Summit on Illicit Finance

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Tuesday 9th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)]

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We are on the horns of a dilemma, because we expect a vote fairly imminently, but there is another wind-up speech to follow, so we will get started. There are likely to be three votes on the Floor of the House, then a pause before a fourth vote on Third Reading, and then possibly—sheer joy!—something after that, but let us get cracking and see how we go.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the Illicit Finance Summit 2026.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I am delighted to have secured this debate on the illicit finance summit 2026, although it might be more accurate to say that we are debating the illicit finance summit that is just about in 2026, or the illicit finance summit that will probably be in 2026 if we are not too busy. I am glad that this debate is an excellent opportunity to remind the Government that they are supposed to be hosting this summit and to break the radio silence of the past few months.

Hundreds of billions of pounds of illicit finance flow through the UK annually. This is a major drain on our economy and a driver of criminality across society. Illicit finance touches every one of us and, on a daily basis, makes our lives that little bit worse. For those who are fed up with a dying high street in their town, with an endless stream of neon-clad vape shops, illicit finance is making it worse. For those who are furious about dodgy donors ploughing money into political parties, illicit finance is making it worse. For those who are tired of hearing politicians tell them that there is no money to keep our basic services functioning, illicit finance is making it worse.

The phrase “illicit finance” might not come up much on the doorstep, but “fairness” does. When it comes to people and organisations paying taxes, it does not get much more unfair than a system that makes it trivially easy for wealth to be hidden offshore but, bafflingly, still within His Majesty’s jurisdiction. It is not just tax that we are missing; illicit finance is funding criminality around the world. That is why I find it particularly difficult that this Government have put the summit six months into the future and that they sneaked out the news on a quiet Friday after the House has risen. My first ask of the Minister today is that he commit to greater engagement and candour with Members relating to the summit from now on.

All that aside, we must now look ahead to the summit. If the Government are to delay it, they had better make sure that it is effective and delivers real change. So far, we have heard very little from them on specific aims and priorities. The Minister told the House that he was personally committed to tackling illicit finance, and I hope that in today’s debate he will get some welcome support in finding some areas to report on.

I am pleased to remind the Minister that this debate is attended by MPs across the parties with serious expertise and experience in this area. The Government can see that this is a truly cross-party effort. We are not here to score points or win votes; we are here in the belief that we can make Britain better and free it from the scourge of illicit finance once and for all. I might briefly note that I am looking carefully and there is one particular party that is not represented here, and its Members’ attendance may or may not have indicated their interest in getting dodgy money out of our country and our politics, but I will do my part in helping the Government with a few ideas as to what could constitute a successful summit—[Interruption.]

[Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)]

Order. There is a Division on the Floor of the House. The sitting is suspended until 15 minutes after the start of what is likely to be the third Division in that group. Please do come back, because we think that there will be a pause between those Divisions and the vote on Third Reading.

--- Later in debate ---

On resuming—

[Steff Aquarone]

A quick recap: a gentle jibe at the Minister, a sharp poke at Reform and a commitment to doing my bit in helping the Government with a few ideas that might constitute a successful summit.

First, when many think of property in this country, they might think of the words of my predecessor as a Norfolk MP, Sir Edward Coke, about how an Englishman’s home is his castle. I am not sure whether Sir Edward foresaw so many being owned by a complex and secretive array of companies and trusts, lacking clarity about their ultimate beneficial owners.

Properties under secretive ownership are not only multimillion-pound mansions in Kensington; in fact, if many of us looked closer to home, we would be shocked by what we found. The Tax Policy Associates’ “Who secretly owns Britain?” map says that an unassuming cottage near the centre of the village of Cley next the Sea in my constituency is ultimately owned by a faceless company called Claystone Investments Ltd, registered in Switzerland. A Companies House search finds a similarly named company registered in the British Virgin Islands, which in turn gives its beneficial owner as a company registered in Panama. A search of the Panamanian company register gives no indication of who actually owns that cottage. That level of complexity and layers of ownership for a cottage in a quiet Norfolk village simply cannot be right.

This summit is a chance to call this out for being as ridiculous as it seems. The Government need to work with international partners to bring an end to anonymous property ownership. If an Englishman’s home truly is his castle, it cannot be a castle registered through multiple trusts, bouncing the legal rights halfway around the world and back again. If someone owns a property, they need to declare who they are and face the music, not hide behind shell companies and legalese.

It is also important that we get our own house in order on this. We have laws around beneficial ownership and property transparency, brought in under the last Government, with the help and hard work of my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran) and others. However, “Who secretly owns Britain?” indicates that rule-breaking is rife, and little seems to be being done to crack down on those flouting their obligations. I hope the Minister can assure us today that he is looking into the wealth of publicly available evidence of companies not doing what they are required to do, and will take action.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Member for this debate. He is absolutely right that we must aggressively pursue and prosecute the wealth managers, the lawyers and the accountants who mask dirty money through loopholes. Does he agree that, when it comes to corporate transparency, we must go as far as the Crown dependencies and the overseas territories, that we need to take an aggressive stance, and that the Minister and this Government need to follow that?

[Steff Aquarone]

I wholeheartedly agree. In fact, a past Government wrote to all those revealed by the Panama papers to ask them about their financial affairs. Might the Minister perhaps commit to doing the same for those shown not to be fully complying with beneficial ownership registration?

Speaking of getting our own house in order, naturally, I must turn to the overseas territories. When looking into opaque property ownership in my own area, I was sadly unsurprised to see that the British Virgin Islands were partly culpable for obscuring true beneficiaries. It is all well and good running a big international summit and talking a big game on transparency and fair taxation, but when we are allowing hundreds of billions in illicit finance to keep rolling through countries that fly our flag, rely on our defence and are citizens of our King, it looks as though we are not taking this issue seriously.

The overseas territories and Crown dependencies are part of our British family, but part of being a family is calling them out when they are doing wrong. So many are taking positive steps towards financial transparency, and their work will allow us to fight corruption and illicit finance more effectively, but there remain bad actors who are letting the side down. Their progress has been achingly slow, with deadlines missed, promises broken and beneficial ownership registers half delivered. The Government’s own anti-corruption champion recently said:

“I think we’re coming to the end of the road trying to do this through agreement”.

Such registers need to be free and publicly accessible. Restricting registers, or those behind payrolls with claims of legitimate interest, prevents journalists or non-governmental organisations—or even the interested public—from seeing who is truly behind these companies. We know that, in corruption and tax abuse, sunlight is the best disinfectant. For those malign actors who want to use existing secrecy to hide their ill-gotten gains, we have to smash that ability by ensuring that this information is freely available, just as is expected of anyone setting up or holding significant control in a company in this country.

I hope that the Minister can build on what Baroness Hodge has said and give a clear signal to us of the next steps that he is expecting to take if he has also, finally, run out of patience with these regimes. I can tell him and the House that most people ran out of patience long ago—hard-working, honest people who pay their way in what feels like an ever increasing tax burden. All the while, criminals, billionaires and dictators are seeing their dirty money flowing and growing, letting them live a life of luxury while we cobble together any penny that the Treasury can find to keep our public services afloat.

For those of us who are supporting the brave Ukrainians in their fight against Putin and his illegal war, we should be sickened that hundreds of private yacht transactions went on in overseas territories since the war began. Putin’s cronies, awash with blood money, are sunning themselves while Ukrainian people fight for their very future as a nation. While the Iranian regime represses protests and attacks our allies in the Gulf, the new Ayatollah has a multimillion pound mansion by Kensington Palace Gardens, just a short tube ride from here, which is one of the many ways he can launder wealth plundered from the people of Iran.

Illicit finance is a poison and cancer spreading through our country, infecting everything it touches. We have to get serious on this, and fast.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

For most people, illicit finance is most prevalent on our high streets, when they see illegal vape shops or barbershops that do not have any trade but seem to be doing quite well. Does my hon. Friend agree that illicit finance is not necessarily always in big mansions, and can often feel very close to home?

[Steff Aquarone]

I completely agree. This issue goes two ways: fighting crime overseas and tackling illegal activity in this country are both hindered by illicit finance.

The message from Government that those benefiting from their dirty money can have another six months of fun before we hold our summit is disappointing. I hope the Minister can take steps to correct that today by setting out an ambitious, far-reaching and impactful programme of work leading up to this summit, which will culminate in international agreement.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that we need the international summit to crack down on fraudsters and scammers abroad? I have a constituent with disabilities who lost £70,000 to a romance fraud, with no checks having been done by the bank. Does the summit not also need to look at that issue?

[Steff Aquarone]

While there are certainly corporate victims of international illicit finance, it also affects us as taxpayers and as individuals. I totally agree with my hon. Friend, and I thank him for raising that case.

Turning a blind eye and washing our hands of responsibility has gone on too long. Britain has been a world leader in so much, so let us step up to the plate and lead the world once again in tackling this scourge, cleaning up our financial system, making the crooks and corporations pay their fair share and delivering justice and a fairer system once and for all.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Steff Aquarone]

I thank the Minister for his responses, and all Members and hon. Members for their contributions. I will just reiterate what I said earlier: this is not a popular cause on the doorstep, but it is the right thing to do. I feel like I have become a recent member of a noble, long-standing cause, which I welcome, and for which I am grateful. I reiterate my offer to the Minister to support his initiatives. Lastly, I will just say, let us consider the brief, summarised conclusions of Margaret Hodge: it might be time to drop the carrot and start to use the stick.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the Illicit Finance Summit 2026.

Oral Answers to Questions

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Tuesday 21st April 2026 Commons Chamber

The Secretary of State was asked—

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

1. What steps she is taking to help ensure the illicit finance summit 2026 will tackle international economic crime.

[The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)]

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.

[Steff Aquarone]

The summit is an opportunity for global action on the dirty money that flows through our financial systems, but the Foreign Secretary might rightly be asked by our international partners why overseas territories, who fly our flag and have our King as their Head of State, are preventing transparency and accountability for billions of pounds of illicit finance. Britain should be a world leader in tackling dirty money, but we have to get our house in order. Can the Minister assure the House and our international partners that he will bring overseas territories into line, and can he outline which of his powers he will use to do so?

Oral Answers to Questions

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Seema Malhotra]

Reports from within China about the detention of Zion House Church leaders are a very worrying indication of further persecution of Christians in China. This Government continue to engage with China on the issue of human rights and freedom of belief. We will continue to champion freedom of religion and belief for all and uphold the right to that universal freedom through our positions at the UN and in the G7, as well as through our bilateral engagements.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

8. What steps she is taking to ensure greater financial transparency in the British overseas territories.

[The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)]

I welcome the progress that many overseas territories have made on financial transparency. St Helena, Montserrat and Gibraltar now have fully public registers of beneficial ownership, while the Cayman Islands and the Turks and Caicos Islands have implemented legitimate interest access registers. However, I have also been clear with those overseas territories where progress has not been quick or comprehensive enough, including the British Virgin Islands, and at the joint ministerial council in November, I pressed for further progress, and agreed to provide technical-level support for that work. We will reconvene later this month to assess the latest position, and we reserve the right to consider all options, if progress is not made. Of course, we prefer to work in constructive co-operation, recognising the wide range of constitutional arrangements, but there are crucial issues here for tackling illicit finance, and for our national security.

[Steff Aquarone]

Perhaps I can help with that assessment. Transparency International uncovered at least 160 cases since 2022 of luxury yachts being transferred into or out of Russia that were registered to companies in British overseas territories. While the brave Ukrainians are defending their country from a brutal invasion, Putin’s cronies are joyriding their multimillion-pound yachts, enabled by the likes of the BVI. Does this sicken the Foreign Secretary and the Minister as much as it sickens me, and can the Minister tell certain overseas territories that we are fed up with their excuses and their shielding of evil regimes and tax dodgers, and that they must deliver transparency now?

[Stephen Doughty]

I welcome the work of Transparency International and others in shedding light on these issues. Those are exactly the concerns that I have raised directly with overseas territories’ Governments and have expressed in this place, and we will work to ensure rapid progress on these issues.

Iran

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Tuesday 13th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

I urge China to support the UN sanctions process that was triggered by the snapback that the UK, France and Germany instigated in October. It is essential that China does so, because we have seen the pressure that is needed around the nuclear programme, which affects all our safety and is immensely important. It is not just China but countries around the world who should support that sanctions process.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

I am appalled by the actions of the murderous Iranian regime, but I am deeply concerned that the financial secrecy of our overseas territories is enabling sanctions dodging. Will the Foreign Secretary assure me that she is doing everything she can to secure greater transparency in the overseas territories, uphold effective international sanctions and end any complicity in the flow of blood money fuelling this regime?

[Yvette Cooper]

We have strongly pushed for greater transparency, including in the overseas territories. My hon. Friend the Minister covering the overseas territories continues to do that with all the overseas territories. The action that some of those territories have taken has been extremely important in implementing sanctions and has demonstrated what can be done and achieved. That is one reason why we are determined to see further progress around transparency more widely.

Parkinson’s Disease

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Monday 17th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for securing this debate and I thank the charities and organisations including Parkinson’s UK and the Royal College of Emergency Medicine for meeting me and sharing the insights into Parkinson’s that they have as patients and clinicians.

In the UK, 166,000 people have Parkinson’s. It is a progressive neurological disorder that can start with a tremor or muscle stiffness, sleep problems or a whole range of symptoms, and end in complications such as swallowing difficulties, falls and bone fractures. Like all degenerative conditions, it impacts not only the individual but their family. It is vital that our NHS has the neurologists and therapists to care for people with Parkinson’s, because they depend on them for world-leading care. Unfortunately, this is an area in which we could do better. The UK was ranked 44th out of 45 European countries for the number of neurologists per head of population. The UK has only one neurologist per 100,000 patients, compared with one for every 25,000 patients in France and Germany, and one in five patients here has no access to a Parkinson’s disease nurse.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

The real-world experience in North Norfolk is very much like that. It is a struggle to secure the care that people need. We have a shortage of specialist care and Parkinson’s nurses, and those are just some of the things that our rural health system struggles with. Does the hon. Member agree that those living with Parkinson’s in rural communities such as North Norfolk need support and care provided in a way that is equally accessible to them?

[Dr Johnson]

As I am a rural MP myself, the hon. Gentleman will not be surprised to hear that I agree with him.

The problem is with wider specialisms, too. According to the 2022 audit by Parkinson’s UK, just 40% of people with Parkinson’s had access to a speech and language therapist, 45% had access to an occupational therapist and 62% had access to a physiotherapist. I want to particularly highlight that to the Minister because there are no treatments that slow down the progression of Parkinson’s disease, but evidence published last year suggests that exercise might do, so physiotherapy—making sure that people are doing the right exercises to help them—is important. What plans does the Minister have to recruit, train and retain the NHS Parkinson’s health workforce? For the benefit of charities, hospitals and patients, will she shed any light on how her delayed long-term workforce plan, when it is published, might assist in that mission?

As was highlighted by my hon. Friend the Member for Chester South and Eddisbury (Aphra Brandreth), Parkinson’s disease patients can live for many years, often with huge positivity. I was inspired to read of Neil Russell, a 65-year-old gentleman who ran from London to Barcelona—almost 1,000 miles—to raise money for Parkinson’s disease research. One in three of those living with Parkinson’s is of working age. It is crucial that they can get support, because many work as doctors, nurses, chief executives, scientists, journalists and in other professions. I was inspired by a meeting that I was privileged to have with Dr Acheson last week. He is not only working as an A&E consultant, after being diagnosed with Parkinson’s almost 10 years ago, but is leading work on a time-critical medicines project.

We have already heard that medicines for Parkinson’s are time critical. If people with Parkinson’s do not get their medication within 30 minutes of the prescribed time, it can lead to them being unable to walk, talk or swallow. Research by Parkinson’s UK has found that 58% of people with Parkinson’s—a clear majority—do not get their medication on time every time when in hospital. That will not only cost hospitals £65.8 million in excess bed days and readmissions, but cost over 150 people their lives this year. That is inexcusable.

Just half of NHS trusts provide staff with training for time-critical medication, and one in four trusts in England does not have policies allowing people with Parkinson’s to take their own medication in hospital. That leaves patients capable but unable to take their medication, and they suffer detriment as a result. I was pleased that last week—following repeated questions to the Minister, both in the Chamber and outside—that the Minister for Health Innovation and Safety, the hon. Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed), met me, Dr Simin Nikou from the RCEM, and Dr Acheson to talk about self-administration of medicines. I am pleased that the Minister was able to commit that the chief pharmaceutical officer will work with those individuals to ensure that there is a protocol for self-administered medicines in A&E for those who are capable of taking them, and to ensure that the protocols for time-critical medicines are enhanced.

NHS England launched a three-year national quality improvement initiative on time-critical medications that is not yet complete. I worried that the Minister’s eagerness to merge NHS England and her own Department may cause such ongoing initiatives to be simply lost. I encourage the Minister to correct me if I am wrong but, from conversations with her ministerial colleague, I understand that NHS England’s three-year initiative on time-critical medicines will be completed.

Research is important because, at the moment, treatment for Parkinson’s is symptom-relief treatment, not disease-modifying treatment. In fact, some of it is not symptom-relief; it is treatment to relieve side effects of the treatments that are providing symptom relief. Ramping up research is an important step towards finding better treatment, and hopefully chasing down a cure for Parkinson’s.

Between 2019 and 2024, the last Conservative Government invested almost £80 million into research for Parkinson’s disease, on top of a £375 million investment over five years for research into neurodegenerative diseases. Will the Minister confirm whether that funding commitment will be renewed as part of her Government’s spending review? What assessment has the Minister made of companies pulling out of billions of pounds of life sciences investment in the UK? How does she think that will impact critical research into conditions such as Parkinson’s? Is she working with her colleagues in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to resolve matters for the health sector?

Within the treatments that we have so far, Produodopa was approved in February 2024, and made available on the NHS, under the last Conservative Government, to around 900 people with Parkinson’s. As people with Parkinson’s often struggle with taking numerous tablets to manage fluctuating symptoms, delivering a continuous dose of medication 24 hours a day by a canula under the skin can be ideal to manage symptoms day and night. What assessment has the Minister made of the benefits of Produodopa so far? What steps is she taking to make sure that more people with Parkinson’s have access to that potentially life-changing treatment? More broadly, what is she doing to mitigate the supply issues for some Parkinson’s medications?

Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Wednesday 5th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) on the way he has framed this discussion, because we are debating the impact of these tax arrangements in the overseas territories on UK communities. Every penny being shielded from paying the fair share in these places is a penny that is not getting into our NHS and is not going to support local schools or improve public transport.

Hard-working people in North Norfolk pay their taxes fairly, but thanks to the shady systems of places like the BVI or the Cayman Islands, the multimillionaires and multibillionaires can squirrel their money away and pay very little tax at all. With their shell corporations and subsidiaries, trusts and transfer pricing, the fat cats can get away without paying their fair share. It is a tax system that is “pay to play”, and the billionaires are playing all of us.

The BVI, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda all have something in common: up there, in the top left-hand corner of their flags, is the Union Jack. Many look at this as a legacy of centuries past, but it must actually represent the existing British responsibility for—dare I say, complicity in—tens of billions of pounds of corporate tax avoidance and abuse. We still hold power over many of these places, and we can take steps to force their hand if necessary. Orders in Council have been drafted previously, which can require our overseas territories to take this action. Governments have been understandably reluctant to take this step, not wanting to appear as the colonial hand reaching across the ocean to meddle in the affairs of its territories. But if we are to provide defence and security for them, stand up for their interests internationally and support them in their hours of need, it is not too much to ask that the Governments of those territories play fair.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

The Panama papers, released in 2016, were so-called because the company whose papers were exposed, Mossack Fonseca, was headquartered in Panama. Is my hon. Friend aware that one out of every two companies listed in the Panama papers was incorporated in the British Virgin Islands?

[Steff Aquarone]

Yes, I am frighteningly aware, because I have tried to access these registers myself, and I have relied upon reports by other organisations to tell me what is really going on. When a country’s wealth in savings is a multi-hundred-times multiple of its GDP, that brings all this into sharp focus.

But to get back to my focus, when people in North Norfolk see their health services closing down, their children’s schools unable to buy glue sticks and the cuts to public services, and then they look at the billionaires and their yachts, mansions, football clubs and private jets, they smell a rat—they know something is not working here. Something has to change. That change is real, and it is possible, if the Government have the will and the guts to stand up for it. I hope the Minister and his Government can finally be the ones to end this scandal, secure money for our public services and stop these tax havens once and for all.

--- Later in debate ---

[Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) for securing this debate. I also thank the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) for all his work on this issue and for his good speech today. Indeed, I have enjoyed the contributions from all hon. Members so far. The common theme has been explaining that what goes on in the overseas territories impoverishes people in the UK and takes money out of their pockets, which we all want to see stopped.

The Government have an opportunity to improve financial transparency by working with the overseas territories so that they adopt the same standards as the UK. The deliberate masking of corporate ownership is used to dodge tax, accountability and responsibility. It inhibits law enforcement and prevents citizens, workers and journalists from holding the powerful to account for their corporate actions.

If Labour wants bad actors to be brought to heel and to stand up for people in our country and globally, this is its chance; it has the power to act. The world’s top three corporate tax havens—the British Virgin Islands, which have been much discussed, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda—are all British overseas territories. Tax Justice Network estimates that, in total, profit-shifting through the UK and its Crown dependencies and overseas territories accounts for nearly a quarter of all lost tax revenues globally—over £80 billion annually. The continued lack of transparency in the overseas tax havens, or overseas territories, including the absence of truly publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership, poses a real threat to the UK’s reputation and standing in the world.

[Steff Aquarone]

Does my hon. Friend agree that the documentation often exists to prove ultimate beneficial ownership, where it suits the individuals concerned? In some cases, we have a perverse situation where respectable UK financial institutions obtain that information in confidence when carrying out their required “know your customer” due diligence, without any obligation to pass on the details to UK tax authorities.

[Charlie Maynard]

I did not know that, so I thank my hon. Friend for informing me.

How can we ask others to get their own house in order when we enable these entities on UK sovereign territory to beggar their neighbour on a global scale? The UK Government bear responsibility for this lack of transparency, as British overseas territories are subject to UK law in certain respects. The Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, or SAMLA, requires the UK to support these territories in implementing public registers of company ownership, which are a crucial tool for combating tax evasion and financial crime. More specifically, section 51 of SAMLA allows the UK Government to make regulations requiring overseas territories to establish publicly accessible registers of the beneficial ownership of companies, and if they do not do so voluntarily, we have the power to enforce them to do so.

Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Wednesday 4th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I will return to this House when I have further announcements.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

Parishioners in the Matlaske benefice have raised over £3,000 to support the people of Gaza. They were visited last year by a priest from Bethlehem, who shared how this conflict is impacting people there. They hope for the return of the hostages, and for peace for the Palestinian people. I will not ask the Minister to repeat his answer to the question, “when?”, but will he confirm to them that the tools that he is considering using as a next step include sanctions against extremist Government Ministers, and formal recognition of a Palestinian state?

[Mr Falconer]

I pay tribute to the work of the hon. Member’s constituents. So many of our constituents, including mine in Lincoln, are doing so much to keep these issues in people’s minds, and to raise funds. I will not be drawn on what further steps may be taken. We were clear in the leaders’ statement that they could include targeted sanctions, so he can assure his constituents that that remains under review.

London Sudan Conference

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Thursday 24th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I have heard the House’s interest in the fine detail of which elements of our aid programme are working with survivors, and I commit to providing that further information in due course.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

I am deeply concerned by the ongoing conflict in Sudan and in particular the sexual violence that was brought to light so shockingly by the hon. Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald). When the Minister next engages with his counterparts in South Sudan, will he raise the case of Dr Ding Col Dau Ding? He travelled from Norfolk to South Sudan to practise medicine shortly after independence and saved many lives across east Africa in his time there. Just a year later, he was shockingly murdered, and his family—my constituents—have been fighting for justice for almost a decade. Will he meet me and the family of Dr Ding to discuss how they can finally secure justice for their beloved brother and son?

[Mr Falconer]

I am not familiar with the case. I will discuss it with the Minister for Africa and ensure that the hon. Member gets a proper response.