Joe Powell MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 10 Sept 2026 · Lobbying: Ethics and Integrity Commission Report · Hansard source

  More

  1. What assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of the Ethics and Integrity Commission’s report into lobbying, published on 9 July 2026.

• 10 Sept 2026 · Lobbying: Ethics and Integrity Commission Report · Hansard source

  More

  I strongly welcome the Government’s efforts to rewire the state and create more accountability for decisions made by the Government. As part of that effort, cleaning up our politics is so important, as we have seen from the summer of scandals on the funding of the Reform party. The Ethics and Integrity Commission has laid out how lobbying can be reformed to make it more open, rational and accountable. Can the Minister outline what immediate steps might be taken, and can he assure us that he will keep an open mind to the commission’s central recommendation, which is legislation for a unified digital open lobbying register?

• 10 Sept 2026 · Social Housing Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with my hon. Friend. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, that policy would increase homelessness and would be entirely self-defeating, because it would just shift the bill to local authorities that would then have to deal with the problem, rather than tackling the problem, as we are doing today through this Bill. What we actually need is more social and genuinely affordable housing, and I welcome the steps this Bill takes to address the issue, because there is no doubt that unchecked right to buy has contributed to the problem. The measures in the Bill are sensible and will make a difference. They build on policy changes that the Government have already made, including making permanent the retention of 100% of right-to-buy receipts. However, the implementation of these measures in communities such as mine will obviously be vital. In many of our council estates and buildings, the current owners of right-to-buy properties are actually open to selling. That is partly because of estate regeneration costs and concerns about service charges and quality, and because unlike other private leaseholders, those leaseholders may not necessarily benefit to the full extent from the easier path to commonhold and resident-run buildings that the Government will be bringing in for leaseholders in general. I would welcome further information about how local authorities can be supported to buy back properties in blocks where the council is already the freeholder. I fully understand that this is an admission of the failure of the historical right-to-buy policy, and the situation certainly would not be helped by retaining the three-year eligibility requirement that the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), supported in his speech. Changing the requirement to 10 years makes much more strategic sense for councils, because it incentivises both those buy-backs and investment in new council housing.

• 10 Sept 2026 · Social Housing Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I do agree. We have to increase supply in any way we can, and my point about buy-backs is that they demonstrate the false economics of the system. Councils are buying back at a premium, and often they have to buy back only for temporary accommodation—because that is where the costs are so high—rather than for lifetime secure tenancies, which is what we need. We also have a real challenge on housing association disposals, which I know other Members will speak to. The classic examples are Victorian-era street properties in North Kensington and Notting Hill. I am hearing of accelerated sell-offs as housing associations raise revenue to deal with their recent challenging financial situation, given remediation costs and the requirements to improve standards. Given that the Government have now backed the sector with access to the building safety fund, a 10-year rent settlement, low cost loans and more, I hope that those disposal numbers will drop. I know from experience that those homes in my constituency are unlikely to be replaced in the same community. The new four-week period for housing associations to notify the council is therefore extremely welcome, but it must lead to more purchases by local authorities of these properties. I would therefore welcome further information from the Minister on what impact he expects these notification periods to have. What guidance can be provided to housing providers, given their independence, to make it clear that private sector sales should be a plan B? What support will local authorities have to purchase these properties? Moving briefly on to shared ownership, I welcome the Minister’s close attention to the operation and effectiveness of shared ownership. Ministers will know about the case of Shaftesbury Place, because I have raised that building near Earls Court before. It has approximately 30 shared ownership flats that have experienced a twenty-onefold increase in building insurance due to a disputed fire risk assessment. The shared ownership leaseholders have consistently raised issues—broken security gates, cleaning, unauthorised access requests and late accounts—with the management of the building by Notting Hill Genesis,. In many ways, these residents are experiencing the same challenges that many leaseholders have with managing agents in the private sector, for which I hope the Government will introduce a new independent regulator. Can the Minister assure me that how housing associations manage shared ownership properties will be considered not only under forthcoming leasehold reforms, but in the Department’s work to review the challenges of shared ownership? I welcome the new measures in this Bill to keep victims of domestic abuse safer, and I look forward to seeing those powers used by landlords. Clearly, there is no one solution to the housing crisis in a community like mine in Kensington and Bayswater, but today’s Bill is an important step forward, and I strongly welcome it.

• 10 Sept 2026 · Social Housing Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  The housing crisis in Kensington and Bayswater is one of the biggest drivers of inequality in our community, with overcrowding, damp and mould, families stuck in temporary accommodation, and a lack of options for people with accessibility issues. It is a huge drag on life chances and opportunity, including for children. The issue is not helped by Conservative-run Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea receiving a C3 rating from the Regulator of Social Housing—a staggering failure nearly 10 years after the Grenfell Tower tragedy, in which the inquiry found major failings at the council. It certainly would not be helped either by an entirely arbitrary £4 billion cut in housing benefit, which would dramatically increase homelessness, require the local authority to spend more on temporary accommodation and dramatically change the socioeconomic make-up of communities such as mine. It is a truly shameful policy. I will happily take an intervention from Conservative Front Benchers if they want to defend it, but it certainly would not address any of the issues we are talking about today.

• 3 Sept 2026 · Short-term Lets: Regulation · Hansard source

  More

  Over the summer, the abuse of short-term lets in my community has continued with breaches of lease, antisocial behaviour, subletting of private rented properties and social housing, and even short-term lets hosting brothels. We still do not have a way of identifying where these lets are so that enforcement action can be taken, nor do we have a way of implementing London’s 90-day cap on lets, so will the Secretary of State please do all she can to make it a priority to tackle these serious harms? Can she tell us when the register will go live, and will she work with those of us affected and local councils so that we can find solutions for our communities?

• 3 Sept 2026 · Short-term Lets: Regulation · Hansard source

  More

  1. What steps her Department is taking to improve the regulation of short-term lets.

• 2 Sept 2026 · Rewiring the State · Hansard source

  More

  I, too, welcome the First Secretary of State to her place and welcome today’s statement as well as the one in July. The first English devolution settlement was, of course, for London, and despite some incremental improvements since 1999, our capital’s mayor, the Greater London Authority and the 32 London boroughs are not currently set up to deliver on the capital’s full potential, whether on productivity and growth or in dealing with our housing crisis and the massive increase in temporary accommodation spending to combat homelessness. Will revisiting London’s devolution settlement will be on her and her team’s agenda?

• 2 Sept 2026 · Representation of the People Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I join others in warmly welcoming the Democracy Minister to her place. I know that the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee will miss her excellent chairing, but it is great to have such a strong ally on these issues in Government. We have returned to this place after a summer when barely a day has gone by without another political funding scandal on the front pages. As the previous speaker referred to, there have been accusations of impermissible foreign donations, undeclared donations, undeclared gifts, conflicts of interest, undeclared assets, foreign interference and more. I doubt that anyone in this House could say with confidence that we currently have the right safeguards in place to ensure that dodgy money is kept out of our politics and that sufficient transparency is in place so that the public can judge whether a politician is acting in their interests or in the interests of foreign-based billionaires. That is why this Bill is so important and why so many of the measures in it are welcome. I am delighted that following the Rycroft review there are amendments to strengthen the Bill, including: the cap on donations from overseas electors; the new residency test to close the potential loophole of people coming back to meddle in our politics; the moratorium on crypto, which will ensure that companies can only donate up to the value of their post-tax profits; and the swift recent action we have seen to look at lower caps on how much parties and candidates can spend during regulated periods. These are all really welcome steps that will help to limit the influence of big money and curb foreign influence. We have to be alive, though, to the constantly evolving nature of this threat and to ensure that our electoral traditions are not open to abuse. In that spirit, I have a couple of suggestions. I do hope that in the Electoral Commission’s review of spending limits, per the Government amendment, it could also be asked to look at whether the whole concept of the long and short campaign is working to keep spending in check. Candidates have already been selected by parties for the next general election, and many more will be in place by the end of this year, but the long campaign regulated period does not kick in until 4 February 2029. That means, in many cases, more than two years of further uncapped spending, with declaration of interest rules only formally in place for the year before an MP is elected and nothing for candidates who do not win. This is really important because we know that the reality of modern politics is that campaigning never switches off. I am glad that in this country we have avoided the money-pit of TV advertising that the United States has, but social media means that vast sums of hard-to-trace money can be spent promoting a candidate or party outside of these regulated periods. I am fully supportive of the Government’s intention to bring down the spending cap, and I think that a thorough look at these regulated periods would help to deliver that goal and ensure that capping spending works permanently, not just in those limited periods. I am also glad that the Prime Minister, the Secretary of State and the Minister have been clear that this Bill is the start of the political reform agenda and not the end. Unfortunately, many of these big money interests and foreign states with malign intent are very good at finding loopholes and working around our laws, and they will continue to do that and adapt once these new laws are enforced. To avoid that risk, the Electoral Commission could also look at donation levels that are currently uncapped to ensure a further check on big money interests. I welcome the Democracy Minister’s positive engagement on this topic, and I hope that there may be a way to use this Bill to review that issue and build consensus while ensuring that we do not have to wait for a further legislative route in this Parliament, which we all know would be challenging. In that spirit, we do not need legislation to talk about the national commission—we could do that immediately. As I said, I hope the Bill is the start of the new Administration’s political reform effort and not the end. We all know the context, with plummeting trust, the influence of big money and the fact that many of our voters feel that their politicians are serving not them but other interests. I know that the Minister is committed to going as far as possible. The Bill is in really good shape—it has been strengthened—and I hope that in the summing up from the Dispatch Box we might hear about next steps to take it that little bit further.

• 13 Jul 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T7. I warmly welcome the Government’s swift introduction of the National Security (State Threats) Act 2026, which received Royal Assent last week. The activities of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps have caused huge concern across the country and in particular to my Iranian and Jewish communities. Can the Home Secretary update the House on when these new powers will begin to be used to protect our country from hostile, state-linked organisations and threats?

• 9 Jul 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T2. This week it was revealed that Thames Water had slowed its reporting of pollution incidents by 70% since 2022, which is yet another example of institutional failure that has hurt residents across the region. Given that Thames Water’s creditors are now saying that they will bid for the company if a special administration regime is set up, can the Secretary of State reassure me that consumers, who continue to pay the bills and suffer the consequences of serious pollution, will be the first priority of this Government?

• 9 Jul 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  My constituent Billy Hood, a son and father, has spent more than five years in a prison in the United Arab Emirates after being convicted of possessing trace amounts of cannabidiol vape oil. His family are deeply concerned about his welfare, the conditions of his detention and the lack of progress on the pardon process, and are disappointed by the support they have had from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. Given the UK’s close relationship with the UAE, will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on supporting British nationals in overseas prisons and the proactive steps that the Government can take to bring people such as Billy home?

• 7 Jul 2026 · Climate Change: International Discussions · Hansard source

  More

  3. What discussions he has had with his international counterparts on tackling climate change.

• 7 Jul 2026 · Climate Change: International Discussions · Hansard source

  More

  I note the recent data showing that support for renewables in this country is now at 81% of the public. Certainly, in every visit that I make to meet young people, including students at Imperial College London, climate change is one of the first issues they raise; they are concerned about the future that they are going to inherit. Will the Minister comment on the impact of repealing the Climate Change Act 2008—unfortunately, this has become the position of some Opposition parties—on our standing in international negotiations, including our Paris agreement commitments?

• 6 Jul 2026 · Foreign Interference in UK Politics · Hansard source

  More

  People want politicians to serve their interests, not those of billionaires or millionaires based overseas, whether they are in the US, Russia, Thailand or, indeed, Montenegro. The revelations of the last few days have shown how important it is to update our rules. Can the Minister confirm that corporate political donations through shell arrangements or foreign-linked entities, with no link to or interest in Britain’s prosperity, will no longer be possible under the proposals?

• 1 Jul 2026 · Flood Insurance: Reform of Flood Re · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the focus on supporting low and middle-income households. The Minister will know that after the July 2021 floods in central London, denial of flood insurance or punitive excesses for people living in blocks of four or more flats has been a serious problem. That is a big chunk of my constituents. They cannot access Flood Re, because those properties are treated as commercial premises. What plans does the Minister have to address this issue?

• 25 Jun 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T4. I thank the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister for asking the Ethics and Integrity Commission to review lobbying, disclosure and access to Government. Does he agree that given that The Guardian has reported that the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) lobbied for changes in cryptocurrency policy that would massively benefit Reform’s biggest donor and, in fact, his £5 million personal benefactor, any look at strengthening the rules should include a look at lobbying cases involving the Bank of England?

• 25 Jun 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  indicated assent .

• 25 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Leader of the House join me in commending the fantastic parliamentary staff in Westminster and in constituencies across the UK who keep MPs’ offices running? They are employed by 650 separate offices, rather than by Parliament itself. That leaves them without consistent terms and, in some cases, proper support. The GMB, the largest union in Parliament—for the record, it is my union—is working to fix that through its “One Parliament, One Employer” campaign. Will he join me in encouraging Members to back its proposal?

• 25 Jun 2026 · Sudan · Hansard source

  More

  The single most effective action to protect El Obeid civilians and avoid a repeat of El Fasher would be for the UAE to withdraw its clearly evidenced backing for the RSF and demand that civilians are protected. What more can the Minister do to persuade the UAE? If that fails, what can we do on the gold trade and illicit finance, in addition to sanctions, to ensure that anyone involved in arming the conflict does not materially benefit?

• 11 Jun 2026 · Grenfell Tower Fire: Ninth Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is right. We have seen, in recent history, that with events of national significance—from Southport to the recent disturbances on our streets—the criminal justice system has moved really quickly because of the importance of showing that justice is seen to be done. I hope that once the CPS has made its decisions, we will do everything we can to ensure that the court capacity is in place to deliver the trials as soon as possible. I hope the Minister can reassure us that the investigation will continue to be fully funded and that that planning is already taking place with the judiciary and the Ministry of Justice so that the cases are prioritised. If those trials take place, which I obviously hope they will, they will be some of the most complex ever held in the UK. I therefore hope that consideration is also given to a special court or a Nightingale-style court. I know that is being looked at. Corporate manslaughter convictions are incredibly rare, so it is essential that those responsible face the full force of the law. I also believe that it is completely wrong for any company cited in the public inquiry still to be receiving public contracts. In December I uncovered dozens of contracts with implicated companies, including two current NHS contracts with Rydon, the main contractor for the refurbishment, which was cited in the public inquiry. I urge all public bodies to do a full audit of their contracts, including subcontractors and supply chains, and publish exactly what they find. It is good news that this Government have introduced new powers to exclude companies on grounds such as professional misconduct. Now is the time for procurement offices to start using them. We have already had a public inquiry that has laid out in stark terms why the fire happened and where responsibility lies, and I am glad that this Government have accepted the recommendations in full and that important progress is being made. It is important not to forget that. The last report shows that 20 of 61 recommendations are complete and 40 are in progress. [ Official Report , 15 June 2026; Vol. 787, c. 4WC.] (Correction) I am glad that those include progress towards a single construction regulator, the expansion of product regulation, the introduction of residential personal emergency evacuation plans, the idea of a college of fire and rescue, and proposed changes to the statutory fire safety guidance in approved document B. I am also pleased that, under Lord Roe in the other place, the performance of the Building Safety Regulator is improving, including signing off remediation works more quickly. I welcome the remediation Bill in the King’s Speech, on which I look forward to engaging in this parliamentary Session, so that we can address the outstanding unremediated buildings and the knock-on effects, such as crippling insurance bills for leaseholders. I acknowledge all that progress, but there is one missing piece of the jigsaw: oversight and accountability. The online tracker for Grenfell recommendations is no doubt helpful, but Grenfell would not have happened at all if we had properly learned the lessons from the Lakanal House fire in 2009 and listened to the coroner’s recommendations. Instead, they sat on a shelf, and an opportunity to save lives was missed. We need a proper system of tracking and following up, not just on major inquiries that get a lot of attention here, but on all the inquests and investigations that lead to recommendations for change. That is why I continue to support the idea of a national oversight mechanism as a legacy for Grenfell. On 25 February, the Secretary of State said in this House, in answer to my question: “Work is continuing across Government, including in my Department, on setting up a national oversight mechanism”. —[ Official Report , 25 February 2026; Vol. 781, c. 363.] I hope that the Minister can provide us with an update on that work and tell us when we can expect a decision to be made. Such a mechanism would sit alongside the Public Office (Accountability) Bill—the Hillsborough law—which I hope to see back here soon, as landmark reforms that put power in the hands of citizens: a real duty of candour for the state, a level playing field for legal aid, and clear deterrence for misconduct in public office. If we design those well, they will lead to fewer and shorter inquiries, more rapid lesson learning by the state and a culture shift towards openness, which can contribute to the rebuilding of trust in politics and in government in this country. The culture shift that we need extends to the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. I am deeply disappointed that the first decision of the Conservative leadership in the new council term last month was to remove an opposition chair of the housing scrutiny committee. Since Grenfell, that position has been promised to an opposition councillor. It is still unclear to me why or how that decision was taken, because avoiding scrutiny, especially for this council, which is so culpable for the fire, is an extremely bad look. I call on the leadership to think again and to reverse that decision. Residents in RBKC know that the council needs scrutiny. The independent Regulator of Social Housing reported last year that the housing department was seriously failing, giving it a C3 rating. The council has the third worst complaints record in the country. It likes to say that it gets the basics right. Well, meeting the decent homes standard, so that everyone can have the minimum of a safe and healthy home, is surely a basic human right that any council should be delivering. The Lancaster West estate surrounding Grenfell is a good example. After the fire, the promise was a model 21st-century housing estate, and that promise is still unfulfilled. I am glad that the Government have stepped in with an additional £8 million to ensure that there are no further delays to the current work, and that that will come alongside additional scrutiny on how that money is spent. I hope that the Minister can provide more details on how residents can be involved, including leaseholders and others, so that new oversight can be shaped by them and that they have confidence in the arrangement. I am also pleased that support was extended to NHS services through the period of the deconstruction of the tower, given the acute risk of mental health issues, and to five local primary schools to provide trauma-informed education around the community. My final point is a simple one: with the passage of time, we cannot allow a return to business as usual before the fire. Already, we hear rumbles from parts of the construction industry and even, shamefully, some political parties, saying that Grenfell is somehow responsible for the slowdown in house building or that fire safety is a trade-off worth considering. There will always be policy choices for local and national Government to make, but putting life at risk should not be a trade-off we accept. I hope we can work together with empathy and respect—something I suspect Jo Cox would have wanted—and ensure that the legacy of Grenfell is that everyone in this country, regardless of class, race, geography or age, lives in a safe and healthy home.

• 11 Jun 2026 · Grenfell Tower Fire: Ninth Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  This Sunday will be the ninth anniversary of the Grenfell tower fire. With thousands of others, I will join the silent walk on father’s day to remember the 72 people who lost their lives in an entirely preventable and foreseen tragedy, and to support families who lost parents, siblings and children in unimaginable circumstances. [ Official Report , 15 June 2026; Vol. 787, c. 4WC.] (Correction) I know that for the bereaved and for survivors, and for our community in Kensington and Bayswater, this is always a difficult time, because nine years on, there has been no criminal accountability for those responsible; nine years on, the pace of change at local government and at national level is too often too slow; and nine years on, the cladding crisis still affects hundreds of thousands of people across the country. I pay tribute to all those who continue to advocate for truth, justice and change for Grenfell, and to everyone across the country affected by this national scandal. But it would be a mistake to give up hope. The Metropolitan police said last month that it will hand over files to the Crown Prosecution Service in September this year and that the CPS will make charging decisions by the 10th anniversary in 2027—20 organisations and 57 individuals could face criminal charges, and potential offences under consideration include corporate manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, fraud, health and safety breaches, and misconduct in public office.

• 11 Jun 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T5. We are seeing Lime bike leg injuries, antisocial parking, and pedestrian crossings being ignored—and one constituent of mine has even had multiple surgeries after a hit and run by a child on a hacked Lime bike. Every week the costs to the NHS and local authorities soar, while profits for the venture capitalists in California who started these companies go through the roof. I am really keen to see safer cycling in London—I am a keen cyclist myself—so will the Minister set out when the really important new regulations for the dockless e-bike sector will kick in for Londoners?

• 9 Jun 2026 · Summit on Illicit Finance · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate the cross-party spirit in which this debate has been held, but it would be helpful if the Green party leader would pay his own council tax as a demonstration of leading by example.

• 9 Jun 2026 · Summit on Illicit Finance · Hansard source

  More

  I join others in congratulating the hon. Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone) on securing this debate and on restricting himself to only two mentions of mansions in Kensington in his introduction. This should be one of the progressive causes of our time. Others have covered the harms: from the links to the drugs trade and other serious organised crime, to the housing crisis and to conflict in Ukraine, Sudan and other parts of the world. I am delighted that the Government have recognised the problem and have taken action to date, including their commitment to host this summit on illicit finance. I disagree with the hon. Member for North Norfolk; I think it was the right decision to delay the summit. Primarily, that is because it gives us time to produce a package of progress that we can show to the world, build alliances around key themes and link this summit to the UK Government’s other international leadership positions, including the G20 presidency in 2027, the presidency of the financial action taskforce from 2026 to 2028, and the chair of the Open Government Partnership. Those are all forums where we can take illicit finance and corruption initiatives and multilateralise them through other international organisations. There is a big opportunity here. Before being elected, I spent a decade working on illicit finance and corruption. I supported the last summit on anti-corruption that we led as a country in 2016, which was hosted by Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton. That summit helped to put beneficial ownership transparency on the map as a tool to remove secrecy from the anonymous companies that, on many occasions, facilitate money laundering. There is an unheralded British success here: 104 jurisdictions now have a live register, although I accept that there are varying degrees of openness. There is, of course, the glaring exception of most of the British overseas territories and Crown dependencies. The lessons of the summit can be applied to December’s summit. First, as others have mentioned, there is the need for political leadership, from the Prime Minister down, to bring international counterparts to the UK and to link the summit to other international forums in which we are involved. Secondly, there should be strong cross-Government co-ordination, with regular ministerial meetings. Thirdly, there should be clear and specific policy commitments that other countries can join, rather than vague initiatives that will fizzle out immediately. Fourthly, we must be open to working with civil society, which can support the bringing of countries to the table and add ideas, enthusiasm and accountability to the summit. Fifthly, we must prepare our own package of reforms so that we open the summit with a strong policy offer. We have an outsize responsibility in this area because we are the epicentre of global finance. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) has covered the stats, and I know that the Minister cares deeply about this issue. I have three brief policy proposals on which we can make progress before the summit. The first proposal is about property, which the Government are right to make a summit priority. The goal should be a global alliance for full transparency in property ownership, so that dirty money cannot be stashed in London or in other property markets around this country and the world. In my constituency of Kensington and Bayswater, 40% of the foreign-owned property is still held in anonymous trusts. That means that approximately 4,000 properties in my constituency have hidden ownership, despite the introduction of a register of overseas-owned properties after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. There is a major loophole that is incentivising more opaque ownership structures, which have only been thrown open through leaks and investigations such as the Panama and Paradise papers investigations. Dan Neidle, a tax lawyer, found that the ultimate owners of 45,000 properties in this country—properties collectively worth £190 billion—are still hidden from view. It is time to report back on the consultation opened two years ago on trust-owned property and to take bold action. Of course, beyond property there is a need to continue Britain’s leadership on beneficial ownership, the overseas territories and Crown dependencies, as the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) has outlined. That is absolutely the right place to start with our leadership in the global jigsaw. Gibraltar has done this work with no economic harm whatever and we need to extend it. Finally, on professional enablers, I am really glad that the Financial Services and Markets Bill was in the King’s Speech. That will extend the Financial Conduct Authority’s supervision to accountants, lawyers and other financial bodies, and introduce proper anti-money laundering supervision to them. There must be no more anonymously owned properties, which allow dirty money to be stashed with impunity; no more tax haven secrecy, which facilitates billions in criminal and corrupt cash; and no more hiding places for professional enablers, who turn a blind eye to dirty money. Those ideas should be the basis for a summit that can show our leadership on the global stage.