Tag: Stephen Barclay

Below is the text of the speech made by Stephen Barclay, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, in the House of Commons on 3 April 2019.

We will oppose this Bill. It is being passed in haste, and the fact that we have a time limit of two minutes for a number of speeches this evening is an indication of the fact that the Bill is being passed in haste. It is constitutionally irregular and, frankly, it fails to understand the decision-making process by which any discussion of an extension or agreement of an extension at the European Council will be reached. I will come to that in the limited time I have in which to speak.

It is not just me who has concerns about the Bill on behalf of the Government. Objections to the Bill have been raised by the Chair of the European Scrutiny Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Stone (Sir William Cash); the Chair of the Procedure Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Broxbourne (Mr Walker); and the Chair of the Select Committee on Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Harwich and North Essex (Sir Bernard Jenkin). All have raised concerns about the Bill—particularly the fact that it is being rushed through in such short order—and indeed about the precedent it sets for this and successive Governments.

The Bill also calls into question the royal prerogative. It has been a long-standing practice that Heads of Government can enter into international agreements without preconditions set by the House that would constrain their ability to negotiate in the national interest. Let me give an example of how such constraints could have adverse effects and, in particular, given that the House has voted against no deal, how the Bill could increase the risk of an accidental no-deal exit. On Wednesday 10 April the European Council could propose an extension of an alternative length, yet under the Bill the Prime Minister would then have to return on Thursday 11 April to put that proposal to the House. However, by 11 April the European Council will have concluded and the leaders will have returned to their member states. We would then need to confirm the UK’s agreement to the European Council’s decision and get its approval for that by 11 pm on 12 April.

At the heart of this is the fact that last Friday the House voted against the withdrawal agreement, which was the only legal right the House had to an extension to 22 May, which, as I understand it, Mr Speaker, was at the heart of your decision to grant that vote, because, as the Attorney General set out, that was an additional right bestowed on the House as a result of the previous European Council. We have no automatic right to a legal extension. That right was forgone as a result of the House’s decision last Friday. Yet the Bill would put the House in the position of having to agree after the European Council has concluded and the leaders have returned to their member states.

Tom Brake

The right hon. Gentleman is generous in giving way. Who ran down the clock?

Stephen Barclay

It is not usually my practice to quote from The Guardian, but I suspect that it is the right hon. Gentleman’s newspaper of choice. We all remember its front-page headline, “No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No”—it was quoted by many EU leaders—because this House failed to agree on the various options.

The Prime Minister has sought to compromise. Indeed, part of the challenge she has had with her deal is the fact that people on both wings of the debate feel that it is too much of a compromise. She has sought to compromise in the national interest, reflecting the fact, as Members have said, that 48% of the public did not vote to leave. That is why she reached out to the Leader of the Opposition, but for several weeks he refused to meet her. Indeed, he even refused to meet just because the hon. Member for Streatham (Chuka Umunna) happened to be in the room, which was apparently beyond the pale. I am pleased that today I was able to join the Prime Minister at a meeting with the Leader of the Opposition.

The fact that the House has consistently voted for what it is against, rather than what it is for, and indeed its decision on Friday not to approve the withdrawal agreement, is the very essence of running down the clock, because it waived our right to an extension to 22 May and therefore allowed an extension only to 12 April. It is very odd for the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake), having voted for that reduction in time, now to complain about it.

We are passing the Bill in haste and do not have adequate time to debate it in the manner that I would like us to—there is only one minute left on the clock. There are problems with the speed of its passage, the constitutional principle of it and the way it will interact with any decision reached by the Council that differs from the earlier decision taken by the House. I hope that the constitutional experts in the other place will address some of the Bill’s flaws. It is because of those defects that the Government will oppose the Bill, and I urge Members to oppose this defective Bill.

Below is the text of the statement made by Stephen Barclay, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, in the House of Commons on 7 January 2019.

In a tone that I am sure will reflect the year ahead, may I join the Leader of the Opposition in wishing you, Mr Speaker, and colleagues across the House a happy new year?

As the House will be aware, the Prime Minister today launched a new 10-year plan for the NHS, allocating an extra £20.5 billion a year in funding. I am therefore responding to this question on her behalf. I am sure colleagues across the House recognise the importance of the NHS plan.

As confirmed by the Leader of the House in her business statement before the Christmas recess, this Wednesday the House will debate a business motion relating to section 13(1)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. That will be followed by the main debate on section 13(1)(b), which will continue on Thursday 10 January and, subject to the will of the House, Friday 11 January. Discussions are taking place through the usual channels as to the proposed length of that debate and the date of the vote, but ultimately it will be a decision for this House, through the business motion, which will be voted on this Wednesday. Debate will also take place in the House of Lords on Wednesday 9, Thursday 10 and Monday 14 January.

The decision to postpone the debate last year was not taken lightly. Over the two years of negotiations, the Prime Minister won hard-fought battles—most importantly, to agree a bespoke deal, rather than the flawed off-the-shelf options initially offered. But it was clear from the three days of debate held in this House that it was not going to pass the deal and that further reassurances should be sought, particularly on the issue of the backstop.

Following December’s European Council, a series of conclusions were published that went further than the EU had ever gone previously in trying to address the concerns of this House. Over Christmas, the Prime Minister was in contact with a number of her European counterparts on the further legal and political assurances that Parliament needs on the backstop. She has been in touch with the Taoiseach, and indeed British and Irish Government officials have been in contact over the past week. Securing the additional reassurance that Parliament needs remains our priority, and leaders remain in contact. Leaving the EU with the deal that has been agreed is in the interests of both sides.

When the debate begins on Wednesday, the Government will make clear for the House what has been achieved since the vote was deferred last year. As I said when I spoke in the debate on 4 December, the deal will enable us to deliver a fair, skills-based immigration system and to have control over our fisheries policy and agricultural policies.

We will have our own trade policy for the first time in more than three decades, and there will be an end to sending vast sums of money to the EU. It is a good deal, it is the only deal, and I believe that it is the right deal, in offering certainty for this country.

Below is the text of the statement made by Stephen Barclay, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, in the House of Commons on 20 December 2018.

The UK has reached agreement with Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway (the “EEA EFTA states”), and separately with Switzerland, to resolve the issues arising with those states from the UK’s exit from the European Union. The Government have been clear that their first priority as part of securing a smooth and orderly exit from the EU was to provide certainty for citizens. As such, we announced in February that we were seeking agreements with these countries, similar to the UK’s withdrawal agreement with the EU.

The EEA EFTA states participate in the single market and other EU-led initiatives. As a result, the agreement with them also addresses a small number of the other separation issues that we have agreed with the EU in the withdrawal agreement.

The EEA EFTA agreement will cover:

Citizens’ rights. As with part two of the withdrawal agreement, the agreement ensures that citizens falling within scope will have broadly the same entitlements to work, study and access public services and benefits as now.

Goods on the market, public procurement, intellectual property, and data protection. Provisions in this agreement broadly mirror the arrangements set out in the withdrawal agreement. Where necessary, small technical adaptations have been made, in line with existing technical differences between EU law and the EEA agreement.

Ongoing judicial proceedings. This will allow UK lawyers to continue to appear before the EFTA court in cases which are ongoing at the point of exit.

Police and criminal justice. These provisions broadly mirror the arrangements set out in the withdrawal agreement, but for the smaller subset of police and criminal justice matters in which Norway and Iceland participate.

Governance arrangements. As for EU citizens under the withdrawal agreement, EEA EFTA citizens will be covered by the Independent Monitoring Authority for the Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA). A joint committee consisting of the UK and the EEA EFTA states will be established to oversee this agreement.

The agreement reached with the Swiss Confederation will lay out the arrangements for citizens when the current EU-Swiss free movement of persons agreement ceases to apply between the UK and Switzerland. This supports the ending of free movement after we leave the EU. The terms of this agreement protect the rights of Swiss citizens in the UK and UK nationals in Switzerland, ensuring that they can continue to contribute to their communities and live their lives broadly as they do now.

Together, these agreements will protect over 50,000 UK citizens living in these countries and nearly 30,000 citizens from these countries in the UK.

It is also the Government’s intention that the rights of these citizens would be protected in the event of a no-deal outcome with the EU. The citizens’ rights agreement with Switzerland already addresses this. We are discussing a separate citizens’ rights agreement with the EEA EFTA states for a no-deal scenario.

I will be depositing these agreements and explainers today in the Libraries of both Houses. The Government intend to sign both agreements before exit day and legislate for them through the EU (Withdrawal Agreement) ​Bill. Both agreements are subject to ratification processes in each of the relevant states, including the provisions of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act (CRaG) 2010 in the UK.

Below is the text of the statement made by Stephen Barclay, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, in the House of Commons on 26 October 2017.

The UK is one of the world’s largest and most open economies. The Government are committed to tackling the risk of illicit financial flows from money laundering and terrorist financing, and to protecting the UK as an attractive country for legitimate business and a leading global financial centre. As the threats from illicit finance and terrorist financing continue to evolve, so must our understanding of the risks and our response.

Today, the Government are publishing the UK’s second national risk assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing. This 2017 assessment, jointly published by the Treasury and the Home Office, shows how our understanding of and response to money laundering and terrorist financing have developed since the first assessment in 2015.

The key findings of the 2017 assessment are as follows:

High end money laundering and cash based money laundering remain the greatest areas of money laundering risk to the UK. New typologies continue to emerge, including money laundering through capital markets and increased exploitation of technology.

The distinctions between money laundering typologies are becoming increasingly blurred. Criminal funds are progressing from lower level laundering and are being accumulating into larger sums to be sent overseas using more sophisticated methods.

Professional services are a crucial gateway for criminals looking to disguise the origin of their funds.

Cash, alongside cash intensive sectors, remains the favoured method for terrorists to move funds through and out of the UK.

A wide-ranging set of reforms by Government and law enforcement over recent years is still in its early days, but is starting to take effect.

The UK has been at the forefront of recent global efforts to shut down money laundering and terrorist financing. The 2016 London anti-corruption summit led to over 600 specific commitments made by more than 40 countries and six major international organisations.​
In 2015, the UK published its first ever national risk assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing. This set out candidly the areas where action was needed. In 2016, the Government published an action plan and committed to the most significant reforms to our anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing regime in over a decade.

Many of the actions in this plan have now been delivered or are underway. The Criminal Finances Act 2017 will provide tough new powers such as unexplained wealth orders. The Money Laundering Regulations 2017 bring the latest international regulatory standards into UK law. The publicly accessible register of people with significant control (PSC) was introduced in 2016, and records the beneficial owner of a company, thus improving corporate transparency. Progress continues with reforms to the suspicious activity reporting and supervisory regimes.

This 2017 assessment provides a critical component of continued partnership and prioritisation between Government, law enforcement, supervisors and the private sector.

A copy of the report has been deposited in the Library of the House.

Below is the text of the speech made by Stephen Barclay, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, to the FT Investment Management Summit on 28 September 2017.

The UK is currently the best place in the world for asset management.

That’s not my bias talking, as someone who’s worked in the City and is now the industry’s leading advocate in government.

It was the assessment of the Global Financial Centres Index just last month – ranking London top for asset management activity, ahead of both New York and Hong Kong.

So today I will speak about what the government has done to support that reputation, and what the government will do to preserve and enhance it going forward.

We’ve got the largest asset management industry in Europe here, with around £8 trillion in assets under management – more than France, Germany and Italy combined.

Globally, there are $69 trillion in assets under management and 7% growth over the last 12 months. This presents the UK with a great opportunity to use our proven strengths to gain an increasing share of this business.

And the UK asset management industry is truly global.

Just five years ago, UK firms managed £790 billion on behalf of non-EU investors. Today, that figure has surpassed £1 trillion.

But there are huge opportunities for further growth, with the UK poised to capitalise on developments in emerging markets.

In China, there are already £6 trillion in assets under management and that figure is growing at over 10% per year.

In India, there are £1.8 trillion in AuM.

And around 83% of all Masala bonds are listed in the UK, which is worth £1.8 billion.

While in South America, the opportunities in Brazil with £900 billion in AuM are well known.

But there are also emerging opportunities in other countries such as Argentina, Chile, Peru and Columbia.

Having this specialism here in the UK brings a lot of tangible benefits for people.

Obviously, there are the tax revenues this sector brings in. Which is particularly pertinent from government’s perspective.

But there are also the jobs it provides – over 90,000 all in all – not just in London, but in cities across the UK, like Edinburgh, Leeds and Bristol.

There are the funds it manages that allow British savers to plan for their future.

The finance it offers to our businesses to help them grow.

The investment it can bring to our big infrastructure projects.

And there’s the essential liquidity it provides to our financial markets.

All in all, the asset management sector makes an enormous contribution to our economy as a whole – supporting British success in ways many people outside of the sector under appreciate.

I want to be clear that the government understands the strategic importance of the UK asset management sector and, alongside insurance, it is an industry with truly global reach.

That’s why we’re keen to keep the UK as the premier global location for asset management.

Now I know we’ve heard people questioning whether that will remain the case after Brexit.

I want to tackle that head on – I get that what the industry needs most is certainty and clarity around Brexit – and I want to reassure you that we’re working hard to get that as soon as possible.

This is a government that will keep taking action to support you in the work you do. And we have taken action.

When my colleague, Sajid Javid, was City Minister, we abolished Schedule 19, which acted as a proxy for the principal stamp duty reserve tax charge.

This charge was previously seen as a major deterrent to domiciling funds in the UK and its abolition enhanced the competitiveness of the UK funds industry considerably.

And now – assets managed in UK funds on behalf of UK investors have reached £1 trillion. A 13% increase in the past year alone.

We worked with the FCA to cut fund authorisation time in half to a maximum of 3 months.

We introduced the Private Fund Limited Partnership to reduce the administrative burdens for funds operating as a limited partnership.

We overhauled how we do our overseas marketing and promotion – working with the sector to make the most of global opportunities to market the UK’s strengths.

I was in Brazil myself for the Economic and Financial Dialogue earlier in the summer, and had the chance to discuss the significant opportunities that exist to further promote investment and capital flows between our two markets.

These are opportunities that we’re determined to realise, whether that’s attracting Brazilian pension funds to the UK or enabling UK firms to do more business in Brazil.

The Department of International Trade is also working to promote UK industry abroad and encouraging overseas firms to set up in the UK through the “one-stop-shop” approach adopted in 2013.

That’s just an illustration –there’s much we’ve done to support this industry.

And with your expertise, the UK’s economies of scale, the strong network of ancillary services, and our high-standard regulation, asset management has flourished here.

So what we’re going to do as we manage our exit from the EU, is not let that go. Quite the opposite – I am determined to use the challenge posed by Brexit as a spur to capitalise on the underlying global reach of the sector.

It is a central priority of the Treasury that the asset management sector thrives after the UK withdraws from the EU.

Part of that work will include continuing to strongly support the global delegation model for portfolio management, in partnership with other countries that share our views on this issue.

I know that a number of you are concerned about this, going forward.

But I see the delegation model as an integral component of the asset management industry – not just for the UK, but for the US, Asia and the rest of Europe. And I know Megan Butler spoke about these points earlier today.

It benefits everyone within the value chain, allowing firms to harness specialist expertise, promote efficient capital allocation and operate on a truly global basis.

And this enables UK asset managers to sit at the heart of global investment allocation – turning the cumulative capital of millions of savers into investment beyond the UK.

So I would like to reassure you that the government understands your concerns and is looking to preserve this global activity.

And that is in the interests of Europe as well – a restricted delegation model would cause fragmentation and prompt funds located in Europe leave the continent for other financial centres such as New York or Hong Kong.

But whether Brexit had happened or not, we would have still wanted to look at what more we could do to proactively enhance our competitiveness in this field.

Brexit unlocks a renewed urgency for the government to turn its attention to the sector.

Of course, some of you will have ideas for tax reform, and I am always happy to listen to those, especially where this unlocks growth.

But beyond tax, there are four main areas I’ll be looking at.

Firstly, I want to consider how we can ensure that the UK retains its status as a jurisdiction with gold standard regulation, in particular how we ensure simplicity in our regulatory approach.

Because a robust and resilient regulatory framework provides the foundation for the growth and innovation that will be key to us moving forward.

Secondly, I’ll be exploring FinTech solutions within the asset management industry.

There’s huge potential in this area – for example, reducing investor charges through disintermediation or improving direct-to-consumer investments.

As Europe’s largest centre for asset management and with the FCA’s world-class regulatory hub for the development of FinTech business, the UK is uniquely placed to take advantage of FinTech trends.

Whether it is through innovative robo-advice models, helping consumers invest wisely or blockchain solutions to reduce back office costs.

Thirdly, I’ll be considering how we can generate an environment that stimulates innovation within the sector.

There are already a number of initiatives that asset managers can capitalise on – patient capital and green finance are just two examples.

So far this year, $79 billion worth of green bonds have been issued across the globe and the market is expected to reach $150 billion by the end of the year – demonstrating the importance of this growth market.

And I’m leading a Green Finance Taskforce with BEIS to make sure that government responds to this opportunity with cross-Whitehall collaboration and industry engagement at the most senior ministerial level.

All in all, I want to ensure that government is engaged with the sector through these initiatives, and assess what further changes we can make to create a growth environment for asset management.

And finally, skills.

You don’t stay best in the world unless you can attract or develop the best talent in the world.

That’s why I want to work with the industry to make sure we’re doing all we can to get that through. We are in close discussions with the Home Office to reassure, as the Prime Minister has made clear, that we want to attract the brightest and best.

And with the Department for Education we are looking at ways to maximise the opportunities that the apprenticeship levy brings. So from next year firms will be able to pass on up 10% of funds to other firms in their supply chains. And it means bringing in scale – by 2019-20 the annual spend on apprenticeships in England will reach £2.45 billion, double what it was in 2010-11.

So there are clear growth opportunities for the sector.

And that extends beyond the UK, to our engagement with overseas markets across the globe – from Asia to South America – both through our existing Economic and Financial Dialogues and through new contact with emerging markets such as in Latin America.

Both to ensure we are making the most of the opportunities to grow on the global stage, while also attracting more overseas asset managers, and international capital, to the UK – further developing our unique, diverse, and global financial services cluster.

As part of the change in gear in government, I am delighted to announce that I am establishing an Asset Management Taskforce to look at how we stay ahead.

This Taskforce will bring together CEOs within the UK asset management industry and senior representatives from investor groups and the FCA.

It will be a forum to discuss how government, industry and the regulator can work collaboratively to stay competitive and deliver for investors.

And it has come about in response to an industry request. After discussing the issues facing UK asset managers with CEO’s across the industry, there is a clear need for a discussion forum like this.

So, you can rest assured that the government is listening and that it has delivered on this ask.

It will help identify concrete steps that we can take to reinforce the UK’s position as a global centre for asset management.

And this is what I intend for it to deliver:

ideas that government, industry and the regulator can consider to ensure a thriving asset management industry that can respond effectively to the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, and make the best of global trading opportunities
mechanisms by which industry can improve its offer to domestic savers
a means of enhancing the sector’s contributions to the UK economy through investment and stewardship

In conclusion, I am in no doubt of the importance of the asset management sector to UK Financial Services.

There are clearly huge opportunities for growth in global markets. Brexit must act as a spur to accelerate our response to these global opportunities, not a distraction.

And we will continue to drive support for the global delegation model, which is key to the interests of our European partners as well as an important element of the industry in the US and elsewhere.

I look forward to working with you in the weeks ahead.

Thank you.