxiety is that Companies House will have a major change of role: as several agencies have said recently to the Foreign Affairs Committee, it will go from being a registrar to being effectively a policeman. To do so, it will need enormous additional capacity. Can she tell us how much additional money it will have to fulfil that role?

    Suella Braverman

    The transformation of Companies House has been under consideration for some time, and the Treasury Committee has done quite a lot of inquiring into the issue. We published a White Paper on corporate transparency and register reform earlier this year, which provided considerable detail on how these reforms will operate. It is a complex area of law. Resources will be needed for these extra powers.

    Chris Bryant

    How much?

    Suella Braverman

    The transformation is already under way, with £20 million invested in 2021-22 and a further £63 million announced up to 2024-25 at the most recent spending review. We have been thinking about this, and the money has been announced in spending reviews. It has been thought about.

    Kate Green (Stretford and Urmston) (Lab)

    Will the Home Secretary give way?

    Suella Braverman

    I am going to continue.

    The Bill will tackle the misuse of limited partnerships, including Scottish limited partnerships, and will modernise the law governing them. We will tighten registration requirements and will additionally require limited partnerships to demonstrate a firmer connection to the UK. Transparency requirements will be increased. The registrar will be able to de-register limited partnerships if they are dissolved or no longer carrying on business, or if a court orders that it is in the public interest.

    Nor does the Bill overlook cryptoassets. It will give additional powers to law enforcement bodies so that they can more quickly and easily seize, freeze and recover cryptoassets that are the proceeds of crime or are connected with illicit activity. That will ensure that cryptoassets cannot be a conduit for money laundering, fraud, ransomware attacks or terrorist financing. Most notably, it will mitigate the risk posed by those who cannot be prosecuted but who nevertheless use their funds for criminal purposes. I am sorry to say that cryptoassets are increasingly being used to fund terrorism; we will crack down on that by introducing an amendment to counter-terrorism legislation that reflects those changes.

    I turn to anti-money laundering. We will enable better sharing of information about suspected money laundering, fraud and other economic crimes between certain regulated businesses, allowing them to take a more proactive approach to preventing economic crime. As a result, businesses will be better able to detect crime taking place across multiple businesses and to prevent criminals from exploiting information gaps between them. We will also reduce the reporting burdens on businesses, enabling the private sector and law enforcement to focus their existing resources on tackling high-value and priority activity.

    Threats evolve and are changing, so the Bill includes a measure to streamline and allow faster updates to the UK’s high-risk third country list. The list will be updated and published on gov.uk for everyone to see, reflecting updates from the Financial Action Task Force, the international standard setter, when it identifies countries with weak anti-money laundering, counter-terrorist financing and counter-proliferation financing controls. By removing the need to lay a statutory instrument before Parliament every time the list needs to be updated, we will reduce delays in updating the list and free up parliamentary time.

    The Bill will add a regulatory objective to the Legal Services Act 2007:

    “promoting the prevention and detection of economic crime.”

    It affirms that it is the legal duty of legal regulators and professionals to uphold the economic crime regime. That will reduce the risk of lengthy and expensive challenges from regulated members over enforcement action. It will improve the ability of the Legal Services Board, as the oversight regulator, to manage the performance of frontline regulators in meeting that objective.

    The Bill will remove the statutory cap on the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s financial penalty powers for disciplinary matters relating to economic crime. That will align the SRA with other regulators that have such flexibility. Fewer cases will be referred to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, resulting in faster enforcement. There will be a credible deterrent and a more coherent response to breaches of economic crime rules.

    The Bill will enable the Serious Fraud Office to use its powers under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1987 at the pre-investigation stage in any SFO case, including a fraud case—an ability that is currently limited to cases of international bribery and corruption. This measure will mean that the SFO can more quickly gather the information that it needs to allow its director to decide whether to take on a case.

    Cracking down on economic crime is a major plank of the Government’s beating crime plan.

    Andy Slaughter

    I am grateful to the Home Secretary for giving way; I know that she is about to finish her speech. There are 22 professional bodies overseeing compliance with anti-money laundering rules. Is the Home Secretary going to do anything about the resulting confusion, and the inadequacy of some of those bodies? May I also ask whether she intends to introduce—as her colleague the Secretary of State for Wales hinted earlier this week—a new offence of failure to prevent offences from being committed? I do not know whether she welcomes her colleague commenting on her brief, but as the Welsh Secretary has raised the question, perhaps she could respond to it.

    Suella Braverman

    The hon. Gentleman raises two issues concerning the regulators. We need to ensure that they strike the right balance in terms of their investigatory or prosecutorial powers, but also do not overstretch themselves to become a burden on legitimate and bona fide enterprise. This is a balance that legislation constantly seeks to strike. As for the offence of failure to prevent offences, it is something that we consider all the time, and I am always open to considering such possibilities.

    Far from being victimless, these crimes bring misery, fund other crimes and undermine our country’s reputation, and Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine raises the stakes even higher. The United Kingdom must ensure that we are doing nothing to aid Putin, and doing everything we can to support the courageous Ukrainian people.

    I urge the whole House to get behind the Bill so that we can make sure that the UK is a great place for legitimate business and a no-go area for crooks, and I commend it to the House.

  • Lindsay Hoyle – 2022 Statement on Anniversary of Murder of David Amess

    Lindsay Hoyle – 2022 Statement on Anniversary of Murder of David Amess

    The statement made by Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons, in the House on 13 October 2022.

    This Saturday marks the first anniversary of the death of our friend and colleague Sir David Amess, who was murdered in his Southend West constituency. David was an extremely diligent constituency Member of Parliament who died carrying out his democratic duties, which made his death all the more shocking. May I express, on behalf of the whole House, our sympathy with his family, friends and colleagues on this sad anniversary? David was a long-serving Member who was respected and liked on all sides of the House. We will not forget him.

    At this time, we also remember our colleague James Brokenshire, a dedicated, respected parliamentarian, and hold his family and friends in our thoughts this week.

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2022 Statement on UK-Gulf Co-operation Council Free Trade Agreement Negotiations

    Kemi Badenoch – 2022 Statement on UK-Gulf Co-operation Council Free Trade Agreement Negotiations

    The statement made by Kemi Badenoch, the Secretary of State for International Trade, in the House of Commons on 13 October 2022.

    The first round of negotiations for a free trade agreement (FTA) between the United Kingdom (UK) and Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) took place between 22 August and 29 September. The negotiations were conducted virtually.

    In this round of negotiations the UK and GCC discussed their objectives for the FTA, and exchanged technical information. Technical discussions were held across 29 policy areas over 33 sessions. In total, more than 100 UK negotiators from across Government took part in this round of negotiations.

    An FTA will be a substantial economic opportunity, and a significant moment in the UK-GCC relationship. Government analysis shows that, in the long-run, a deal with the GCC is expected to increase trade by at least 16%, add at least £1.6 billion a year to the UK economy and contribute an additional £600 million or more to UK workers’ annual wages.

    Both sides have committed to secure an ambitious, comprehensive and modern agreement fit for the 21st century.

    The Government remain clear that any deal will be in the best interests of the British people and the UK economy. We will not compromise on our high environmental and labour protections, public health, animal welfare and food standards, and we will maintain our right to regulate in the public interest. We are also clear that during these negotiations, the NHS and the services it provides is not on the table.

    The Government will keep Parliament updated as these negotiations progress.

  • Michelle Donelan – 2022 Statement of the 5G Network Removal of Huawei Equipment

    Michelle Donelan – 2022 Statement of the 5G Network Removal of Huawei Equipment

    The statement made by Michelle Donelan, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport in the House of Commons on 13 October 2022.

    Public telecommunications networks and services are critical to the future prosperity of the UK. 5G offers new technical capabilities through higher data rates, reliable and low latency communications, and machine-to-machine communications. This gives 5G the potential to generate significant economic and social benefits across the digital economy. However, it brings risks as our national infrastructure becomes more dependent on these networks and services.

    To manage the risks to UK national security, the Government have issued a designation notice to Huawei and designated vendor directions to 35 public telecommunications providers.

    The directions place restrictions on the use of Huawei goods and services by those telecommunications providers. This follows long-standing advice from the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) and the Government on the use of Huawei equipment in UK public telecommunication networks. The Government have concluded a targeted consultation with telecommunications providers and Huawei and is now, following the passage of the Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021, placing legal controls on the use of Huawei goods and services for the first time.

    I have set dates by which telecommunications providers should meet the requirements in the direction. Having fully considered consultation responses, and following close consultation with the NCSC, the key deadline to remove all Huawei equipment in the UK’s 5G network by 2027 remains unchanged, as do eight other requirements.

    For a small number of operators, the interim milestones initially proposed before the coronavirus (covid-19) pandemic could have led to network outages and significant disruption for millions of customers, with delays caused by covid-19 restrictions and global supply chain issues. In light of this, while I am asking providers to continue to meet the original target dates for the removal of Huawei from network cores and the capping of Huawei in the access network to 35% wherever possible (January and July 2023 respectively), I am setting the legally required date for compliance to December and October 2023 respectively to avoid customer disruption. Providers also now have a legal requirement to report to me on progress in January and July 2023, so I can keep Parliament informed of progress. Providers will also work closely with NCSC through this period, who have confirmed that the adjustments represent a sensible balance between network disruption and network security.

  • Liz Truss – 2022 Comments at Press Conference Following Dismissal of Kwasi Kwarteng

    Liz Truss – 2022 Comments at Press Conference Following Dismissal of Kwasi Kwarteng

    The comments made by Liz Truss, the Prime Minister, at the start of the press conference held on 14 October 2022 at Downing Street.

    Good afternoon,

    My conviction that this country needs to go for growth is rooted in my personal experience.

    I know what it’s like to grow up somewhere that isn’t feeling the benefits of growth.

    I saw what that meant and I am not prepared to accept that for our country.

    I want a country where people can get good jobs, new businesses can set up and families can afford an even better life.

    That’s why from day one I’ve been ambitious for growth.

    Since the 2008 financial crisis, the potential of this great country has been held back by persistently weak growth.

    I want to deliver a low tax, high wage, high growth economy.

    It’s what I was elected by my party to do.

    That mission remains.

    People across this country rightly want stability.

    That is why we acted to support businesses and households with their energy costs this winter.

    It’s also the case that global economic conditions are worsening due to the continuation of Putin’s appalling war in Ukraine.

    And on top of this, debt was amassed helping people through the Covid pandemic.

    But it is clear that parts of our mini budget went further and faster than markets were expecting.

    So the way we are delivering our mission right now has to change.

    We need to act now to reassure the markets of our fiscal discipline.

    I have therefore decided to keep the increase in corporation tax that was planned by the previous government.

    This will raise £18 billion per year.

    It will act as a down-payment on our full Medium-Term Fiscal Plan which will be accompanied by a forecast from the independent OBR.

    We will do whatever is necessary to ensure debt is falling as a share of the economy in the medium term.

    We will control the size of the state to ensure that taxpayers’ money is always well spent.

    Our public sector will become more efficient to deliver world-class services for the British people.

    And spending will grow less rapidly than previously planned.

    I met the former Chancellor earlier today. I was incredibly sorry to lose him.

    He is a great friend and he shares my vision to set this country on the path to growth.

    Today I have asked Jeremy Hunt to become the new Chancellor.

    He is one of the most experienced and widely respected government ministers and parliamentarians.

    And he shares my convictions and ambitions for our country.

    He will deliver the Medium-Term Fiscal Plan at the end of this month.

    He will see through the support we are providing to help families and businesses including our Energy Price Guarantee that’s protecting people from higher energy bills this winter.

    And he will drive our mission to go for growth, including taking forward the supply side reforms that our country needs.

    We owe it to the next generation to improve our economic performance to deliver higher wages, new jobs and better public services, and to ease the burden of debt.

    I have acted decisively today because my priority is ensuring our country’s economic stability.

    As Prime Minister, I will always act in the national interest.

    This is always my first consideration.

    I want to be honest, this is difficult.

    But we will get through this storm.

    And we will deliver the strong and sustained growth that can transform the prosperity of our country for generations to come.

  • Lucy Powell – 2022 Speech on Cutting the Cost of Broadband

    Lucy Powell – 2022 Speech on Cutting the Cost of Broadband

    The speech made by Lucy Powell, the Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport on 13 October 2022.

    As family bills rocket as a result of the economic crisis made in Downing Street Labour is today calling on the government and Ofcom to stop a broadband bombshell hitting families and firms with a three-point plan to reign in expected broadband price increases and ease the cost of living crisis.

    Ofcom reports that nearly a third of households (8 million households) are having problems paying for their broadband, phone and streaming bills, double the number last year, and the highest since their records began. In a recent Lloyds Bank survey, 26 per cent of adults not using the internet in the past three months gave “it’s too expensive” as a reason. At the same time, 97 percent of eligible low-income families are currently missing out on a social tariff. Meanwhile, it has been reported that broadband firms are in line for a £1.7 billion windfall as a result of above inflation price rises.

    Labour is calling for:

    1) A reversal of changes the government made in 2019 which allowed regulated wholesale prices to rise with CPI rather than costs, so that telecoms wholesalers and internet service providers don’t get a windfall from sky high inflation whilst families and firms struggle to pay their bills.

    2) Ofcom to investigate and take action to strengthen consumer protections including taking action on mid contract price rises, early termination costs for social tariff customers, and loyalty penalties where long term customers pay more than new customers.

    3) An industry wide social tariff for low-income families. Industry including wholesalers like Openreach, must work with Ofcom and consumer groups to develop a mandatory well-advertised broadband social tariff for low-income families, or the Party will set and legislate for one in government.

    Broadband is the newest utility, an essential for everyday life, not a luxury. Yet the Conservative cost of living crisis means that many families are finding internet access increasingly unaffordable, or impossible. Without access to the online world, children can’t do homework, parents can’t access the labour market, social security, or the best rates for services or goods, and grandparents can’t stay in touch face to face with family over distances.

    Broadband wholesale price increases used to be capped at costs with prices stable over many years. However, in 2019, the government changed regulation so the price of existing Openreach networks could increase in line with CPI inflation instead. Wholesale prices for 2023 will be set this October with inflation estimated to reach a peak of 13 percent. As a result it has been reported that broadband bills could increase by a quarter.

    Lucy Powell MP, Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, said:

    “Internet access is a necessity not a luxury, yet the economic crisis made in Downing Street is making it increasingly difficult for families to make ends meet and stay connected.

    “Our three-point plan will ease the broadband bombshell facing families and firms, at a time when they are already facing eye watering energy bills, and mortgage and rent increases. Whilst the Conservatives crash our economy, Labour will ensure accessing and connecting to digital infrastructure powers growth across our economy to ensure people and places aren’t left behind.”

    In her Labour Conference speech Shadow Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Secretary Lucy Powell pledged a new settlement for the digital age, building on our digital infrastructure to make Britain one of the most connected nations in the world for gigabit broadband, and industrial 5G.

  • Liz Truss – 2022 Letter to Kwasi Kwarteng Following His Dismissal

    Liz Truss – 2022 Letter to Kwasi Kwarteng Following His Dismissal

    The letter sent by Liz Truss, the Prime Minister, to Kwasi Kwarteng, on 14 October 2022.

  • Kwasi Kwarteng – 2022 Letter to Liz Truss Confirming His Dismissal

    Kwasi Kwarteng – 2022 Letter to Liz Truss Confirming His Dismissal

    The letter sent by Kwasi Kwarteng, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to Liz Truss, the Prime Minister, on 14 October 2022.

  • Brandon Lewis – 2022 Statement on Criminal Legal Aid

    Brandon Lewis – 2022 Statement on Criminal Legal Aid

    The statement made by Brandon Lewis, the Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 12 October 2022.

    Since I became Lord Chancellor, I have been keen to resolve the dispute with the Criminal Bar Association, in order get the criminal justice system working again. To that end, my officials and I have been holding constructive discussions on a package of proposals with the Bar Council and the CBA. This package was agreed as part of our overall response to the criminal legal aid independent review consultation.

    I am pleased to announce that the CBA membership has now voted in favour of my offer on criminal legal aid, and has agreed to come back to work.

    As a result, my Department laid a statutory instrument on 11 October which will mean the recent fee uplift for new cases claimable by litigators and advocates will also now apply to the vast majority of existing cases in the backlog where the main hearing takes place after the commencement of the instrument on 31 October 2022. This equates to an additional investment of £28 million in the fee scheme for advocates and £14 million in the fee scheme for litigators over the spending review period.

    My Department will also make an additional £3 million of funding available for case preparation, such as written work and special preparation, as well as a further £4 million for defence barristers involved in pre-recorded cross-examinations, which are used to reduce the trauma of a trial for vulnerable victims and witnesses by early 2023.

    The Ministry of Justice is proposing a further £5 million uplift per year for fees in the youth court, from the 2024-25 financial year, which is expected to particularly benefit both solicitors and some junior barristers.

    A new criminal legal aid advisory board on criminal legal aid reform will also be created and hold its first meeting in October. This board will discuss the operation of the criminal legal aid system and make recommendations to the Lord Chancellor.

    In addition to this, the Government will respond to the remaining elements of the above consultation by the end of November, including further reforms directed at solicitors. As was made clear by Lord Bellamy in his review, the profession of criminal legal aid solicitors requires immediate attention, and I am keen to work to provide further reforms and support.

    I look forward to working constructively with criminal legal aid practitioners on criminal justice issues, including working to drive down court backlogs and resolve cases sooner.

    After all, we share the same aim: putting the criminal justice system on a more sustainable footing for the future, to support victims and everyone who relies on our justice system.

  • Leo Docherty – 2022 Statement on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review Conference

    Leo Docherty – 2022 Statement on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review Conference

    The statement made by Leo Docherty, the Minister of State for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in the House of Commons on 12 October 2022.

    The House may welcome an update regarding the 10th treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons review conference, which was held at the United Nations in New York from 1 to 26 August. The conference reviewed progress and sought to reach consensus on future actions under the treaty’s three pillars: disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful uses of nuclear technology. While the conference was unable to achieve its overall goal of a consensus outcome document owing to Russian actions, it advanced discussion on each of the treaty’s three pillars, and agreed to establish a working group on further strengthening the review process of the treaty, open to all states parties.

    We were deeply disappointed that, despite the progress made in many areas, Russia blocked the adoption of a consensus outcome document over references to Ukraine, in order to defend its unprovoked, illegal war on Ukraine. Russia’s betrayal of the security assurances it gave through the Budapest memorandum when Ukraine joined the treaty, and its responsibility for the unfolding situation at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, were both referenced obliquely in the President’s consolidated text. Russia’s aggression poses grave challenges to the international nuclear security architecture. The UK, and many other states, raised these concerns consistently throughout the conference, and the UK issued a joint statement with 56 countries explaining how Russia’s aggression and behaviour in Ukraine impacted the treaty.

    The UK played an active role both in the preparation for the conference and at the conference itself. As part of its preparations, the UK published a revised national report setting out the action being taken to support the treaty and fulfil the UK’s commitments across all three pillars of the treaty. At the start of the conference, former Minister of State at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, Graham Stuart MP, set out the UK’s approach and progress against the treaty’s objectives, and led a side event on the UK’s national report. The UK’s positive agenda for the conference focused on our track record on disarmament, including reductions in stockpiles and delivery systems and thought-leadership on risk reduction, verification and transparency. The UK also highlighted our leadership in establishing the “Sustained Dialogue on Peaceful Uses”, a new effort to increase access to the benefits of peaceful nuclear technologies for development, including through meeting the UN sustainable development goals. We engaged constructively in the negotiations throughout, seeking to reach agreement and to make progress across all three pillars of the treaty.

    The lack of a consensus outcome neither undermines the treaty nor changes states’ obligations. Of the nine previous review conferences, which have taken place almost every five years since the treaty came into force in 1970, only three have adopted a comprehensive final document by consensus. Throughout, the treaty has remained vitally important for the UK and for the international community as a whole, playing an unparalleled role in curtailing the nuclear arms race and keeping the world safe. The action plan adopted at the 2010 conference remains valid as a comprehensive road map for all states party to the treaty to follow to take forward action on disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful use of nuclear technology, as do the consensus outcomes from 2000 and 1995. The UK will continue to work closely with our partners to strengthen the treaty and make progress against this roadmap, while also building on the successes of this conference.

    In particular, we look forward to contributing to the working group on strengthening the review process and we will continue to work with Norway on our initiative to clarify and apply the principle of irreversibility. We will also be launching, with the United States and 30 other partners who have joined so far, the sustained dialogue on expanding access to the peaceful uses of nuclear technologies.

    The UK’s commitment to the treaty and to fulfilling our obligations, including under article VI on disarmament, remains undiminished. As a nuclear weapon state that takes our responsibilities seriously and an original party to the treaty, the UK remains committed to creating the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons. We have approximately halved our nuclear stockpile since the cold war peak and we continue to drive research and discussion on risk reduction, verification and transparency. We remain committed to working internationally to reduce the risk of nuclear conflict and enhance mutual trust and security. The UK will continue to play its part in bringing about a safer world for all and achieving the long-term goal of a world without nuclear weapons.

    The treaty is and will remain the fundamental cornerstone of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and is the irreplaceable foundation and framework for our common efforts on advancing nuclear disarmament and the peaceful uses of nuclear technology. The conference decided to hold the 11th review conference in 2026 in New York, with preparatory committees to take place in 2023 in Vienna, 2024 in Geneva and 2025 in New York. The UK will continue to work alongside the international community at all of these meetings to strengthen the regime and to promote international stability, peace and security and will keep Parliament updated.