New Loan Guarantees to Support Ukraine

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Wednesday 21st June 2023 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

Today I have laid a departmental minute which describes a new liability the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) is undertaking to support the economic stability of Ukraine following Russia’s invasion in February 2022.

It is normal practice, when a Government Department proposes to undertake a contingent liability in excess of £300,000 for which there is no specific statutory authority, for the Minister concerned to present a departmental minute to Parliament giving particulars of the liability created and explaining the circumstances; and to refrain from incurring the liability until 14 parliamentary sitting days after the issue of the statement, except in cases of special urgency.

This departmental minute sets out details of a new liability undertaken by the FCDO. The liability is a commitment to guarantee up to $3 billion of additional lending by the World Bank to the Government of Ukraine. This new commitment to Ukraine, which would likely be split into several separate guarantees, will create a contingent liability of up to $5.6 billion (£4.6 billion) (once interest payments are accounted for). Once existing UK guarantees to support Ukraine are accounted for, the maximum amount which could be demanded from the UK in a single year would be approximately £402 million. The guarantees will be denominated in USD. I have separately notified the Chairs of the Public Accounts Committee, Foreign Affairs Committee and International Development Committee.

The FCDO will guarantee both principal and interest repayments from Ukraine to the World Bank. A UK pay-out would be triggered if the Government of Ukraine misses a repayment by 180 days.

The exact length of the liabilities will be linked to the financial terms agreed between the World Bank, and the Government of Ukraine. The World Bank’s lending is expected to have a maturity of 29 years and a seven-year grace period during which only interest payments are due.

The war has placed huge pressures on Ukraine’s economy. The international finance community, including development banks such as the World Bank, is playing a key role in providing rapid financial support. Ukraine’s IMF programme is helping to mobilise combined donor support worth $115 billion over the next four years—up to 2027.¹ This package is promoting macroeconomic and financial stability, hailing a shift from ad-hoc unpredictable funding to effective multi-year assistance. The UK’s latest set of loan guarantees will form a part of this package and will help enable the World Bank to continue providing reliable and significant financial support at a critical time.

The exact length of the liability created by this commitment will be linked to the financial terms agreed between the World Bank and the Government of Ukraine.

HM Treasury has approved this new contingent liability in principle with the FCDO. It is also normal practice that any contingent liabilities should not be incurred until 14 sitting days after Parliament has been notified of the Government’s intention to incur a contingent liability. If any Member of the House has questions or objections, please do get in touch.

A copy of the departmental minute has been placed in the House Library.

¹ https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2022/12/21/Ukraine-Program-Monitoring-with-Board-Involvement-Press-Release-Staff-Report-and-Statement-527288

[HCWS873]

European Political Community

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Monday 19th June 2023 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

On Thursday 1 June, the Prime Minister attended the European Political Community (EPC) summit in Chisinau, Moldova. The summit brought together 49 leaders from across Europe for the second time to discuss common challenges, including strengthening Europe’s resilience to hybrid threats, energy security, and illegal migration. Hosted by Moldova, it was a powerful demonstration of pan-European unity in support of Ukraine and Moldova, in the face of continued Russian aggression.

The Prime Minister co-chaired a security roundtable alongside Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki. The Prime Minister outlined the areas where the EPC could helpfully respond: (1) energy security; (2) our ability to deal with aggression and hybrid threats to our continent; and (3) our ability to secure our borders. On the third point specifically, the Prime Minister noted that illegal migration has become a serious issue for Europe requiring a lawful and compassionate approach and should be part of the agenda for the EPC from now on.

The Prime Minister also met with over 20 leaders including with Spanish Prime Minister Sánchez where they discussed Gibraltar and with Bulgarian President Rumen Radev, with whom he confirmed a new UK-Bulgaria partnership to tackle organised immigration crime.

The Prime Minister also met Moldovan Prime Minister Recean and welcomed the UK-Moldova announcement to begin negotiating a readmission agreement, as well as the UK’s recent full liberalisation of tariffs to support Moldova’s economy. The Prime Minister underlined our continued long-term support to Moldova, including £10 million announced in March to support reforms in the energy sector as well as £12.5 million to UN agencies to support Ukrainian refugees in Moldova. The Prime Minister was also pleased the UK could support the security of the EPC summit including through the participation of the RAF in a joint US-France-Romania-UK exercise during the event.

The Prime Minister reiterated the UK’s continued commitment to supporting Ukraine, attending a meeting with Ukrainian President Zelensky and leaders from Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands and Sweden. They took forward discussion on further ways to support Kyiv, including building on the G7 announcements on air capability.

The Government look forward to hosting the EPC summit in the UK in spring 2024, and are working closely with EPC leaders, including Spain who will host in October 2023, to promote coherence across the summits.

[HCWS856]

Oral Answers to Questions

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Tuesday 13th June 2023 Commons Chamber

[Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP)]

T2. May I refer the Foreign Secretary to column 289 of the Official Report on 24 May, when I asked the Prime Minister to publish the list of the 1,700 veterinary medicines that will no longer be available in Northern Ireland? He told us all to “take heart” that the extension of the grace period would work that out. However, in correspondence, the Ulster Farmers’ Union has said that the EU has told it that veterinary medicines are not up for discussion with the EU. What heart can we take from that?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

I think this is an issue for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, but I will look at the issue and write to the hon. Gentleman.

[Mr Speaker]

Let us now come to Sir Conor Burns—congratulations.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con)]

It is now six months since the illegal blockade of the Lachin corridor—the vital lifeline between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. Since then, the Azerbaijan President has made increasingly bellicose threats towards Armenian people. Can the Under-Secretary of State, who recently returned from Armenia, update us on what we are doing to bring pressure to end that humanitarian disaster?

[Leo Docherty]

We support the Euro-Atlantic efforts to bring the two sides together. We have urged our interlocutors in both Armenia and Azerbaijan to get back around the table. I look forward to updating my hon. Friend in person.

[Lloyd Russell-Moyle (Brighton, Kemptown) (Lab/Co-op)]

T8. Following the elections in Türkiye, OSCE observers said that the lack of a level playing field gave an unjustified advantage to Erdoğan. When I was in Turkey, I saw intimidation at the ballot boxes, ballot irregularities and heard of particular security forces targeting the Kurds. Turkey is a key ally. Its beautiful people deserve a functioning democracy. So what steps is the Foreign Secretary taking to raise these issues with our ally, and to ensure that Kurds do not have intimidation in Turkey, here or in Sweden, where they are being used as a bargaining chip for NATO membership?

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Farry (North Down) (Alliance)]

The Windsor framework is a welcome settlement but may I seek an assurance from the Government that they will work closely with the Northern Ireland business community over the detailed operational guidance, such as with the red and green lanes?

[Leo Docherty]

I am pleased to report that we have issued guidance. We will continue to work with businesses as the green lane rolls out between September this year and September next.

[Jonathan Gullis (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Con)]

I am proud to represent many Pakistani-British dual nationals in Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke, who are rightly concerned about the human rights violations that are taking place, as well as the threats they fear they will face if they return to see family members in Pakistan. What is the Foreign Office doing to ensure those dual nationals will be protected and prevented from ever being detained?

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

We are all concerned about Russian attempts to destabilise the western Balkans, but does the Secretary of State agree that what is required now is maximum co-ordination and co-operation between ourselves, the United States and the European Union?

[Leo Docherty]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. We are urging Kosovo and Serbia to de-escalate and return to dialogue, and I am sure the Foreign Secretary will make that point when he sees the Serbian Prime Minister later today.

[Vicky Ford (Chelmsford) (Con)]

The blowing of the Nova Kakhovka dam is the biggest act of ecocide in generations. For the record, will my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary confirm again that the UK will leave no stone unturned in holding the Russian regime to account for the damage that has been caused by their war?

UK-EU Parliamentary Partnership Assembly Membership

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Thursday 8th June 2023 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

The Lord Ricketts has been appointed as a Vice-Chair of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly in place of the Earl of Kinnoull.

The Baroness Bull CBE has been appointed as a full representative of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly in place of the Earl of Kinnoull.

The Lord Krebs has been appointed as a substitute representative of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly in place of the Baroness Bull CBE.

[HCWS834]

Ukrainian Holodomor

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Thursday 25th May 2023 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire (Mrs Latham) for securing this debate and for maintaining over many years a spotlight on this horrific issue. I thank all colleagues for their moving contributions to today’s important debate. We were pleased to welcome in the early stages of the debate the Ukrainian ambassador to the Court of St James’s—we value his terrific diplomacy on a daily basis. Of course, we must never stop learning from these events.

I was grateful for the contribution from the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), and I will cover the questions he asked before I make substantive remarks. I can reassure him that we are very active in countering disinformation with regard to food supplies. He asked some pertinent questions about the international efforts to rebuild Ukraine with regard to agriculture and wholesale reconstruction. That will be the theme of the Ukraine reconstruction conference next month. I will not pre-empt the content, but I am pleased that he will be involved, along with other shadow Ministers. I would be pleased to consider his queries regarding our sanctions regime if he puts them in writing.

I turn to the substantive question raised in this debate. In simple terms, when it comes to the Government’s stance on genocide generally, there is universal agreement that the holodomor was one of the darkest chapters in Ukrainian and European history. It was a vast and horrific man-made disaster that killed millions of innocent people, as we have heard from Members on both sides of the House, so calls from my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire and others to designate it as a genocide are wholly understandable. Nevertheless, I believe that there are sound and logical reasons for this Government to maintain the long-held position of UK Governments and refrain from making determinations about whether a genocide has or has not been committed.

It is a long-standing policy of the Government that any judgment on whether genocide has occurred is a matter for a competent court, after consideration of all the evidence available, rather than Governments or non-judicial bodies. This approach ensures that genocide determinations are above politics, above lobbying and above individual, political or national interests. It means that UK Government references to genocides are harder to dismiss by those responsible for genocidal acts. The Government believe that this remains the right approach, because it gives our words authority. This in no way detracts from our recognition of the appalling events of the holodomor.

[Drew Hendry]

Everybody in this Chamber is on the same side in wanting this to be explored properly and recognised. Is the Minister saying that the European Union and the 28 other countries that have recognised this as a genocide do not have the legitimacy that he is saying the UK Government do? That does not necessarily hold with most people’s understanding of this matter.

[Leo Docherty]

I am saying that, notwithstanding the other important political events that have happened in other Parliaments, it is very important for the long-term legal integrity of the UK Government’s position that we maintain our consistency of approach. That does not detract from the horror of the holodomor, as I have said, nor our recognition of the appalling brutality of Stalin’s policies and regime, and nor does it dilute our determination to remember the victims of the holodomor, as the Prime Minister did by lighting a candle at the memorial for them when he visited Kyiv in November. Other colleagues in this House have also done so, and have reflected upon that this afternoon. Of course, our officials in Ukraine, including our ambassador, regularly attend similar commemoration events.

Today, we stand firm in our support for Ukrainians amid growing evidence of appalling atrocities committed during Putin’s illegal war. As colleagues will know, we have supported our Ukrainian friends since 2014, and we continue to be at the forefront of international support for Ukraine, in both humanitarian and military support. We were the first country in the world to train Ukrainian troops; we were the first in Europe to provide lethal weapons and to commit tanks; and just this month, we were the first to provide long-range missiles. I am very pleased that we are now at the forefront of a coalition to train and equip the Ukrainian air force.

I will briefly turn to accountability, which is an important theme, given the debate we have had. We have been working alongside our Ukrainian friends and the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s office to help them investigate and prosecute alleged war crimes. We have been working alongside the EU and the US to establish the atrocity crimes advisory group, in order to co-ordinate international support for Ukraine’s war crimes investigations, and we welcome the step taken by the International Criminal Court to hold those at the top of the Russian regime to account, including Vladimir Putin. In March the UK co-hosted the Justice Ministers conference, alongside the Netherlands. That conference brought together global partners to enhance financial, practical and technical support to the ICC and its investigation into the situation in Ukraine. Very importantly, we are part of the core group of G7 nations that are exploring options to investigate and prosecute the crime of aggression committed in and against Ukraine, including a potential special tribunal. Accountability is at the heart of our support to our friends in Ukraine.

[Stephen Doughty]

I was pleased to be invited to a meeting with the Ukrainian Justice Minister and the UK Attorney General during that period, and I thank the Minister for that—he knows he has our full support on those prosecutions. Could he give us an idea of the timeline for that working group on the special tribunal? Obviously, this is an idea that has been in the ether for some time now.

[Leo Docherty]

That is a valid question, and the answer is “as soon as possible.” These things are not easy; if they were, we would have done them already. Work is underway apace, and my colleague the Attorney General visited Kyiv earlier this year in order to expedite some of that work. We will keep colleagues in this House updated.

To conclude, the holodomor and Putin’s war are two of the darkest chapters in Ukraine’s history. Our stance is that any determination on genocide must be made by the courts; that does not, of course, detract from our recognition of the holodomor as the most appalling disaster, one that resonates today in the shadows of Putin’s modern aggression. The UK is supporting Ukraine to fight back and to bring those responsible for appalling acts of brutality to justice.

[David Mundell]

I fully understand what my hon. Friend is setting out, but for those in the Ukrainian diaspora in the UK, given all the things he has mentioned that the UK is currently doing, how would the UK’s standing be diminished in any way by recognising the holodomor as a genocide?

[Leo Docherty]

I do not contend that it would be— I think our support is clear, including support to Ukraine’s judicial system and the ICC to investigate and prosecute alleged war crimes. Of course, we share Ukraine’s determination that Putin’s illegal invasion must fail and that justice must be done. As President Zelensky said earlier this month in The Hague, there can be no peace without justice. The desire for Ukraine to prevail, and for justice to prevail, remains something that unites us all across the House.

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd May 2023 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Gary Sambrook) has been appointed as a full representative of the United Kingdom delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe in place of my hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Marcus Fysh).

[HCWS793]

UK-EU Parliamentary Partnership Assembly: Membership

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd May 2023 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

My hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond) has been appointed as a full representative of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly in place of my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley South (Mike Wood).

My hon. Friend the Member for Northampton South (Andrew Lewer) has been appointed as a full representative of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Vicky Ford) has been appointed as a full representative of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly in place of my hon. Friend the Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie).

My hon. Friend the Member for Banff and Buchan (David Duguid) has been appointed as a full representative of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly in place of my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton South West (Stuart Anderson).

The Baroness Meyer CBE has been appointed as a full representative of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly in place of the Lord Godson.

The hon. Member for Stirling (Alyn Smith) has been appointed as a full representative of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly in place of the hon. Member for Central Ayrshire (Dr Whitford).

[HCWS794]

Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2023

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Monday 15th May 2023 General Committees

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

I beg to move,

That the Committee has considered the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2023 (S.I. 2023, No. 440).

I am pleased to be here in place of the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my right hon. Friend the Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Anne-Marie Trevelyan), who is travelling.

The regulations amend the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. The statutory instrument was laid on 20 April 2023 under powers provided by the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 and contains measures on which we have co-ordinated with our international partners to increase the pressure on Putin for waging an illegal and brutal war against Ukraine. The measures place further constraints on Putin’s war machine and Russia’s economy, thereby adding further force to the largest and most severe package of economic sanctions that Russia has ever faced.

The instrument delivers on the UK Government’s commitment to ban the export of all items that have been used by Russian forces on the battlefield to date. It builds on extensive bans in previous legislation by widening export prohibitions to include additional aircraft and vehicle parts, radio and other electronic equipment, biotechnology assets and 3D printing machinery. The second tranche of measures in the legislation prohibits the important of nearly 150 additional types of goods that generate export revenue for the Russian economy. The instrument captures products as diverse as cigars, wood, tools and machinery. The third tranche of new restrictions covers the import of iron and steel products, including metal from Russia that has been processed in third countries.

The additional sanctions underline the UK’s leadership role on Russian trade sanctions. They will inflict further economic damage and constrain Putin’s ability to equip and fund his illegal war. The measures were applied from 21 April 2023, with the exception of the prohibition on iron and steel products processes in third countries, which will enter into force on 30 September 2023—the same date as the EU’s equivalent ban.

Before I finish my opening remarks, let me take this opportunity to update the House on a separate sanctions measure that was announced in April 2022. After careful consideration, the Government have decided not to proceed with a cap on funds held by Russian nationals in UK bank accounts. Having considered that policy option, we have concluded that carefully targeted sanctions against high net worth supporters and beneficiaries of Putin’s regime is a more effective way to achieve our objective. The decision follows careful scrutiny of the policy by relevant officials across Government and in consultation with industry, and is in line with our objective of ensuring that our sanctions are targeted and effective.

As this latest package of sanctions demonstrates, we will continue to impose hard-hitting sanctions against the Russian state and its supporters. This package alone adds a further £280 million-worth of exports and around £145 million-worth of imports to our prohibited list. As with all our sanctions, the latest package has been developed in co-ordination with our international partners. We will continue to work with them to identify and address any gaps or loopholes that emerge in our sanctions regime.

[Barry Gardiner (Brent North) (Lab)]

The Minister talks about loopholes; will he confirm whether it is correct that the stated origin of petroleum is determined by where it is refined? Given that oil and gas products are sold on the international market, is he entirely confident that Russian oil and gas that is refined elsewhere is not finding its way into the UK and thereby avoiding the sanctions?

[Leo Docherty]

We are fully seized of the need for constant vigilance in that regard, because we would of course want to prevent any attempt by the Russian regime to circumnavigate sanctions.

[Barry Gardiner]

I am grateful to the Minister for that interim response, but it does not quite answer the question that I posed, which was about whether the declared origin of petroleum products is determined by where it is refined. We may believe, or it may be on the ticket, that petroleum has come from a perfectly legitimate source when it has not. It would be helpful if the Minister could outline the Government’s strategies to ensure that the sanctions that we are putting in place are effective.

[Leo Docherty]

I do not want to give an inaccurate answer on behalf of the Minister of State, so I will ask her to write to the hon. Gentleman, but I am totally seized of the importance of that question.

To conclude, these latest measures demonstrate our determination to target those who participate in or facilitate Putin’s illegal war of choice. Sanctions continue to work. Russia is increasingly isolated and cut off from western markets, services and supply chains. Key sectors of the Russian economy have fallen off a cliff and its economic outlook is very bleak indeed. The UK Government will use sanctions to ratchet up the military and economic pressure on Russia until Putin ends his brutal invasion of Ukraine. We welcome the clear and continued cross-party support for this course of action. I therefore commend the regulations to the Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Chair]

Order. I blame the Minister for opening up on that subject, but that is not within the scope of our debate. It is perfectly legitimate to respond to the Minister, but I would be grateful if we could move on shortly.

[Leo Docherty]

I apologise.

[Catherine West]

Just to clarify, are we deciding on that tonight, Sir Gary?

[The Chair]

No vote is to be taken this evening on the point that the Minister made.

[Leo Docherty]

It was just a tangential issue that we thought it was helpful to clarify.

[The Chair]

And he is very apologetic for having raised it.

[Leo Docherty]

Yes, because it was not in scope.

[Catherine West]

Thank you so much, Sir Gary, for that clarification. That was my initial impression: the officials were so kind as to provide a briefing to the Opposition and it was my understanding that that matter was coming forward at a later date. Therefore, we can leave the debate and the vote on that matter of principle—

[Leo Docherty]

indicated assent.

[Catherine West]

I see the Minister nodding, which is positive, because I am sure that Members would not like to have that jumped on to them at the last minute.

To revert to the original reason for our being here this evening, I am pleased to see measures being debated about the sustained export of commodities to Russia. No sanctions regime worth its salt could countenance that, so my first question for the Minister is: why has it taken so long for this measure to be brought before the Committee? The exportation of aircraft parts, radio equipment and biotechnology, among other key items, goes against the spirit of our regime and could have been a contributing factor in sustaining Russian offensives and in their destructive impact on Ukraine. I understand that such measures take time to fine-tune and are a constant work in progress, but we are well over a year into this harrowing conflict and we were, until April, still exporting biotechnological materials and vehicle parts to the Russian Federation. My second question, therefore, is this. What is the total value of the equipment that is now covered by the new measures and has been exported to Russia since February 2022, and were the Government monitoring the rate of those exports prior to 21 April 2023, when those measures came into effect?

Labour is committed to supporting the Government in expanding the UK’s sanctions regime, but time and again we come to Committees such as this to debate measures that, frankly, should have come into effect much sooner than a year and two months into this egregious conflict. I have a great appreciation for the work of the sanctions taskforce in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and for the staff of the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation, but has further consideration been given by the Government and Ministers to questions about staffing levels and resourcing to ensure that critical measures such as these are brought in sooner rather than later, to ensure that the Russian war machine is sapped of resources more rapidly and more totally?

It is welcome that the Government will expand the sanctions regime in respect of the acquisition, supply and delivery of these goods and related financial, technical and brokering services, and Labour will of course support them. It is also welcome to see an expansion of existing prohibitions on importing iron and steel products. Concerns have been raised time and again that sanctions in this area are too weak and open to evasion. That is why I am profoundly concerned that this specific expansion will not come into force until the end of September. A similar statutory instrument, which I was delighted to cover for the shadow Minister for Europe, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), gave a bit too much notice to others that a sanction was coming in. Can the Minister account for why there seems to be an enduring series of delays with regulations such as these and across our regime? Oligarchs and those across Russia’s political class are not sitting idly by, waiting for their vast wealth to evaporate; they are seeking out ways to capitalise on the delays. I fear that the pace at which the Government are moving is only maximising what those people can retain in the long term.

I would now like to discuss oil and hydrocarbons. My hon. Friend the Member for Brent North made a very important point about how oil and hydrocarbons can be processed in third countries and then exported, even though they originated in the Russian Federation. Will the Minister clarify this? Does he think that we have a tight enough sanction to ensure that no profit returns to the federation to feed the war machine?

On 3 February, a general licence was issued by OFSI that

“permits the supply or delivery by ship of Russian crude oil and oil products, as well as provision of associated services, so long as the price paid for Russian oil or oil products is at or below the price cap”

of “$60 per barrel”. Under this licence, a person may also

“supply or deliver Russian oil by ship from a place in Russia to a third country or from one third country to another third country provided that the Unit Price of the Russian oil concerned is at or below the Price Cap.”

OFSI also states:

“A service provider may provide relevant services to any person provided that the unit price of the Russian oil being supplied or delivered by ship from a place in Russia to a third country or from one third country to another third country is at or below the Price Cap.”

Will the Minister outline the motivation behind that general licence, given that we should be aspiring to end the proliferation of Russian oil across the world rather than encouraging it?

Secondly, how is the Minister ensuring that OFSI rigorously and assiduously enforces the price cap, and how many infringements have been collected? What monitoring is happening of the UK’s role in the international oil market? Today, it seems there could be further cause for concern. The Minister might correct me, as the notice for this SI has been quite short, but the amendment to chapter 4I states that regulation 46Z6 will be omitted. That of course concerns the prohibition on the supply and delivery of Russian oil products. Will the Minister please clarify the purpose of that omission? At first glance, it appears that it would remove the prohibition on the supply and delivery of Russian oil, but I am sure that that is a drafting error. Perhaps the Minister could provide an assurance that the change has a purely technical or drafting purpose. I reached out to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office for clarification on that point in advance of the Committee, and I am not sure whether this is up to date.

As I am sure we can all agree, oil is the bloodstream of Putin’s war machine. As long as the UK continues to make inexplicable exemptions and grant implausible licences, it will continue to flow freely. We know that countries in Russia’s geopolitical neighbourhood are purchasing tens of billions in oil products, and it seems entirely confounding and unacceptable that a drop of that oil should reach the UK, but that is what is happening because often it slips through various other sanctions arrangements. I look forward to the Minister providing much needed clarity and I urge colleagues across the FCDO to consider that the integrity of our sanctions regime really is on the line.

I would like to raise an issue that I know my hon. Friend the shadow Europe Minister has relayed to the Minister on several occasions, which is the question of cryptocurrencies. My hon. Friend brought to the attention of the Minister two entities that the US Treasury sanctioned in August last year—TornadoCash and Blender. Those cryptocurrency mixers have been used to launder billions and obfuscate the proceeds from illicit cyber activity by scrambling the origin of transactions.

--- Later in debate ---

[Leo Docherty]

At the outset, I confirm that I will happily write to the hon. Members for Brent North and for Edinburgh East with regard to the specific question on steel contracts, to clarify that 100%. I thank all colleagues for their support of the statutory instrument. The Government are grateful for the cross-party support for our approach to this issue. We continue to lead on sanctions. The hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green referred to Zelensky’s presence at Chequers today, which was another good sign of our close and tremendous support for Ukrainians in their hour of need, and I confirm that we will continue to lead on sanctions.

The regulations before us indicate not that we are slow in prohibiting certain things, but that sanctions evolve. Often it is in response to the operational landscape that certain parts and technologies that were hitherto not considered operationally or militarily important become apparent. When they do, we evolve our sanctions regime. That is why there is an iterative approach to our sanctions.

The hon. Lady asked a good question about enforcement. Of course, as part of our continued commitment to evolving and enforcing our sanctions, we are pleased to have announced a new economic deterrence initiative as part of our integrated review refresh. That consists of up to £50 million over two years to improve our sanctions implementation and enforcement. A lot of that funding is going into personnel to ensure that we get it right. I think that offers reassurance.

The hon. Lady asked a good question about hydro-carbons circumvention. I would be very pleased to ask the Minister of State to write to her to outline our approach to the oil cap and the issue of circumvention —and, of course, also on the role of OFSI.

We should be confident that we are in the lead and that our sanctions are biting. We have sanctioned more than 1,500 individuals and entities, which puts us right at the front of the pack in comparison with the EU and the US. Our sanctions have had a massive financial impact on the Russian economy. For example, the global assets of Russian banks that we have frozen amount to £960 billion, so the impact is very significant.

I am grateful for the support of colleagues today. The regulations are the latest addition to our package of sanctions, and we are committed to keeping up the pressure for as long as it takes. As the Prime Minister laid out when he met President Zelensky this morning, we stand firm and resolute alongside the people of Ukraine until they prevail. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd May 2023 Commons Chamber

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

1. What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on association to the EU’s Horizon Europe programme.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

We are in discussions with the EU on the UK’s involvement in EU research programmes. We are doing this in good faith, and we hope that the discussions will be successful. We are determined to secure a fair deal for researchers, businesses and taxpayers.

[Martyn Day]

Owen Jackson, the director of policy at Cancer Research UK, has said that Pioneer, the Government’s proposed replacement for the EU’s science programme, does not “match up” to association to Horizon Europe. He has warned that if we do not rejoin, we

“will be at the margins, rather than at the centre, of these important opportunities”

to win funding. Now that the Windsor framework is in place, will the Minister update the House on recent meetings between the UK Government and the European Commissioner responsible for Horizon Europe?

[Leo Docherty]

We have always been at the centre of scientific innovation. I will not give the House a running commentary on the negotiations, but we do have optimism. We are confident that we will be able to secure that fair deal for researchers, businesses and taxpayers, with the kind of important research that the hon. Gentleman has mentioned.

[James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con)]

Britain’s outstanding contribution to Arctic and, indeed, Antarctic science has been greatly aided over the years by Horizon Europe. Can the Minister reassure me that our huge contribution to the High North will be replicated, and soon, and can he tell me when the negotiations will finally end?

[Leo Docherty]

I can assure my hon. Friend that the High North will be at the centre of all our scientific work, and I acknowledge and praise his important role in that region.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

Thousands of jobs in some of our key technological and scientific research institutions throughout the UK are now at risk. We are leaching talent and competitive advantage, and the Government have been dragging their heels. The Minister says that negotiations are ongoing. How long will those key institutions have to wait for an answer—days, months, or yet more years?

[Leo Docherty]

As I have said, I am not going to give a running commentary, but we are negotiating in good faith, we have optimism, and we are determined to secure a fair deal that recognises the researchers whom the hon. Gentleman has described. We are expectant that the negotiation will conclude in good order.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Scottish National party spokesperson.

[Alyn Smith (Stirling) (SNP)]

I am puzzled by the UK Government’s approach. There is cross-party unity in the House, and the Minister is missing an opportunity for a great deal of support. We all want to see our universities back in Horizon Europe, and we all want to see the thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions of pounds guaranteed. Just a couple of weeks ago, Professor Iain Gillespie of the University of Dundee was in Brussels drawing attention to the £900 million that Scotland’s universities secured from the last funding programme. There is a willingness in Brussels, and there is a willingness in Scotland; when will the UK Government match that ambition?

[Leo Docherty]

We are willing, and we are negotiating in good faith. Scotland’s scientific future will, of course, be a part of that, which is another reminder of why Scotland is better, and will flourish, within the Union.

[Alex Davies-Jones (Pontypridd) (Lab)]

2. What assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of recent violence in Israel and Palestine.

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Thomson (Gordon) (SNP)]

5. Whether he has had recent discussions with Cabinet colleagues on association to the EU’s Erasmus and Erasmus Plus programmes.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

We fully recognise the benefits of international educational opportunities, but we have decided that it is not in the UK’s interest to seek continuing participation in the Erasmus or Erasmus Plus programmes. Of course, we have our own scheme, the Turing scheme, which supports global access to education and had more than 41,000 participants in the last academic year.

[Richard Thomson]

There is a real willingness across the House and the European Union for the UK once again to participate in Erasmus and Erasmus Plus, so that answer is incredibly disappointing. If the Minister genuinely believes that we are better together, surely our academic and scientific communities would be even better together if we were back exactly where we belong: at the heart of those hugely beneficial European programmes.

[Leo Docherty]

Many students are, of course, still going to receive an education in Europe. The Erasmus programme was financially unbalanced on our side, and the advantage of the Turing scheme is that these opportunities are now global.

[Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury and Atcham) (Con)]

6. What recent discussions he has had with his counterpart in Mauritius on the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands.

--- Later in debate ---

[Giles Watling (Clacton) (Con)]

12. What recent assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the ongoing Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

The UK values our relationships with both Armenia and Azerbaijan, and we work together on shared interests to advance regional stability, security and prosperity. There is no military solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. We continue to urge the parties to engage in substantive negotiations to secure a sustainable and peaceful settlement.

[Giles Watling]

I recently attended the wreath-laying ceremony at the Cenotaph commemorating the Armenian genocide 108 years ago. I was with His Excellency Varuzhan Nersesyan, the Armenian ambassador. With that in mind, can my hon. Friend tell me why the United Kingdom has not yet formally recognised the genocide, as many other countries have done?

[Leo Docherty]

Of course, it is a very sensitive subject, but the policy of the UK Government is that recognition of genocide is a matter for judicial decision rather than for Governments or non-judicial bodies. When an international legal body makes a judgment that the crime constitutes a genocide, that is a deciding factor in whether we use that term.

[Carol Monaghan (Glasgow North West) (SNP)]

In Nagorno-Karabakh, the humanitarian situation is deteriorating rapidly. More than a dozen non-governmental organisations, including Genocide Watch, have stated that the conditions are ripe for ethnic cleansing. That is a very concerning situation for the 120,000 Armenians who live there. What further pressure can the Government bring to bear to end the blockade of the Lachin corridor?

[Leo Docherty]

We take this extremely seriously. We have urged all parties to return to the negotiating table and to reopen the Lachin corridor. I have spoken directly to the Foreign Ministers of both nations about this. Of course, we are very pleased that we have provided £1 million of humanitarian assistance to the International Committee of the Red Cross following the 2020 conflict.

[Anne McLaughlin (Glasgow North East) (SNP)]

13. What steps his Department is taking in response to the emergency situation in Sudan.

--- Later in debate ---

[Paul Holmes (Eastleigh) (Con)]

Can the Minister outline to what extent he thinks that Finland’s recent accession to NATO further unites Europe in the face of Russian aggression, and what lessons can be drawn from the process to facilitate the quick accession of other nations?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

Of course, our Finnish friends have a heroic legacy and heritage of military courage, and all our diplomatic efforts are now focused on the accession of our friends in Sweden.

[Kim Leadbeater (Batley and Spen) (Lab)]

T6. It is almost a year since the killing of the Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in the Jenin refugee camp. Will the Foreign Secretary join me in supporting her brother Anton’s call for a thorough independent investigation into her death, and agree with me that that is now long overdue?

--- Later in debate ---

[Leo Docherty]

I raised this issue with the Azerbaijanis themselves in Baku in February. It is a very important subject and we continue to advocate for all sides to come back to the negotiating table. I will be looking at circumstances first hand in Armenia very soon.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

Further to the excellent question from my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich East (Nicola Richards), Vahid Beheshti has now been on hunger strike for 69 days. He has had a meeting with the Foreign Office Minister for the area responsible, but he has not had a meeting with the Foreign Secretary, so may I urge my right hon. Friend—Vahid Beheshti is just across the road from the Foreign Office—to have a meeting with him on his route back to the Foreign Office? He will tell my right hon. Friend about the malign activities carried out by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in this country and about the threat to UK citizens.

--- Later in debate ---

[David Duguid (Banff and Buchan) (Con)]

With reference to Nagorno-Karabakh, what steps has the Department taken to support the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan within its internationally recognised borders?

[Leo Docherty]

We continue to urge both sides to return to the negotiating table, and we recognise—I have told them this directly—how important both countries are as geostrategic allies.

Georgia

Leo Docherty Excerpts

Thursday 27th April 2023 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Leo Docherty)]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Adam Holloway) for securing the debate. I note his first-hand experience in Georgia and I am grateful for his characteristically eloquent speech, based on that first-hand knowledge. I am sure all colleagues would agree.

The United Kingdom and Georgia have a strong and enduring relationship, which was illustrated very ably by my hon. Friend. Diplomatic relations between our countries are the strongest they have been since they resumed some 30 years ago, as was demonstrated when the Foreign Secretary visited that country in March. As he highlighted during his meeting with Prime Minister Gharibashvili, the UK remains a steadfast supporter of Georgia’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and Euro-Atlantic aspirations.

Prior to that, in January this year, the Foreign Secretary and I were very pleased to host Georgian Foreign Minister Darchiashvili for the Wardrop strategic dialogue. At that dialogue, we agreed to increase co-operation, including to counter Putin’s aggression in Ukraine, and support Georgia’s aspirations for much closer ties with NATO. That was in the very changed context of last year, because Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has confirmed Georgia’s view that it will never be safe until it joins the EU and NATO.

For decades, Russia has tried to exert control over Georgia and the region, fuelling conflict and division. Following the 2008 war, which resulted in Russia’s recognition of the Georgian breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Russian pressure on Georgia has been relentless. Today, roughly 20% of Georgia’s territory is under Russian control, with Russian troops in South Ossetia just 30 minutes from Tbilisi.

Russia is applying economic and political pressure to try to break the will of the people of Georgia, including through restrictions on travel and trade. We should not forget that together with the UK, Georgia has sent more than 5,000 tonnes of vital humanitarian aid and 25 high-powered generators to Ukraine, while supporting Ukrainian refugees in Georgia, and has implemented international sanctions against Russia. That unity sends a strong signal to Putin. We will continue to deepen our partnership with Georgia to increase the pressure on Russia to end its outrageous and illegal war in Ukraine.

Let me briefly make a remark about the breakaway regions. We will continue to use our influential role within the Council of Europe, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the United Nations to call on Russia to withdraw its troops from Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Like the overwhelming majority of the international community, the UK does not recognise the so-called independence of those breakaway regions. We consistently call upon the Russian Federation to fulfil its clear obligations under the EU-mediated ceasefire agreement of 2008. It must withdraw its forces to pre-conflict positions and meet its other commitments to dialogue under the ceasefire agreement.

Turning to the Euro-Atlantic aspirations of Georgia, despite Russia’s constant threat and interference, the people of Georgia have bravely chosen the path towards Euro-Atlantic integration, as my hon. Friend alluded to. Such membership is a sovereign choice for Georgia and the member states of those organisations, and no third country, including Russia should have a veto.

We believe that further integration with the EU and NATO for Georgia will deliver greater prosperity and security. The UK will continue to support Georgia in its implementation of the EU association agreement and its NATO commitments. We continue to lead calls in NATO to step up practical and political support to Georgia as a matter of urgency.

We have heard concerns during this debate that actions of the current Government of Georgia appear to align with Russian interests, and my hon. Friend was eloquent in laying those out. We fully recognise, however, the Georgian Government’s steadfast commitment to NATO and the EU, which was reinforced during the Foreign Secretary’s visit in meetings with the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister.

As a long-standing friend, we have stressed the importance of matching words to actions. At this crucial moment, we must recognise that Georgia has consistently supported Ukraine multilaterally, has sent humanitarian supplies, including generators, and has supported Ukrainian refugees in Georgia. We continue to work with Georgia to build resilience against Russian aggression, including through the tailored support package announced at the 2022 NATO summit in Madrid, in line with the will of the Georgian people.

We have also heard concerns about polarisation in Georgian politics, which would threaten its progress on democratic reforms and risks undermining its Euro-Atlantic aspirations. We share some of those concerns, and we have made that clear to our Georgian allies. We continue to encourage the Georgian Government to accelerate genuine, far-reaching reforms, which will anchor Georgia’s democracy against those who would seek to undermine it, and assist it to build its institutions. That includes meaningful parliamentary scrutiny of the Executive, an independent judiciary, free media and a system of fully functioning checks and balances.

As the Foreign Secretary outlined to the Georgian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister during his visit in March, recent actions in these areas have been detrimental to progress, and threaten to tarnish Georgia’s hard-won international reputation. As mentioned, the proposed introduction of a Russian-style foreign agents law was a counterproductive step, particularly as it comes on the back of a marked increase in aggressive rhetoric against Georgian civil society organisations supporting media freedoms, human rights and democracy, which my hon. Friend referred to. We were very pleased to see that draft law withdrawn.

The ongoing incarceration of media owner Nika Gvaramia is another counterproductive step, coming on the back of Georgia’s marked decline in the world press freedom rankings. We also continue to raise the detention of former President Saakashvili, including the need for due process and proper treatment in line with international norms, with the Government of Georgia. We will continue to monitor developments closely in that case and keep it under review. We are determined to work in partnership with Georgia to overcome those challenges and will continue to engage with the Georgian Government as a critical friend to support progress and the Georgian journey of reform.

I should briefly mention some of our projects. Through our embassy in Tbilisi, we are supporting Georgian reforms, as well as wider peace-building, administrative and judicial reform initiatives, through the conflict, stability and security fund and the good governance fund. A total of £4.5 million was allocated to that work in the last financial year. On top of that, last year we announced more than £5 million in additional funding to help Georgia to identify and repel threats to its cyber- security, something that is only becoming more relevant and important.

Let me conclude by reaffirming the UK’s unwavering support for Georgia. With our international partners, we will continue to work to boost its security, strengthen its democratic institutions and increase its prosperity. That includes engaging through the United Nations, the OSCE and the Council of Europe, while working to support domestic reforms in Georgia.

Together with Georgia we will continue to resist Russian aggression and support Ukraine, including through defence and security co-operation and sanctions enforcement, and we will work together in the spirit of collaboration that has defined our relationship for the last 30 years.

Question put and agreed to.