Russian Federation: Human Rights

Debate between Tom Tugendhat and Wendy Morton
Wednesday 27th January 2021

(3 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Tom Tugendhat Portrait Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge and Malling) (Con) [V]
- Hansard - -

It is welcome to hear the Minister’s condemnation of the attack on Alexei Navalny, whose crime, it appears, is to survive an assassination attempt by the state that now holds him prisoner.

This is not the first of these incidents. Litvinenko, Skripal and now Navalny are three names that speak of Russia’s brutality towards its own citizens. When will we see a proper list of the ill-gotten gains that President Putin has stolen from the Russian people over the past 20 years? When will we see a breakdown of his hidden wealth through UK jurisdictions or in areas where the UK has influence, so that the Russian people can know how much money has been stolen from them by this gangster elite, and when it will be held in trust, to be returned to them as soon as he is gone?

Wendy Morton Portrait Wendy Morton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think that I have set out very clearly the action that we are taking in response to the poisoning of Alexei Navalny. I have set out very clearly the sanctions that we have put in place against six individuals and one organisation. As for any future sanctions or measures that we may put in place, it would be wrong for me to speculate further at this stage.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Tom Tugendhat and Wendy Morton
Tuesday 14th January 2020

(4 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wendy Morton Portrait Wendy Morton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman makes a very good point, highlighting the fact that domestic abuse is out there in so many different areas, and not always where we expect. With regard to rugby, I would need to go away and ask a few questions, but I thank him for raising that in the Chamber and for highlighting the importance of bringing forward the Domestic Abuse Bill, to see an end to these abhorrent crimes.

Tom Tugendhat Portrait Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge and Malling) (Con)
- Hansard - -

5. Whether his Department plans to review sentencing policy for prolific offenders.

Charities (Protection and Social Investment) Bill [ Lords ] (First sitting)

Debate between Tom Tugendhat and Wendy Morton
Tuesday 15th December 2015

(9 years ago)

Public Bill Committees
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wendy Morton Portrait Wendy Morton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Kids Company is one of the charities that sadly did make it in to the newspapers and on to our TV screens and it has been debated in the House. It is an example of why the public’s trust is so vital. The Bill demonstrates the importance of having an effective charity regulator and strengthening the powers of the Charity Commission to protect charities from abuse. Clause 1 focuses in particular on trusts and trustees and the issue of warnings. That is the right and appropriate thing to do. We will move later to the additional powers to spend and to remove trustees. In doing so, it is important that we recognise that deliberate wrongdoing is rare. It may be unlikely that the new powers are used many times, but let us hope that they are not.

Tom Tugendhat Portrait Tom Tugendhat
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend is making a powerful case. Does she agree that having the powers on the statute book is part of the persuasion that allows them not to be used?

Wendy Morton Portrait Wendy Morton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Absolutely. I was about to say that it is important that we have the powers to protect and safeguard charities and their reputations and to maintain the trust of the public, on whose generosity they depend. That also helps trustees, who usually do their job out of the goodness of their hearts, often for a cause that is close to their hearts. They deserve that trust, respect and support.

It is understandable that the mention of additional powers can raise concerns. It is important to ensure that smaller charities are not disproportionately affected. I do not believe they will be, but that is something to be mindful of. It is equally important to reassure the public that charities are more accountable and, in particular, that large charities are transparent about their fundraising and their activities.

In conclusion, in our drive to maintain and strengthen public trust in charities, we should be mindful that the Bill is helping, not hindering. I therefore support it and hope that clause 1 will stand part of the Bill.