Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministerial Statement

Russia: UK Companies

07 December 2022 · 22 other contributors

Opened by James Cartlidge Con South Suffolk

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

James Cartlidge raised concerns about russia: uk companies in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.

Key points

  • The UK and its partners have imposed sanctions on over 1,200 individuals and more than 120 entities in Russia since the invasion of Ukraine.
  • The UK has frozen 18.4 billion worth of Russian assets and banned new outward investments in Russia.
  • The UK prohibits the importation of Russian oil and oil products, and restricts UK ships from transporting Russian oil above a price threshold of $60 per barrel.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Government Statement

The UK and its international partners have imposed extensive sanctions on Russia since the invasion of Ukraine, including designating over 1,200 individuals and more than 120 entities. This includes a ban on new outward investments in Russia and the freezing of £18.4 billion-worth of Russian assets reported to the Government. The UK has also banned the importation of Russian oil and oil products into its markets, prohibiting UK ships from transporting Russian oil unless the price is below $60 per barrel. The Government support further signals from companies indicating their intent to divest from Russian assets but do not comment on individual commercial decisions.

Other contributors (22)
  • Margaret Hodge Lab Barking

    Question

    Questions the effectiveness of Government measures, citing BP's continued investment in Rosneft despite promises to divest. Asks if it is shameful for British companies to profit from oil funding Putin’s war and queries whether BP should donate its Russian dividends to Ukraine’s reconstruction.

    Minister reply

    Acknowledges the complexity involved in divesting from sanctioned entities, noting that selling shares could inadvertently return them to sanctioned individuals. Stresses that while sanctions against Russia are severe, there is a need for companies to divest responsibly and legally. The Government remains committed to supporting Ukraine through aid and training, having provided over £6 billion in support.

  • Julian Lewis Con New Forest East

    Question

    Questions if the Government can take further action to prevent companies from profiting indirectly while the UK supports Ukraine.

    Minister reply

    Acknowledges that 120 entities and over 1,200 individuals have been sanctioned with £18.4 billion-worth of Russian assets frozen. While supporting divestment by firms, complexity in ensuring compliance means further investigation into what can be done is warranted.

  • Pat McFadden Lab Wolverhampton South East

    Question

    The right hon. Gentleman poses a number of very important questions. On a general point, he talks about strengthening the resolve of the people of Ukraine. This country can be rightly proud of every step it has taken to strengthen that resolve, and, I must say on record, of the leadership of two former Prime Ministers, as well as the current Prime Minister. They have shown extraordinary leadership appearing in Kyiv under huge pressure and supporting President Zelensky, alongside the support we have given to the Ukrainian armed forces and our massive humanitarian aid. I know there is consensus on that, but we should not in any way be defensive about the steps we have taken to support the Ukrainian people.

    Minister reply

    The right hon. Gentleman talks about companies doing the right thing. He is absolutely right that companies are divesting and exiting from Russia. We welcome that. I explained about the statement made by the Prime Minister when he was Chancellor back in March, which is obviously something we welcome. I think there are some complexities in that process and I will not be drawn on individual firms. That is long-standing Treasury policy for very good reason.

  • Mark Pritchard Con The Wrekin

    Question

    There is no doubt that the UK has led the Ukraine war effort with the United States, and there is no doubt that the UK has led the international sanctions regime, but this urgent question is about UK companies. Does the Minister share my concern that DP Eurasia is selling pizzas in Russia, Unilever is selling Cornetto ice creams in Russia, and HSBC is still servicing Russian corporate clients? Does he think that is acceptable? What more action can the Government take to encourage those companies to remove their services and businesses from Russia and to divest themselves fully, rather than just give interviews to corporate magazines and offer warm words?

    Minister reply

    My hon. Friend makes an important point. It is for good reason that we do not entertain specific discussions on individual companies and their commercial interests, but we have been very clear on the need to divest. We have an outright ban on investment in Russia, and I sincerely hope that companies are not abusing that. I am not going to suggest that the companies he mentioned are doing so or comment on those specific cases, but I am always happy to meet my hon. Friend, or receive correspondence from him, if he has concerns in that regard.

  • Question

    It seems to me to ring a little bit hollow to say that companies are still trying to unwind their various operations in Russia. If some companies can do that quite easily, can the Minister explain to me why companies such as Infosys are still working in Russia?

    Minister reply

    As I said to the right hon. Member for Barking (Dame Margaret Hodge)—I apologise if this becomes a relatively repetitive point—I am not going to comment on specific individual companies. As I say, there is very good reason for that, and it is a long-standing Treasury policy that I think any Government would follow.

  • Mark Francois Con Rayleigh and Wickford

    Question

    As a Member of the House of Commons Defence Committee, I visited Ukraine about three weeks ago. We were welcomed literally with open arms, so grateful are the Ukrainians for staunch British support. They know a hard winter is coming, so may I make a practical suggestion? They clearly need more weapons, but they also desperately need generators in order to keep hospitals and other critical facilities operating even if they lose main power stations to missile strikes. Is there anything the Minister and the Government can do to encourage UK companies of all types that might be able to spare even one or two generators from their stocks to get them to Ukraine, where they would be put to incredibly good use?

    Minister reply

    My right hon. Friend speaks not only with his expertise on the Defence Committee; he also served in His Majesty’s armed forces and, of course, as a Defence Minister. He makes a very important point, and I was delighted to hear about his visit. It is inspirational to me and, I think, to the rest of the country when we see leading British politicians going over to Ukraine and showing that we are not afraid to go there. We will give the Ukrainians every form of support that we can.

  • Chris Bryant Lab Rhondda and Ogmore

    Question

    I am sorry, but this is just terribly complacent. It is 3,218 days since the annexation of Crimea, and there are still British companies that seem to be invested in Crimea, let alone British companies—including Infosys, from what I understand; the Minister did not refute that point earlier—that are still operating in Moscow and Russia with a staffed office. He says he will not comment on individual companies, but he does it all the time: that is what sanctions are. That is the whole point of sanctions. Some £778 million-worth of Russian oil has ended up coming into 10 British ports this year, having been transferred from one ship to another on the route here. This is complacency. We have to have a total effort from every Government Department to make sure that we stop funding Putin’s illegal war.

    Minister reply

    As ever, the hon. Gentleman makes his point with his usual passion. The point I was making was not to refute or in any way entertain points about individual companies; I am simply saying that it is long-standing Treasury policy not to comment on individual taxpayers or companies, or on their commercial activities, and I suspect that would be true of any Government.

  • Question

    As the secretary of the all-party parliamentary group on Ukraine, and as a constituency MP with a large Ukrainian community, I gently prompt my hon. Friend the Minister to urge BP, if it is unable to sell its stake in Rosneft, to take the profits and commit them to the reconstruction of Ukraine and to aiding the victims of Putin’s barbaric invasion.

    Minister reply

    My hon. Friend is right to remind us of the many Ukrainians who have made their home here and, of course, the many UK nationals who have opened their homes to them. It has been an extraordinary contribution. The reason we do not comment on individual companies’ commercial affairs is that, for a start, these are matters of commercial sensitivity.

  • Darren Jones Lab Bristol North West

    Question

    Asked the Minister to write to the chief executive officer of BP to suggest that moneys gained by the company be used to pay for generators for Ukraine.

    Minister reply

    The Treasury is responsible for UK tax and spending decisions. The Government has set out a windfall tax funding energy support this winter, next year, as well as supporting the people of Ukraine.

  • Question

    Asked when the review on the oil price cap would take place to ensure further decisive action can be taken.

    Minister reply

    The Treasury keeps all matters under review through constant dialogue with international partners. The step has only just been taken, but it is being reviewed.

  • Sarah Olney Lib Dem Richmond Park

    Question

    Asked whether the Prime Minister agreed that private citizens in the UK should follow British businesses and sell shares in Russia.

    Minister reply

    In March, as Chancellor, the Prime Minister urged companies to divest from Russia. Companies need to ensure new owners comply with sanctions before selling their shares.

  • Question

    Asked whether the Minister would ensure conversations across Government to ensure that companies are not penalised for doing the right thing in relation to Russia.

    Minister reply

    The Treasury will have conversations with relevant departments and service providers to address this issue.

  • Marie Rimmer Lab St Helens South and Whiston

    Question

    Asked whether the £580 million dividends due from BP should be used to provide aid to Ukraine.

    Minister reply

    The UK has provided over £6 billion in military aid and humanitarian assistance, second only to the United States. The Treasury will continue supporting Ukraine.

  • Question

    Asked about efforts to stop the illegal resale of Russian oil and gas.

    Minister reply

    The UK has banned imports of Russian oil and prohibited UK ships from transporting it unless the price is at or below $60. The Government will invest in nuclear energy, offshore wind capacity, and net zero commitments.

  • Clive Efford Lab Eltham

    Question

    Asked whether the Government should not profit from activities that sustain Putin’s war.

    Minister reply

    The Treasury has committed to seeing businesses divest from Russia, and there have been high-profile public cases of firms divesting.

  • Derek Twigg Lab Widnes and Halewood

    Question

    Asked whether the Minister would look again at what more can be done in legislation to ensure that no British company benefits Putin’s regime.

    Minister reply

    The Treasury is looking with international partners at what more can be done on illicit finance. The Government will work night and day to support Ukraine.

  • Question

    May I raise the issue of a UK company, the Lawn Tennis Association, being fined $1 million by the ATP—Association of Tennis Professionals—tour for banning Russian and Belarusian players from all tournaments, including Wimbledon, with further sanctions potentially to come? That is on top of a similar fine and ruling from the Women’s Tennis Association. Will the Minister join me in condemning the ATP and the WTA, which have both shown an extraordinary lack of empathy towards the people of Ukraine?

    Minister reply

    That is an interesting point. My colleagues have been clear on the record about where we stand on that. I will not comment on any specific appeals, but our sanctions regime, to which he referred, is very strong and is working in practice.

  • Karl Turner Lab Kingston upon Hull East

    Question

    Fenner Dunlop has existed in Marfleet in my constituency since the company Fenner was established in 1861. It manufactures conveyer belts for the mining industry. It refused to trade in Russia and has done the right thing. As a result, it is reviewing the business in Marfleet and 71 jobs are potentially at risk. Everybody can see that the company needs to be commended—it is an excellent employer—but the reason the Minister is having difficulty mentioning specific businesses is because one of them is Infosys. Does he want to put his finger on why he is struggling to talk about that business?

    Minister reply

    As ever, I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. All I will say about the company in his constituency—in Marfleet, I think—is that companies divesting their interests in Russia will undoubtedly have an economic impact at home.

  • Andrew Slaughter Lab Hammersmith and Chiswick

    Question

    The Exchequer Secretary cannot have failed to notice the exhibition in Portcullis House showing the gross human rights abuses committed by Russian forces in Ukraine. As well as justice, the victims of these war crimes deserve compensation, but so far that has not come from seizing and distributing the assets of Putin’s allies or the Russian state. Why can it not come from BP and others’ Russian earnings?

    Minister reply

    I always enjoyed working with the hon. Gentleman in my previous position at the Ministry of Justice. He makes an extremely powerful point.

  • Question

    I fully support the right hon. Member for Barking (Dame Margaret Hodge) in her efforts. Would not one way to dissuade UK companies from investing in Russian oil assets and to encourage disinvestment be to prohibit any such companies from benefiting from the North sea windfall tax investment allowance?

    Minister reply

    The hon. Gentleman asks an interesting question, knitting together two points.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    Question

    I thank the Exchequer Secretary for his answer to this urgent question. It is clear to me and to the House that he is doing his best to address the issue in a firm way. We have seen not only the continued involvement of UK companies in Russia, but the ongoing involvement of Russian companies and kleptocrats in infiltrating UK companies potentially to commit fraud. What steps will the Exchequer Secretary take to ensure that UK companies are discouraged from any involvement with the Russian economy and ensure that a harder stance is taken to protect our economy from the promotion of economic crime and infiltration by Russia itself?

    Minister reply

    As ever, Mr Speaker, you have saved the best till last. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his kind words.

Shadow Comment

Margaret Hodge

The shadow Minister criticises the lack of concrete action by the Government to prevent British companies from investing in Russia. She highlights BP's continued significant investment despite earlier promises to divest, citing Global Witness research indicating that BP stands to receive £580 million in dividends due to Russian oil profits fuelled by the war. Margaret Hodge calls for BP and other companies invested in Russian fossil fuels to donate their wartime profits to Ukraine’s reconstruction and questions whether the Government will force such donations through a windfall tax.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy