Stephen Doughty MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 16 Jun 2026 · Russian Oil Sales · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman will understand that I am not going to comment on future operational matters. What I can say is that we have also assisted in the interdictions of other vessels, including by working with the French and the United States in relation to the Bella 1. We keep Russia’s activities under very close review and designate hundreds of vessels under the shadow fleet measures, and we will look at all opportunities to ensure that they cannot evade sanctions.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Russian Oil Sales · Hansard source

  More

  As you will know, Mr Speaker, Jo Cox was a good friend of mine long before we came into this place, as well as a colleague of mine at Oxfam, and I have to say that coming in today on this anniversary is particularly sad. I also know that Jo would have told me to stop getting so emotional and to get on with the job in her inimitable way, as she often did—so I will do just that. We are committed to increasing the economic pressure on Russia by disrupting the revenue the Kremlin generates from Russia’s energy trade, including oil, which remains its primary means of financing the illegal war in Ukraine. The Prime Minister has today announced further sanctions, designating and specifying 70 individuals, entities and ships under the UK’s sanctions regulations, including 20 shadow fleet vessels.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Russian Oil Sales · Hansard source

  More

  With respect, the hon. Gentleman may not have caught up with developments on that front. First, it was never an indefinite waiver; we said that we were keeping it under two-weekly review—my colleagues in the Department for Business and Trade made that very clear. Yesterday in the House, and indeed in announcements over the weekend, we set clear end dates for those temporary licences, which are to phase in these measures. Of course, these are new measures—we were never watering down previous sanctions; these are toughening the sanctions on Russia, but with sensible provisions in place to phase them in.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Russian Oil Sales · Hansard source

  More

  The shadow Minister asks an important question. I made it clear in yesterday’s Delegated Legislation Committee that that is the end date, but we are keeping it under review every two weeks and the licence could end before then, with the appropriate notice in place for industry. I am clear that our sanctions are having a categorical impact on the Russian economy. Russia has slashed its economic growth forecasts, and collectively our sanctions have denied Russia access to $450 billion, which could have fuelled the war for many more years. Our sanctions are having an impact, but we will continue to toughen them.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Russian Oil Sales · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend raises an important issue. I would be happy to discuss it further with him, as, I am sure, would colleagues from the Department for Business and Trade.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Social Media Disinformation · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure that my ministerial colleagues with responsibility for Myanmar would like to follow up with the right hon. Gentleman on that issue. The challenge of misinformation and disinformation relates not only to Russia but to a whole series of contexts—and not just states. We also see it in non-state actors, including Daesh and other organisations. We are working very closely with partners to identify and tackle those networks.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Social Media Disinformation · Hansard source

  More

  Well, Jo certainly was funny. I remember standing in King Charles Street with her once just before going to see officials in the Foreign Office—she had lots of climbing ropes in her bag as she had just got back from a hiking expedition. There were many fun moments with her over the years. My right hon. Friend raises a crucial point. I really welcome the work that she and her Committee have done on this issue. We have taken their recommendations seriously and I will continue the conversation with her. I cannot make the promise that she is asking for at the moment, but we are certainly looking closely at the suggestion.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Social Media Disinformation · Hansard source

  More

  As the Foreign Secretary said in her Locarno speech in December, and as the Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service reinforced a week later, an industrial-scale attack is being waged every day through social media, designed to undermine our democracies and divide our societies. We know that networks attributed to Russia, including Doppelgänger, are flooding social media in countries across the world—not just the UK—with counterfeit documents and deepfake material in an attempt to weaken global support for Ukraine. We are taking tough action on this front with our international partners.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Social Media Disinformation · Hansard source

  More

  I assure the hon. Member that we are very much having discussions with counterparts across Government. I am sure that in the next few days I will be meeting the new Security Minister and the new Minister for the Armed Forces. I also recently met a Minister at the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to discuss these very issues. I assure him that we are working closely together across Government on this issue.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Social Media Disinformation · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with my hon. Friend. That is exactly why we have taken the action that we have: since October 2024, we have exposed and sanctioned 96 actors and entities involved in this type of activity, and in May we imposed sanctions on another 56 individuals and entities that are particularly involved in activity to undermine Ukraine. That included employees of Social Design Agency and ANO Dialog. We are constantly looking at what measures we can take, and taking action. The Kremlin is spending billions of dollars on information warfare. We will expose this activity and take it down.

• 15 Jun 2026 · The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I genuinely appreciate the scrutiny in the questions raised by hon. Members. I appreciate the wholehearted support for the package as a whole from the shadow Minister. He asked me about further operations, but he will understand that I will not get into those here. But let us be clear that we sent a strong signal with the action over the weekend—the Prime Minister has been absolutely clear about the intent. We will act lawfully to take measures in relation to the shadow fleet, so that is a very clear signal. This is not the first time we have been involved in such operations; we have supported partners and allies on a range of vessels operating outwith international law in relation to sanctions evasion. But this was the first time when we were in the lead and took action in the channel. I gently caution the shadow Minister on his question about loopholes. There is not a loophole. There was a loophole, prior to our bringing in this legislation—that is why we have sought to introduce it. I have called for this for a very long time, as have many Members. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock, was right to point out his noble Friend Lord Purvis’s assiduous advocacy on the issue over many years. The situation did allow these products before and but they will not be allowed now. It is only right that this is phased in appropriately, and we have set out clearly how we intend to do that. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Fylde, raised a point about wider energy supplies and went back to arguments used on the Floor of the House a few times about the North sea. The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero and others have been very clear: expanding drilling in the North sea will not lower bills or improve energy security. That short-sighted approach would leave the UK exposed to volatile global gas prices. Gas prices are set internationally, so having new North sea licences would not take a penny off of bills and would potentially make people more vulnerable. We are looking at making better use of existing North sea infrastructure, such as the range of measures we are taking around what are known as “tie-backs”. We will always act in the interests of British consumers, in relation to both the challenges of climate change and making sure that we have security of supply. The regulations are not one policy on their own, but sit within a range of different measures. The shadow Minister rightly pointed out the importance of investing in nuclear. That is exactly what the Government are doing, including, I am pleased to say, in Wales—my part of the United Kingdom. Announcements were made recently. We can also see the investment in the Hinkley plant, which will bring huge benefits. We are clear that investing in nuclear, renewables and a robust, resilient energy system that does not rely on the likes of Putin—or anybody else—is the way forward, and we work with partners on that. The hon. Gentleman asked about the other exemptions, saying that they are narrowly construed. I am happy to write to him with some more technical detail, but I assure him in general terms that we aim to make sure that none of those matters can be circumvented in an unreasonable way. He also asked about the shadow fleet. We intend to take further measures in this place, but we have had a steady drumbeat of designations and actions, each of which has to be evidenced and based on clear legal parameters. I absolutely assure him that we are closely across the practice of false flagging and re-flagging vessels, which is one of the tactics that Russia, as well as other countries, has used to avoid scrutiny. The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock raised some important points. He asked whether I would deposit certain letters and correspondence in the Library. My understanding is that those were private, but I will certainly look at whether I can do that, given that the Government have now publicly announced the measures that I set out. On the end date, as I set out to his colleague, Lord Purvis, that will remain under constant review; if there is an earlier opportunity, we will seek to take it, subject to the four-month notification period provision set out in the original licence. The hon. Gentleman also asked whether notifications of people using the existing licence have been made. Some notifications have been made but the numbers are extremely low, which was one of the factors we took into consideration when looking at how the licence was operating. As he will understand, it would not be right for me to comment on individual companies, as there may be commercial confidentiality provisions. I assure him that we constantly look at and keep under review any UK nexuses, or any other way in which services are used, and that we work closely with other partners to do so. Alongside Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office teams, I met EU officials today to establish where we can unify efforts to have the maximum impact. Although the United Kingdom can have a huge impact, it is important to act with others as that will have the biggest hit to Putin’s war chest. On the topic of the EU, the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim asked about the Windsor framework. I am happy to write to him on the technicalities, but I do not want to mislead him. All the sanctions regulations came in as a result of us leaving the EU sanctions regime as part of Brexit and our having wider obligations, so I suspect that the language in that paragraph is standard. I cannot think of specific obligations, but I will certainly write to him with the technical detail. I assure him that we aim for the sanctions to have the biggest impact, and that there are not loopholes or ways for anyone in any part of the United Kingdom to get around them. That is also true for our overseas territories and Crown dependencies, with which I work closely to ensure that their sanctions legislation is fit for purpose. We have strong working between different teams to make sure not only that we understand what we need to put in place legally but, crucially, that enforcement takes place. Having visited the port in my constituency, I know the work that goes on to check and make sure that vessels do not appear on lists of sanctioned vessels. I am sure that that is also the case in Northern Ireland, and across other EU partners.

• 15 Jun 2026 · The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026. These regulations amend the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. Before I begin, I want to place on the record—I am sure this is shared by all colleagues—our utter horror at the attacks meted out by Russia in Ukraine yet again, in the past 24 hours. The attack on the monastery in Kyiv was particularly despicable, as were the deaths of civilians across Ukraine. Those appallingly barbarous actions show the whole House and the whole world again what Russia continues to be capable of. This morning, I was able to convey that horror and our solidarity and support to the Chairman of the Rada, Ruslan Stefanchuk, who was here as a guest of Mr Speaker and has been meeting right hon. and hon. Members across the House. We all stand united with Ukraine in this Committee, and our thoughts are with all those affected by those terrible actions. This statutory instrument was laid on 19 May under the powers in the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018; its measures, subject to the affirmative parliamentary procedure, entered into force on 20 May. Since coming to power, the Government have been clear that Russia must not be allowed to succeed in its illegal war, and we have been steadfast in our support of Ukraine. Russia represents a threat not just to Ukraine, but to the whole of Europe, including the United Kingdom and our allies. As part of our response to Russia’s illegal and barbarous war in Ukraine, the United Kingdom has sanctioned more than 3,300 individuals and entities under the Russian sanctions regime, with more than 1,300 of those delivered under this Government. Only last month, we introduced a new package that sanctioned 18 individuals and entities under the UK’s Russia sanctions regulations, including cryptocurrency exchanges active in Russia, and entities and individuals that we suspect are linked to the UK-sanctioned A7 network, which has embedded itself in the Kyrgyz financial sector. This instrument marks a further step in the UK’s sustained effort to erode Russia’s ability to fund its illegal, full-scale invasion, ramping up pressure on Putin’s war chest. It is yet another set of measures from this Government, who continue the work of the previous Government; when I sat on the Opposition Benches, I welcomed and supported such measures, while also providing robust scrutiny. The sanctions are having a real impact. Last month, Russia slashed its economic growth forecast for 2026 from 1.3% to just 0.4%; Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister ascribed the downgrade to the impact of sanctions, among other factors. Indeed, Putin himself admitted that Russian GDP contracted by 1.8% in January and February, with a decline in areas critical to Russia’s war efforts, including industrial production. It is clear that our sanctions are having an impact and that they have bite, which is why we will not cease them. I will not comment on further measures, but we will not cease to explore all opportunities to raise the pressure and degrade Russia’s war machine for its actions in Ukraine, and to look at all the methods it uses to evade such regimes. To phase in the implementation of the measures, we have issued two targeted licences, intended as a temporary measure—I make that very clear, as we have done in response to the many questions and debates we have had about this issue. The licences are subject to ongoing review, with fortnightly checkpoints. They may be amended, suspended or revoked, as appropriate. The first licence is for the new liquefied natural gas maritime services ban. It temporarily authorises spot-market trade from Russian LNG projects Sakhalin II and Yamal until 1 January 2027. The second licence applies to the refined oil import ban and to authorised imports of diesel and jet fuel refined in third countries from Russian crude oil. As with the LNG licence—I must reiterate this to the Committee—the licences have always been intended as a temporary measure. They are designed to mitigate and protect consumers and market stability here, and they are subject to fortnightly review. The process of review involves continually assessing the impact of licences on energy supplies, market conditions and other relevant considerations against our overarching objective, which is, I am sure, shared by all members of this Committee: of ramping up pressure on Russia through our sanctions regime and, in light of this assessment, determining what steps are appropriate at each review point. There was some misleading reporting and commentary around the time of these measures. We were not watering down existing measures—these are new measures that many across the House have called for, including me when I sat on the Opposition side, which toughen and tighten the pressure on Russia. As often happens with sanctions regimes, it is only appropriate that they be phased to allow for appropriate market stability; at the earliest possible opportunity, the bans will be introduced in full. As part of the review process that has been ongoing since the measures came into place, the Government have now set a clear end date for the refined oil licence of 1 January 2027, in line with the liquefied natural gas maritime services ban spot licence. That sets the timetable now for fully phasing in the ban and shutting down the remaining route for Russian oil. Regular reviews will continue to ensure that the licence is lifted at the earliest possible date, which of course could be before that date. I will turn to the details in a moment, but I want to say thank you for genuine and constructive scrutiny, particularly from Liberal Democrat counterparts and others, and for conversations with Members across the House to ensure that the measures are phased in correctly. On the basis of the review, the Government have been able to communicate how that is going to operate going forward; I hope these measures will enjoy the wholehearted support of the Committee today. They include a range of different measures, and it is important that all of those are able to go forward. The LNG and refined oil provisions were just part of the overall package. The regulations are a strong enhancement of our Russian sanctions regime. To reiterate what the Prime Minister and my colleague the Minister for Trade said on 20 May, we have not lifted or eased sanctions: our sanctions are now stronger than they were a month ago. I really underline that point to the Committee. The legislation is sanctioning previously unsanctioned goods and services, and that includes multiple measures targeting Russia’s energy sector and other key supplies. We have imposed further export restrictions that fall into the following four categories: first, items sanctioned by the EU already, including certain types of industrial chemicals, metals and machinery that have potential battlefield use; and goods recommended for sanctions by the Government of Ukraine, including additional forms of metals and articles of carbon fibre, which are frequently used in the manufacture of the drones that we have seen causing such devastating impact. I witnessed for myself where those drones had hit Lviv a few months ago, including again on a religious site in the city centre—absolutely appalling crimes. We need to choke off the supplies and matériel used for those drones. Restrictions also include a more expansive list of individual chemicals and chemical precursors that might be used in, for example, riot control agents found on the battlefield or goods for internal repression. Lastly, restrictions include goods related to emerging technologies, including quantum, semiconductor and engineering biology technologies, including new goods and those not already clearly subject to existing sanctions, to reduce the risk of circumvention. As I said, there are measures on refined oil. The legislation bans the import into the UK of oil products refined in third countries that have been made from Russian crude oil. There is a new maritime services ban on LNG that restricts Russia’s access to the UK’s world leading-maritime services, which has been rightly raised on numerous occasions by colleagues across the House. Certain existing long-term contracts are exempt from the provisions until the end of the year, in line with the EU’s LNG measure. We always attempt to work alongside our EU and other counterparts for appropriate effect. There is also a ban on the import of uranium consigned from Russia and uranium that originates in Russia, and UK involvement in the global trade of Russian uranium is restricted. Exceptions are in place to mitigate risks to energy security in third countries, including the supply of uranium to operational nuclear installations. Construction services is another area where this package takes action. The legislation introduces a prohibition on providing construction services to persons connected with Russia. That will complement the other restrictions in place on architecture and engineering, ensuring that UK construction businesses cannot support infrastructure and building projects that benefit Russia. We have also expanded the criteria for specifying ships. Members will have seen the robust and brave action that our armed forces and law enforcement personnel took over the weekend. We will not hesitate to enforce international law and take action when Russia is attempting to use a vessel or another means to circumvent restrictions that we are putting in place. I pay tribute to all those involved in that crucial operation but, as Members will understand, I will not go into further operational details today. I know that questions have been raised on the Floor of the House. In the new, expanded criteria, we have specified ships to include ships carrying liquefied natural gas that originated in Russia and ships carrying coal and coal products that originated in Russia. The aim of that is to make it easier to sanction ships for a wider range of activity. We have also strengthened the trade and shipping sanctions that can be applied to specified ships by introducing additional prohibitions. The new trade sanctions enable the Government to prohibit persons from providing and procuring certain maritime and financial services in relation to specified ships. Indeed, additional shipping sanctions in this package prohibit persons from operating or chartering specified ships, and require the UK ship registrar, who maintains the UK Ship Register, which is part of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, to refuse to register specified ships. Lastly, the legislation will close a gap by prohibiting the acquisition and purported acquisition of a detained transport asset from or for the benefit of a designated person or person connected with Russia. That instrument amends the enforcement provisions of the 2019 regulations, as well as the Trade, Aircraft and Shipping Sanctions (Civil Enforcement) Regulations 2024, to provide for the enforcement of the new prohibitions introduced by these regulations. To conclude, this wide-ranging, impactful package shows that the Government take incredibly seriously our commitment to supporting Ukraine, to targeting Russia for its actions in prosecuting its illegal and barbarous war in Ukraine, and to combating Putin’s attempts to prolong the war and cause further damage, death and destruction, which we have seen him mete out so tragically in just the past 24 hours. Our sanctions have hit Putin hard. We will not let up, and we will continue to go further. I am grateful for the constructive and ongoing engagement with Parliament on the issue of licensing, including with those I have mentioned, as well as for the strong, unified support for sanctions on Russia and the steadfast backing of Ukraine from the vast majority of the House—although you will know, Sir Desmond, that in the past I have criticised some who have parroted Kremlin lines and have serious questions to answer on these matters. The Government welcome the shared determination of the Committee to maximise pressure on Putin’s war machine, and we recognise the concerns and genuine scrutiny that have been raised. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

• 15 Jun 2026 · The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  Of course. As I said, I do not want to mislead the Committee: if there is something more technical in that language, but I will happily copy the hon. Gentleman into my correspondence. I assure him that we work closely with EU partners, including the Republic of Ireland, to establish whether anybody can use any routes around the measures. We co-operate closely with those authorities generally, including on the security of the waters around our islands, which is crucial. When we see Russian ships and other vessels attempting to transit, we need to ensure that that is being done lawfully. As colleagues will be aware, ships have the right to innocent passage under international maritime law, but where that is not adhered to we need to look for any possible loophole. The regulations are an important step forward and I hope the Committee will support them. I commend them to the Committee. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That the Committee has considered the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026.

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

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone) for securing the debate, and all the right hon. and hon. Members who have contributed. It has been a thoughtful and important discussion on an issue that goes to the heart of our national security, our prosperity and our values. I can reassure the House that this Government are determined to tackle dirty money both at home and internationally, and that it remains a key priority. Hosting the illicit finance summit in 2026 is a central part of that commitment, which we will deliver on. We need to do that because illicit finance, as many Members have pointed out, fuels organised crime, corruption and conflict, enables kleptocrats to hide stolen wealth, undermines economic growth and weakens democratic institutions here and abroad. Crucially, as was rightly pointed out by a number of Members, it directly affects people here in the UK, from fraud and scams to criminality on our streets, as shown so excellently by the examples given by right hon. and hon. Members in relation to their constituents. Indeed, as a global financial centre, we also have a responsibility to lead international efforts in this field to tackle this threat. I appreciate the cross-party nature of today’s debate. Of course, one party is not here. What a surprise—Reform is absent yet again. I will let hon. Members draw their own conclusions from that. The summit will be a major opportunity to drive international action. The aim is to bring together countries, international organisations, civil society, private sector experts, researchers and others to tackle dirty money around the world. I was asked a number of times about the objectives of the summit, which are very clear—to expose the scale and harm of illicit finance, to forge new partnerships, to share intelligence, to strengthen enforcement and, crucially, to secure concrete commitments for the future that close the gaps exploited by criminals and others who seek to undermine our society’s economies. We will strengthen global enforcement against illicit finance through new partnerships on, for example, information sharing and asset recovery, which also came up. The summit will also help us to agree actions to tackle channels for dirty money, including money laundering in the property sector, which was rightly raised, the misuse of cryptoassets and, as was rightly referenced in relation to Sudan and other locations, trade in illicit gold. There is no great conspiracy around the change in the date. As the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton), and other colleagues know, there is often complexity when it comes to the diaries of Ministers and others whose attendance we want to secure at these summits. It will take place in December, and we will announce the exact date in due course. It is crucial that we have a successful summit and have the right people there, and that we can demonstrate our own leadership on a number of key topics. I appreciate the welcome from many hon. Members who understand that it is better to have a summit that is successful and that has the right people than one that is, perhaps, not all it could be. That is why we took the decision; it was not taken lightly. I will keep the House updated on the preparations in due course. I was asked a number of times what the Government are doing on this domestically, which is obviously crucial. This is not just an agenda for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office; it is also for my ministerial colleagues in the Home Office, the Treasury, the Department for Business and Trade and many other agencies, as well as our law enforcement agencies. The economic crime Acts protect our open economy and strengthen the UK’s reputation as a place where legitimate business can thrive. We have built on the Acts to enable further progress. In October, the Chancellor announced that the Financial Conduct Authority will take supervision of anti-money laundering and counterterrorist financing in professional services firms—another theme of the debate. That will replace a system that previously involved 22 different private sector bodies. It is better that that is brought together and focused to simplify the system and strengthen our defences. The Chancellor announced an increase to the economic crime levy rates—this was also referred to by hon. Members—which will raise an additional £110 million a year to boost law enforcement staffing and technology, and support public-private data sharing and financial intelligence to target criminal activity. There is, of course, much more to do, and I accept that challenge. We set out further ambitions in the UK’s anti-corruption strategy, which was published in December. That important document included an additional £15 million to expand the domestic corruption unit and improve investigation—the shadow Minister asked about the resourcing across Government and agencies for that. This does not mean that we cannot do more; we will always seek to bring more effort to bear on this. It is important that this is a cross-Government and cross-Agency effort, and that it is not just one Department. We are also working on a new anti-money laundering and asset recovery strategy to strengthen our response. We also have to focus on international co-operation. It is not within the abilities of one country alone to tackle this; it is huge, and the sums referred to by right hon. and hon. Members were staggering. We are using a range of measures on everything from sanctions to exposures of different networks that are moving money around, particularly in new technological ways; for example, by using crypto. As an example of that, colleagues will be aware that in October 2025 and March 2026 we sanctioned the Prince Group and its enablers. It is responsible for a huge network of scam centres in south-east Asia that exploit trafficked workers to defraud victims on a global scale, including on the streets here in the United Kingdom and undoubtedly in every one of our constituencies. Our sanctions froze £127 million-worth of UK property and triggered a wave of investigations and arrests across the region. We also launched the world’s first dedicated sanctions regime targeting irregular migration. And we did not stop there: at the Berlin process summit, we targeted a number of entities including criminal gangs that are driving people smuggling across the western Balkans. We are also working through bodies such as the International Anti-Corruption Coordination Centre, which has identified and frozen billions of pounds of stolen assets globally. We are looking at every way in which evasion is going on and new networks are being used, which includes the evasion of Russian sanctions by those exploiting cryptoassets and complex financial routes. Members will have seen our announcements in recent weeks on that as well as the closing down of crypto exchanges and other means by which illicit finance is being used to fuel the war in Ukraine. That is on top of the National Crime Agency’s Operation Destabilise, which exposed and disrupted high-harm Russian money laundering networks supporting serious and organised crime around the world. That led to 84 arrests—many are already serving prison sentences—and we seized over £20 million in cash and cryptocurrency. That is tangible progress that is being made, which is important to reflect on. I pay tribute to all the law enforcement officers and experts who were involved in that. Members have rightly raised points about the overseas territories and Crown dependencies. I have spoken about that issue on many occasions in this House, and Members will have heard what the Justice Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards) and, indeed, the anti-corruption champion, Baroness Hodge, said in relation to the Crown dependencies. As I am also Minister for overseas territories, I am glad that there was recognition of the progress made in Gibraltar, Saint Helena, Montserrat. We have legitimate interest to access registers in the Cayman Islands, the Turks and Caicos Islands and the British Virgin Islands; progress has also been made in Anguilla. However, I recognise the serious concerns that colleagues have raised about whether some of the measures go far enough. I am in regular dialogue with the elected Governments in the overseas territories, and I have made clear the progress that we expect to make and our disappointment at some of the backsliding we have seen. One location that came up in many right hon. and hon. Members’ speeches is the British Virgin Islands. I want to reassure colleagues that I have raised those concerns directly with the Premier and other agencies in the British Virgin Islands in recent weeks. All options remain on the table if we do not see the sort of progress that we need, because, as been rightly pointed out, this is an issue not only about financial transparency and global economic stability, but about the national security of this country and the global British family. When it comes to the threats posed by Russia, Iran and many other malevolent actors—let alone serious and organised crime—we have to adhere to the highest standards. I have conveyed that to the Premier and the authorities in BVI in the strongest terms and I will update the House in due course. I have said a lot about the action in relation to Russia, which the shadow Minister asked me about, but she also asked about Iran. We have a range of measures in this regard: ramping up disruptions of UK-connected Iranian networks, increasing enforcement actions against Iranian organised crime and sanctions-circumvention networks and indeed dissolving companies registered in the UK for facilitating financing to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The shadow Minister also asked about the related sanctions issue. To be very clear, we are not watering down existing sanctions; we are introducing new sanctions in relation to refined oil and liquefied natural gas, but naturally with a phased-in strategy to ensure that we can wind down existing contracts and others. I can assure hon. Members that that is under regular review, and that we certainly do not want to see Putin or his regime gain any kind of bonanza from this. We have been clear from the start that we are doing a huge amount to tackle the issue of asset recovery. In fact, in 2024-25, asset recovery from proceeds of crime was up by 31%, with £284.5 million recovered. We continue to be very ambitious in those strategies. We are also doing a huge amount, as I said, on the enablers—that was touched on by a number of people—and that new approach by the FCA will ensure that we have the powers to take a coherent, effective and impactful approach to supervision. In the remaining time—I am trying to work out how long I have, Sir Roger; I will keep going until you shout “Order”—the hon. Member for North Norfolk quite rightly asked what we are doing with people who fail to comply. Let me be clear on that: verification of directors and persons with significant control is mandatory. Individuals who fail to comply in this country may face financial penalties, disqualification or, indeed, criminal sanctions. We are also clear that overseas entities on the UK register of overseas entities and register of persons with significant control must comply with our beneficial ownership requirements. We are taking every step possible. Of course, it is for enforcement agencies to follow up on these things, but we are very clear on this, and Companies House is actively identifying non-compliance and working with partners across Government and law enforcement to ensure that entities meet their obligations. If I have not replied to any specific points, I am very happy to write to hon. Members afterwards, but, in conclusion, I want to reassure Members that this remains a major priority. This summit will happen, and it will have tangible, important announcements to make about our commitment here at home and about what we are doing overseas. We will make sure that that has a legacy that impacts into the future, particularly as we enter an important year regarding the G20. I thank everybody for their contributions.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Draft Syria (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Opposition and Lib Dem spokespeople for their remarks and questions, and for their broad support of the regulations. They both reflected on some of the things that are still leading to instability and risk in Syria, which I referred to in my opening remarks. They can be assured that we are keeping these measures under close monitoring. On the risks the shadow Minister raised, we keep those under review at all times. She knows that I do not comment on future designations, but sanctions can always be reimposed where we see anything we are uncomfortable with or that puts security and stability at risk. We have been clear that the violence and other issues we have seen are unacceptable. We want an inclusive, stable future for Syria, and we took action in December by introducing new sanctions on those responsible for those issues. I emphasise to the Committee that 344 designations remain in place relating to human rights violations committed under the Assad regime. They include certain trade measures, including prohibiting the export of goods that can be used for internal repression, chemical or biological weapons, and other matériel. That is the approach that the United States and our partners in the EU have taken. The EU adopted legal acts in May last year to lift all economic restrictions, with the exception of those based on security grounds. In June last year, the US repealed the Caesar Act, which led to the eventual removal of many of the remaining US and secondary sanctions on Syria. In the measures we are setting in place today, our action very much aligns with what the US and the EU are doing. The regulations are aimed at not only normalising economic trade and engagement with Syria but creating opportunities for increasing trade and commercial links between the UK and Syria; automobiles are a huge opportunity. Our latest trade statistics show that the total trade in goods and services between the UK and Syria was £10 million in the four quarters to the end of quarter three of 2025—an increase of 400% since the same time the previous year. That is in the context of the Syrian economy remaining in need of significant support. The humanitarian situation obviously remains acute, there are reconstruction needs and the economy has contracted by 83% since 2010 as a result of the horrors under the Assad regime. The costs of that have been estimated by the World Bank at $216 billion, which is 10 times Syria’s current GDP. These regulations are part of a series of measures. We focused on some of the most important sectors first, but this is a series of phased normalisations of our trading and commercial relations with Syria. Those are aimed at stabilising the economy, providing opportunities and creating a more stable economic footing domestically in Syria, as well as providing opportunities for the UK and Syria to trade and work together in many different areas. But there is the caveat that sanctions remain in place, and they can be reimposed and more actions can be taken if we see illicit finance or other groups seeking to subvert this for their own purposes. The shadow Minister asked about kerosene. I will write to her on that point to give her the most accurate information. I hope that that satisfies the Committee that the regulations are a natural next step. We all want to see a stable, prosperous and secure Syria, not just for the Syrian people and the wider region, but for the security and prosperity of the UK. Question put and agreed to .

• 2 Jun 2026 · Draft Syria (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the Cttee has considered the Syria (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (S.I., 2026, No. 436). It is a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship, Mrs Harris. The regulations amend the Syria (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. Since the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024, the UK has engaged with and supported the new Syrian Government to help build a secure, prosperous future for all Syrians. The UK has long stood by the people of Syria and will continue to do so as they rebuild their country, clear in the knowledge that a stable Syria is firmly in the interests of the region and the UK. That is why the Prime Minister welcomed Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa on his first visit to the UK on 31 March. On 21 April, the Government laid a statutory instrument to amend the Syria sanctions regulations. The instrument revoked specific UK sanctions measures on some sectors of the Syrian economy—namely, gold, diamonds, precious metals and luxury goods, including cars. That action allows British companies to trade with and invest in those sectors in Syria. Sustained investment in those and other sectors supports British industry and Syria’s economic recovery. This is the latest step in a series of actions designed to change our approach to Syria, supporting its economy and allowing UK businesses to contribute to and benefit from the country’s economic recovery. In February 2025, shortly after the fall of the Assad regime, the Treasury’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation issued a general licence, allowing payments to support humanitarian delivery. That provided essential sanctions relief to Syria at a time when the country faced staggering humanitarian needs and a broken economy. We followed that in April 2025 by revoking a number of sanctions on energy, transport, financial transactions and trade. We also delisted Syrian organisations that had been used by the Assad regime to fund the oppression of the Syrian people. That included the Central Bank of Syria, Syrian Arab Airlines, several energy companies and, indeed, media companies. We were at the forefront of western countries lifting sanctions on Syria, recognising that enabling the flow of investment into Syria was essential for the country’s recovery and reconstruction. In parallel, we have actively engaged with British companies to understand their barriers to market entry and to support their re-entrance into the Syrian market. During his visit to London in March, President al-Sharaa joined my colleague the Minister for the Middle East and North Africa at a UK-Syria business reception, where he heard investment proposals from a range of UK firms, as well as the Government’s support for British companies wanting to invest in Syria. The amendments we made to our sanctions regime last year have allowed us to continue to use sanctions as a tool to promote peace, stability and security in Syria, while encouraging respect for the rule of law and protection of human rights. That is why sanctions remain in place on those who committed gross human rights violations with or on behalf of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. The amendments the Government have made to the Syria sanctions regime, both this year and last year, reflect the momentous changes that have taken place since the fall of the Assad regime. They will support the Syrian people in rebuilding their country and economy and ensure that our regime is up to date. We keep all our sanctions regimes under close review to ensure they are used as a responsive tool and target those who bear responsibility for oppression and human rights abuses. Members may rightly raise concerns about violence we have seen in Syria since the fall of Assad, whether in the coastal areas, Suwayda or the north-east. The UK remains committed to holding those responsible for violence against civilians in Syria to account. In December of last year, we sanctioned individuals and organisations involved in coastal violence and Assad-era atrocities to hold to account perpetrators of human rights abuses. Additionally, two individuals who financially supported the Assad regime were sanctioned. In our engagements with the new Syrian Government, we consistently emphasise the importance of protecting the rights of all Syrians and an inclusive political transition. Meaningful representation of Syria’s diverse communities is crucial to strengthening Syria’s social fabric and underpinning a better future for the country. The past year has seen significant strides forward in Syria. We welcome the progress made by the Syrian Government to open Syria to the world, attract investment and reduce the threat from terrorism and insecurity. President al-Sharaa’s visit to the UK in March was his first, and his meetings with the Prime Minister and indeed His Majesty the King cemented a new era for the UK-Syria relationship. I would like, if I may, Mrs Harris—particularly as we are coming up to a significant anniversary—to recognise our dearly loved and lost colleague, Jo Cox, who worked with me and many other Members on many occasions during her time in this place to raise the issues affecting the Syrian people. I am sure she would be looking on today with some hope and optimism, although not without some concerns. She would have held us all to account, but with hope and optimism for the future of the Syrian people after what were truly dreadful times. A stable Syria is firmly in the UK’s interests, and we will continue to stand with the Syrian people. We will work with the new Government to support Syria’s stability, promote regional security and protect UK national interests, including by reducing the risks of irregular migration, terrorism and other threats to our national security. This package, however, reflects the changed environment, and it is another important step in finding a new way forward for Syria. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Gibraltar: UK-EU Treaty · Hansard source

  More

  I can assure my hon. Friend of that. It is important to note that Gibraltar’s sovereignty was never on the table in the negotiations—we have been very clear about that throughout. The agreement has been supported by and worked through with the Government of Gibraltar throughout, and it was unanimously supported by Gibraltar’s Parliament. That is very important to note in this House.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Gibraltar: UK-EU Treaty · Hansard source

  More

  Yesterday I appeared before the Foreign Affairs Committee—its Chair, my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry), is in the House—after the Chief Minister of Gibraltar, to set out this process and to engage in the very important scrutiny that the House provides on this matter. We are all committed to fully implementing and ratifying the treaty as soon as possible to realise its benefits for the people of Gibraltar. There is obviously a complex process, but my understanding is that provisional application of the treaty will be possible from 15 July, which will secure the key benefits of the treaty for the people of Gibraltar, including the fluid border, allowing businesses and working people more certainty and prosperity.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Gibraltar: UK-EU Treaty · Hansard source

  More

  I can absolutely assure the hon. Gentleman of that. We would not have signed off the deal without those assurances. The Ministry of Defence, the Defence Secretary and others were fully involved at all stages of the process. We have been very clear that the treaty protects the operational autonomy of our military facilities, which will continue to operate unfettered, as they do today.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Gibraltar: UK-EU Treaty · Hansard source

  More

  As I set out yesterday, the timetable is not entirely in our control, because it relates to the other party in the treaty, the EU, and its processes. Mr Speaker, you will know that I brought forward the entire text of the draft treaty so that this House had a chance to scrutinise it. I have also provided briefings to the right hon. Lady and her colleague, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), as I did yesterday in the Foreign Affairs Committee. We will follow the CRaG process in the usual way. I will ensure that the House is kept fully informed and is able to scrutinise as appropriate.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Illicit Finance Summit · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member will know from my previous answers in this place how seriously I take this issue. Our commitment across the whole of our British family on these matters is very clear. I have been working closely with leaders of the overseas territories. We have seen some important progress from a number of them, but a number have not gone far enough; I have been very frank with them about that. We are working in partnership and providing technical advice and support, and I am very hopeful that we will achieve progress, particularly on legitimate interest access to beneficial registers of ownership.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Illicit Finance Summit · Hansard source

  More

  Mr Speaker, may I associate myself entirely with your remarks about Her late Majesty? The illicit finance summit will convene a coalition of international partners to scale up global enforcement against illicit finance. The summit will forge new partnerships to combat this shared threat, including illicit gold, money laundering in the property sector and the abuse of cryptoassets. The summit builds on our long-term commitment to this agenda, which is also shown in the 2025 UK anti-corruption strategy, and will complement our upcoming presidency of the Financial Action Task Force and other meetings.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister for the Cabinet Office has set out answers to those questions.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady raises a crucial issue, and I work closely with the Security Minister and others on these matters. Our electoral system is highly resilient and to date we have not seen evidence of successful Russian interference in UK democratic processes. However, we know that the Kremlin is seeking to sow discord in the west and in the UK and to undermine our institutions. We are working on a series of measures to ensure that it cannot achieve that foothold in our society or our democracy.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman will know that we have publicly accessible registers in some of the overseas territories—in Gibraltar and Montserrat—and there has been welcome progress on legitimate interest access registers in a number of them, including in recent weeks, but I absolutely agree that we need to go much further. We are working closely to ensure that there is progress, and I have set out my expectations very clearly.