Edward Morello
MP for West Dorset · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“However, many independent producers have said that they are receiving far less—in some cases, only 130p to 140p per kilogram. Some farmers are losing as much as £50 on every pig they sell. That is unsustainable. Once again, it is independent farmers who have borne the greatest burden.”
“West Dorset farmers are proud of the standards they have achieved. Every farmer I have spoken to wants to see further improvements in animal welfare.”
“The hon. Member must forgive that my speech is weighted towards English rugby, as he is absolutely right that the important role rugby clubs play in a community is true in all four parts of the United Kingdom. Research has now described the evidence linking organised sport with improved psychological wellbeing as compelling.”
“Will the Minister work across Government and with governing bodies to deliver the new school sport partnerships and enrichment framework, and provide early clarity on the objectives, priorities, delivery models and timescales?”
“Government can play an important role by ensuring that schools have access to suitable facilities, qualified coaches and meaningful links with local community clubs. School sport should never operate in isolation. The stronger systems are those where schools, clubs and governing bodies work together.”
“It would enable clubs to expand youth sections, to create better facilities for women and girls and to host schools’ disability rugby and walking rugby. Rugby contributes more than £2 billion annually to England through improved health, stronger communities and economic activity. Those benefits are felt in every constituency.”
The complete record
Every one of 602 lines we hold for Edward Morello, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 13.
“Once services become established and passenger numbers increase, public subsidies can reduce over time. Demand-responsive transport has already shown real promise in Wiltshire, where passengers can book flexible journeys through an app and AI software identifies the most efficient routes. Data suggests that these services have been particularly successful among younger users travelling between villages and market towns before they learn to drive. West Dorset would be an ideal place to pilot a similar, larger-scale approach. For rural communities such as West Dorset, buses are fundamental to tackling social isolation, supporting economic growth and giving young people genuine opportunities.”
“The Department for Transport currently makes up to £3.8 million available annually for eligible community transport operators, but that is across the whole country. Given the scale needed, that is simply not enough. Instead, there should be dedicated, ringfenced grant funding specifically to help communities establish new community transport services where commercial routes have disappeared. A hub-and-spoke model supported by smaller community buses and demand-responsive transport could reconnect villages at a fraction of the cost of restoring traditional commercial routes immediately. Importantly, that funding should recognise that the greatest cost comes at the beginning. Communities need capital investment to purchase vehicles, recruit drivers, establish a booking system and build passenger confidence.”
“I agree 100%—talk to anyone who has got off the last train from Crewkerne when the last bus stopped two hours beforehand. We are depriving our communities of the ability to get around, and of course there is an economic impact to that. The CB3 community bus in Beaminster demonstrates exactly what local communities can achieve when volunteers, councils and residents work together. Similarly, the new LB1 evening service between Lyme Regis and Bridport has quickly proved a success, despite disruption caused by necessary works on the A35. I am also encouraged by proposals for further community transport in places such as Sherborne, which have my support, but parish councils and volunteers cannot continue to carry the burden alone.”
“Whenever I speak about this issue, someone invariably asks, “Why do we not just plant more trees?” I agree: trees are wonderful, and we should absolutely plant more of them. However, to keep global temperature increases below the 1.5% or 2% target, we would need to remove 10 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere every single year, which would require us to plant roughly 50 million hectares of new forest annually. That is equivalent to covering the entirety of the UK with trees, twice, every single year. Even the most committed of environmentalists would accept that that approach has practical limitations.”
“However, even if we achieve every single one of our net zero targets—and we absolutely must—we will still have a problem. Net zero does not remove the carbon dioxide that is already sitting in our atmosphere, which is why this debate is not about carbon capture and storage, but about carbon removal. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been absolutely clear that without greenhouse gas removals, keeping global warming within internationally agreed limits becomes effectively impossible. Today, humanity removes only about 2 billion tonnes annually, 99.9% of which is done by trees and plants. Meanwhile, we continue adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere every single year. The scale of the challenge is enormous.”
“It has been encouraging to see a Secretary of State and Ministers who genuinely recognise the scale of the climate challenge. However, warm words must now become concrete action if Britain is not to miss yet another opportunity to become a world leader in one of the defining industries of the next century. Climate change is here. It is happening now. We see it through rising temperatures and increasingly frequent heatwaves, flooding, drought and wildfires. The changing climate is already affecting our communities, businesses and public services. Much of the conversation has rightly focused on reducing our emissions, and let me be clear: decarbonisation must remain our first priority. Every tonne of carbon dioxide we avoid emitting now is better than having to remove it later.”
“I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to bring this Adjournment debate to the House and to make the case for greater Government support for the greenhouse gas removals sector. First, I thank the sector for engaging so openly with me about its businesses and concerns, the Minister for his continued co-operation on this issue and Dr Alan Whitehead for publishing his extremely important review. Before entering this place, I spent almost a decade working in renewable energy, and before that on climate impact projects. I would certainly not claim to be an expert on greenhouse gas removals, but, through my work in the renewable energy sector, and now as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on climate technology and the co-chair of the net zero APPG, I have at least become a passionate advocate for the sector.”
“My hon. Friend and neighbour is absolutely right. There are many exciting nature-based solutions for which I have high hopes. In my role as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on climate technology, my focus today is mainly on the engineered solutions, but we need to consider all solutions to meet the challenge ahead.”
“We have world-class universities that produce cutting-edge research, exceptional engineers, innovative start-ups and university spin-outs, globally respected financial services and investors, and advanced manufacturing capability. The UK’s GGR sector already contributes about £1.2 billion to the UK economy. It has the potential to contribute between £7 billion and £9 billion to GDP by 2050 while supporting more than 100,000 skilled jobs. The countries that build those technologies first will not simply reduce emissions at home; they will be central to global emission reductions for decades to come. Britain should aspire to become the global centre of carbon removal innovation, the home of future climate tech unicorns and a leading exporter of GGR technologies.”
“I believe that we should back any and all solutions that help us face the challenge, and Northern Ireland is as well placed as any part of the UK to offer innovative solutions. Technology such as direct air capture and engineered removal methods will become an essential part of moving beyond net zero towards net negative emissions. Those technologies are nascent. The businesses that will develop them need to be founded today and to scale over the next decade. They need investment, certainty and confidence if they are to become globally competitive and properly supported. The encouraging news is that Britain already possesses almost everything needed to succeed.”
“If the Government are not yet in a position to introduce longer-term reforms, what interim measures will they take to ensure that promising new UK GGR businesses are supported and not lost overseas while policies are being developed? Finally, will the Minister commit to continuing to work closely with the sector over the coming months, listening to businesses, investors and researchers, so that the UK can seize the opportunity to become a global leader in greenhouse gas removals rather than watching others move ahead? Carbon does not recognise borders or respect international treaties; it is a global challenge that demands world-leading solutions. I believe that those solutions should be developed here in the UK.”
“Net zero is today’s problem, and net negative is tomorrow’s, but if we do not start thinking about it now, we will not be ready to meet that challenge. We should be ambitious. We should not settle for participating in the market—we should aim to lead it. Will the Minister confirm precisely when the Government intend to publish their full response to the Whitehead review, and whether that will be before the House rises for the summer recess? Will he confirm whether the Government are giving serious consideration to the proposal for a British carbon bank or revolving fund to provide the long-term market certainty the sector has consistently called for?”
“Terraset supported Graphyte, which needed early-stage capital to move from planning into commercial deployment. Private buyers recognised the value of the project, but were not yet ready to commit at the scale or speed required. Through its revolving fund, Terraset made an advance commitment of just over $100,000, providing the confidence and working capital that enabled the project to proceed. Once Graphyte had delivered independently verified carbon removals, those credits were purchased by a commercial buyer, with the proceeds going back into the revolving fund to support the next generation of projects. I believe that a British carbon bank could replicate this revolving model at scale, helping promising British companies bridge the gap between innovation and commercial success.”
“Importantly, the model also overcomes the current “chicken and egg” problem in the market. Today, many buyers are reluctant to pre-purchase carbon removals because they bear all the delivery risk. By contrast, a British carbon bank would offer only certified verified credits to the market, making them far more attractive to businesses seeking high-integrity carbon removals while simultaneously providing developers with the up-front certainty they need to secure investment and scale their technologies. The market will determine which solutions ultimately prove effective, whether nature-based approaches, direct air capture or entirely new technologies that are yet to emerge. With a relatively small Government investment, we could seed this market, crowding in five or 10 times more in private finance.”
“A British carbon bank would take that principle and apply it at a national scale. It would provide a clear signal that Britain intends to become the best place in the world to develop, deploy and commercialise greenhouse gas removal. One strength of a British carbon bank model is that it addresses the greatest barrier currently facing the sector: risk. The bank would purchase future carbon removals in advance, holding those credits until they have been independently verified and certified. There is, of course, a risk for the Government that some projects may ultimately fail to deliver the promised removals or not achieve certification. However, that risk can be significantly reduced through robust due diligence and careful product selection, as organisations such as Terraset have already demonstrated successfully.”
“Rather than relying solely on traditional grant funding, Terraset uses philanthropic finance to early pre-purchase commitments to vetted projects, giving those projects the capital to actually remove greenhouse gases. Those advanced commitments provide early demand, giving companies confidence to develop technologies while demonstrating to investors that a future market exists. These projects deliver verified carbon credits to Terraset, which it then sells to buyers. Any revenue generated is then returned to the fund and gets deployed into new projects. For every $1 it deploys, it unlocks $5 in private finance and achieves a 15% mark-up for credits under this de-risk model. As a result of this profit margin, it is now attracting interest from institutional investors, including pension funds.”
“That would de-risk the purchase for the offtaker as the credits are certified, provide the capital that the GGR project needs to start capturing greenhouse gases and generating carbon credit, and improve investor confidence because there is a guaranteed purchaser. Rather than the Government attempting to fund every project themselves, a British carbon bank would create guaranteed demand for high-quality removals over many years, allowing businesses to secure investment and scale their technologies with confidence. The Whitehead review recognises exactly this challenge. It concluded that demand certainty will be fundamental if GGRs are to develop at the pace required. Without reliable long-term demand, many technologies will simply struggle to reach commercial scale. One particularly interesting example is Terraset, a US charity.”
“Solutions could be amending the sustainable aviation fuel mandate, improving access to finance from public finance bodies, voluntary carbon market changes, expanding UK GGR standards to wider methods or endorsing interim standards, a new UK buyers’ club, a regulations audit, departmental sandboxes and standards for the emissions performance standard. We must give the market the certainty it is asking for and the investors the confidence to unlock that potential. That brings me to what I believe is the single most important proposal that the Government should consider. The answer lies in creating a British carbon bank, a Government-seeded revolving fund that will crowd in private finance. A British carbon bank would provide long-term advanced market commitments for verified GGRs.”
“The Government can create the long-term policy framework that gives markets confidence. The publication of the GGR business model alongside the Whitehead review was an important milestone. The commitment to integrating GGR into the UK emissions trading scheme is another positive step, but companies developing GGRs are making decisions today about where to build their first commercial facilities. Those decisions will determine where future supply chains develop, where highly skilled jobs are created and where intellectual property remains. What the sector is calling out for are low or no cost policy changes that would make a real difference until the response to the Whitehead review finally stops gathering dust on the Minister’s desk.”
“Many of those businesses require substantial upfront capital before they generate meaningful revenue. Private investors understandably look for long-term certainty and a return on their investment. Without that certainty, investment simply flows elsewhere. UK start-ups struggle to access patient capital at precisely the moment they need it most. Of all climate tech early start-ups that failed, 62% fail at series A, the start of the so-called valley of death. Britain has repeatedly invented world-leading technologies only to watch other countries commercialise them. We cannot allow that to happen again. If we get this right, GGRs could become one of Britain’s great industrial success stories. If we get it wrong, we will again become purchasers of technologies developed elsewhere.”
“There is a lot of truth in what the hon. Member has outlined. We see the most rapid transformation and progress where innovation and expertise are clustered. British innovators are already developing world-leading GGR technologies. The problem is that many of them struggle to raise the long-term investment needed to move from successful demonstrations to commercial deployment. British companies have told me that they will be European or American by the end of next year if the UK does not do more to support them. The Whitehead review made that point very clearly. It recognised that the United Kingdom possesses many of the ingredients required to become a global leader, but that early-stage GGR companies continue to face significant barriers to scaling up.”
“My CROs tell me that it helps cover the cost of a family meal to say thank you for sacrificing time together; it replaces the sunglasses broken while performing CPR; it helps to compensate the children for an abandoned cinema trip; it helps to recognise the Christmases, birthdays and family gatherings that are missed because they are out on a cliff or in the sea, in the middle of a rescue, when the rest of us are at home. It is not a salary; it is recognition. I believe this Government must find a way to square the circle of the court’s judgment with properly recognising the sacrifice that these heroes make.”
“Thank you, Sir Alec. I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for bringing this important debate on what is, frankly, an outrageous and insulting decision by the MCA. I also pay tribute to the amazing work of the coastguard rescue officers in Lyme Regis, West Bay and across the country. I recognise the extraordinary sacrifice they make when they drop everything to respond to emergencies and save lives. As has been said, no one joins the coastguard for the money, but that small, modest payment helps to soften the substantial financial impacts that they incur.”
“When we fail to equip young people with the skills and services they need to manage their money, we do not simply leave them financially excluded; we rob them of opportunity itself.”
“An estimated 2 million people are now borrowing from illegal moneylenders—an increase of about half a million since 2022. More people are turning to payday loans simply to pay their rent or mortgage. That is not sustainable and we must do better. We must ensure that everyone has access to appropriate and affordable financial services, regardless of where they live, and can access affordable credit and independent debt advice before they reach crisis point. For constituencies such as West Dorset, financial inclusion is also about opportunity. It determines whether a young person can take up an apprenticeship, manage their first wage, avoid exploitative lending and build financial independence.”
“Financial education should become a core life skill, taught from primary school onwards. Every young person should leave school with an understanding of budgeting, saving, borrowing, mortgages, pensions, taxation, credit scores, fraud and the long-term consequences of debt. Those are skills that will benefit them throughout their lives. Financial education should not stop when the school day ends. Family hubs, community hubs and banking hubs could and should become centres of financial guidance, not just financial services. Parents and carers should receive greater support because they remain the single biggest influence on their children’s financial behaviour. We must also recognise the growing risk facing financially excluded households.”
“Meanwhile, our communities are expected to embrace digital banking despite persistent mobile phone and broadband blackspots in villages such as Drimpton, Burton Bradstock and Stoke Abbott. Across the country, 1 million people have cancelled internet packages because of the cost of living crisis. Digital banking cannot be the answer if people cannot get online. True financial inclusion should be about giving people the confidence and knowledge to make informed decisions throughout their lives, yet less than half of children receive meaningful financial education either at home or in school. Nearly one quarter of young adults have low financial capability. Most children say that they would ask their parents’ financial advice, yet only about half of parents feel confident having those conversations.”
“Many are using unsecured loans and buy now, pay later products to cover everyday essentials, while one in five were employed on zero-hours contracts, making it almost impossible to budget or save. This is not just about people on the lowest incomes; it is increasingly affecting younger people who are working hard but cannot get ahead. The challenges are even greater in rural constituencies such as West Dorset. Financial inclusion depends on being able to access financial services, yet facilities that make this possible—bank branches, cash machines and post offices—are disappearing fastest from rural communities because they are considered commercially unviable.”
“Today it is numbers on a screen—online banking, apps, digital wallets, “buy now, pay later” schemes, cryptocurrency and social media influencers offering financial advice that often benefits themselves rather than the young people following them. We assume that because young people are comfortable with technology they are financially literate, but those are not the same things. The Milburn review laid out the importance of financial inclusion for young people. Between January and March of this year, 1.01 million people between the ages of 16 and 24 were not in education, employment or training. The number of young adults regularly relying on borrowing has increased by 45% in just one year.”
“It is a honour to serve under your chairship, Sir John. My first job was on the deli counter of my local supermarket. I congratulate the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) on securing this important debate. In the middle of a cost of living crisis, whether a young person knows how to manage their money, can afford to stay in education, can access affordable financial services and advice they can trust, can avoid problem debt and can build a secure future has never mattered more. Young people are facing challenges that previous generations did not. Money has changed. For previous generations, it was coins in a pocket or cash in a wallet.”
“It has been my huge pleasure to serve on the hon. Member’s Committee for the better part of the last two years, and as I stand down from it, I wish to thank him for his leadership—it has been exemplary. On the whole-society conversation, to go back to the hon. Gentleman’s earlier point about the incident with the Prime Minister’s car, does he agree that we must do a better job of informing the British public about the actual threat? The first stage is getting the public to understand the real threat that we are facing right now. We are under hybrid attack, and we will need the whole of society to support us in the solution.”
“T4. On 28 May, Prime Minister Netanyahu ordered the Israeli military to seize control of 70% of the Gaza strip, in breach of the ceasefire agreement. Some 90% of the homes have now been destroyed, and an estimated $53 billion is required to rebuild the strip. Meanwhile, settlement expansion in the west bank has increased by 80%, with Israeli settlers now comprising one in six of the population. What is the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office doing with European allies to help the Palestinian people?”
“A constituent of mine has been unable to wind up his late uncle’s estate since 2023. The shared ownership retirement flat, managed by Abri in Poundbury, is incurring £15,000 in service charges; even if they find a buyer, those charges plus the exit fees will effectively wipe out any value from the sale. What steps are the Government taking to tackle excessive service charges and ban exit fees in the retirement housing sector?”
“New clause 42 would require an assessment of the benefits of constructing a passing loop at Tisbury on the west of England line. This proposal is important not only to my constituents, but across the south-west.”
“New clause 47 would help to remove that barrier and support social mobility, economic participation and fairness. The needs of rural communities are also reflected in new clause 40, which would place a duty on Great British Railways and the Secretary of State to ensure that rail services respond proportionately to both permanent and seasonal population growth. Coastal communities face the double challenge of being underfunded for their permanent population while simultaneously accommodating huge seasonal increases in demand. This new clause would require consideration of rolling stock services and infrastructure investment to ensure that communities are not left behind simply because population increases occur seasonally rather than permanently.”
“We already reward loyalty in supermarkets and airmiles, yet regular rail passengers receive little recognition for their continued use of the network. A rail-mile programme would encourage repeat journeys, support passenger growth, and provide greater flexibility for commuters, students and working families. It would also help encourage modal shift away from private car use and towards public transport. For young people, passenger-focused rail reform must also mean access to opportunity. That is why I tabled new clause 47, which would provide free rail travel to 16 to 18-years-olds in education, training or apprenticeships. If a young person cannot physically reach a college, apprenticeship or job opportunity, then every other intervention becomes less effective.”
“It would extend standardised discounts for young people, provide discounted fares for veterans, establish a national tap-in, tap-out system, guarantee that passengers received the best-value fare regardless of how they purchase their tickets, introduce a national railcard, and enable open source access to ticketing systems and fare databases. The new clause would also require collaboration with local and regional transport authorities to enable multimodal ticketing. In rural areas such as West Dorset, where passengers often rely on both rail and bus services, joined-up ticketing could make a huge difference. Linked to affordability and passenger growth is new clause 2, which would require a report into the merits of the rail-miles programme.”
“For many passengers, particularly those travelling long distances from rural areas, access to refreshments is a necessity. If we want people to choose rail over car, we must think about the entire journey experience, and not simply whether the train arrives at the destination. Passenger-focused reform must also mean affordability, which is why new clause 6 is important. At a time when many households continue to face pressure with the cost of living, the new clause would require plans for fare increases to be capped in line with inflation.”
“Importantly, it would address issues that passengers in West Dorset have repeatedly raised with me: reliable highspeed wi-fi; comfortable seat design; dependable mobile connectivity; power outlets; luggage and bicycle storage; accessibility and clean toilets; onboard food and drink provision on journeys lasting more than two hours. Those are basic expectations of a modern railway in a modern country. New clause 1 would also strengthen accessibility and extend the principles behind delay and repay to failure of onboard amenities, while moving towards automatic digital compensation. Importantly, NC1 sends a simple message to all: passengers come first. The same principle underpins new clause 43, which would place a duty on Great British Railways to provide food and drink on rail services lasting over an hour.”
“It was my pleasure to serve on the Bill Committee, and I put on record my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover), who led on the legislation for the Liberal Democrats, and behind whose expertise I have gamely hidden throughout. I believe that the Bill should be about passengers, which is why I strongly support new clause 1, tabled by my hon. Friend, which would establish a passengers’ charter. New clause 1 would establish clear expectations around value for money, quality of service and adequate seating. It would require targets for reliability and a timetable for improvements to the passenger experience.”
“I thank the hon. Member for securing this important debate. He is right; summer comes around every year. West Dorset is home to the Jurassic coast—a major tourist attraction—and our population increases by 40% over the summer months. Despite the inter-agency working of Dorset police, Dorset fire service, the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, the coastguard and Dorset and Somerset Air Ambulance, there is no mechanism in the Government funding formula to recognise that seasonal surge in population. It puts huge strain on the emergency services and volunteers who respond to the kinds of incidents that the hon. Member rightly highlights.”
“We will continue to support the expansion of fixed-price renewable contracts to break the link between electricity prices and gas prices, but although we support the draft regulations, we believe that further reforms of the CfD framework should be considered, including extending the lifetime of CfD contracts from 15 to 25 years, and moving all older renewables obligation contracts on to the CfD scheme.”
“Permitting NESO to consider additional documentary evidence or information when reviewing first-stage appeals from applicants whose projects have initially been deemed to be non-qualifying should ensure that decisions are based on the fullest possible information and that applicants are treated fairly. Finally, the draft regulations clarify how pending applications should be treated where eligibility decisions remain outstanding at the point at which the allocation process must move forward. This follows operational experience from allocation round 7 and provides greater certainty for future rounds. The Liberal Democrats support reforms that strengthen and improve the operation of the CfD scheme and accelerate the transition to cleaner and cheaper renewable energy.”
“It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Stringer. I will leave the Minister to respond to all the inaccuracies in the shadow Minister’s speech. The purpose of the draft regulations is not to alter the underlying policy objectives of the CfD scheme but to improve the administration and operation of the allocation process. As the number of applications has increased significantly in recent allocation rounds, the complexity of assessing those applications has also grown. The three principal changes introduced by the draft regulations are all positive. Allowing NESO to correct certain administrative errors that it may make during the assessment of an application should reduce the risk of projects being incorrectly assessed due to procedural mistakes.”
“Too often developing countries lose billions through corruption, tax abuse and illicit financial flows, while also having the fewest resources to tackle those issues. Ultimately, this matter is about more than financial regulation; it is about national security, economic fairness and defending democracy and public trust. It is about ensuring that the United Kingdom remains a leader on the world stage. The delay of the summit was disappointing, but the Liberal Democrats believe it has created an opportunity and a rare second chance. I hope the Government will use the months ahead wisely.”
“We have already seen evidence of cryptoassets being used to evade sanctions and move money across borders beyond the reach of traditional financial controls. Criminal networks and hostile actors adapt quickly; regulators and Governments must do the same. That is another area where international co-operation is indispensable, allowing Governments, regulators and financial institutions to share intelligence rapidly and respond to emerging threats before they become entrenched. The success of the summit will be measured by whether it creates momentum that continues through the UK’s G20 presidency, our leadership of the FATF and beyond. We must also reflect the priorities of the countries most affected by illicit finance.”
“We will also take on the presidency of the Financial Action Task Force, the world’s leading anti-money laundering body. We therefore have a unique opportunity to shape the international agenda. The summit must deliver concrete commitments that include stronger international information sharing, improved asset-recovery arrangements, enhanced co-operation on cryptocurrency regulation, and greater transparency on property ownership. International co-operation will be essential if we are to tackle criminal networks that operate across borders, move assets between jurisdictions and exploit gaps between national regulatory systems. The summit must also address the growing threat posed by cryptocurrency and other digital assets.”
“The role of the UK should be to engage constructively, to provide support where needed and to work together to ensure that meaningful access beneficial ownership and corporate information is in line with international standards. That means achieving transparency that meets, at a minimum, standards comparable to those required under the EU framework. It is also important that we recognise the economic realities faced by some of those jurisdictions. Financial services play a significant role in their economies. If we want proper, lasting reform we must help to support economic diversification and resilience so that transparency and prosperity go hand in hand. The UK will assume the G20 presidency immediately after the summit takes place.”
“The summit must therefore focus on not only identifying illicit wealth, but ensuring that enforcement agencies have the powers, the resources and—importantly—the international co-operation necessary to recover it. As several hon. Members have highlighted, beneficial ownership transparency is an area where progress is required. The Liberal Democrats support the Government’s ambition to improve transparency across the UK overseas territories and Crown dependencies. We welcome the progress already made in places such as Gibraltar, Montserrat and St Helena. However, more needs to be done. That should not be approached confrontationally. The overseas territories and Crown dependencies are valued partners. Many have taken meaningful steps forward.”
“As a Member of the Foreign Affairs Committee I have heard repeatedly that the challenge is now not necessarily the lack of legislation, so the priority must be implementation, enforcement and closure of the remaining loopholes that allow illicit finance to continue to flow through the global financial system. Enforcement remains a particular concern. Despite progress in freezing criminal assets, they are not being recovered at a sufficiently high rate. Current estimates suggest that only £1 in every £4 of frozen criminal assets is ultimately recovered. That is money that should be returned to the public purse, used to compensate victims and reinvested in the fight against organised crime and corruption.”