This amendment aims to address the growing threat of cryptoassets being used for terrorist activities. It seeks to empower law enforcement agencies with the necessary tools and frameworks to detect, prevent, and investigate such transactions.

Mr Roger Gale proposed several new clauses designed to enhance legal defences for public interest disclosures, provide courts with powers to strike out statements aimed at concealing information relevant to economic crime investigations, require publication of findings on the Tier 1 (Investor) visa scheme in relation to economic crime, and introduce criminal liability for corporate failure to prevent certain types of economic crimes. He also introduced reforms to identification doctrine, individual liability for senior managers and officers, whistleblower protections, cost limitations in civil recovery proceedings, reviews on measures preventing proceeds from entering UK economy, effectiveness reports on addressing economic crime involving sanctioned individuals, compensation strategies for victims, and regulatory measures regarding Iranian officials' assets.

Salutes the Minister's leadership on economic crime issues but raises concerns about the delay in addressing strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs). He questions whether the current Bill can address these concerns and seeks assurance on when a separate Bill might be brought forward.

Asks if the Bill will address SLAPPs or only concern itself with money laundering and other economic crime issues. He also inquires about the specifics of asset seizures.

Encourages the Minister to move forward with addressing SLAPPs and seizing assets, arguing that it is necessary for the progress of economic crime legislation.

Raises concerns about golden visas, the adherence to sanctions against Russia, and calls for transparency regarding Mohamed Mansour's company that sells equipment in contravention of Russian sanctions.

Questions the effectiveness of proposed changes about the duty to prevent, suggesting they may not be as game-changing or deregulatory as claimed.

Supports the proposal for setting up a fund to compensate victims of economic crime, highlighting its potential benefits and emphasising urgency in dealing with issues related to Ukraine.

Questions the financial implications of setting up a fund for compensation, asking about its cost and funding source.

Supports the need for determination in delivering policies to tackle economic crime, emphasising the importance of a change in attitude towards how these issues are handled.

Argues that the proposed amendments are necessary to improve corporate liability and prevent economic crime. Highlights existing legislation like the Criminal Finances Act 2017 and discusses the importance of clear definitions in new laws to avoid unintended consequences.

Supports Robert Buckland's amendments, emphasising that economic crime is a national security issue and criticises the current system as being ineffective against large corporations.

Questions Buckland about the Bribery Act, suggesting that similar procedures have already produced significant results in reducing bribery incidents.

Raises concerns about the limitations of current laws as exemplified by the Barclays case and urges for reforms that prevent senior managers from avoiding liability.

Supports Government amendments on Scottish Ministers and information sharing between agencies. Concerned about rejection of 'failure to prevent' amendment, citing previous support by now-Minister Kevin Hollinrake. Advocates for a precedent set in Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Bribery Act 2010, arguing the Bill provides an opportunity to address economic crime. Supports new clauses on senior management accountability, whistleblowing protection, cost caps, proceeds of crime, and compensation for victims. Emphasises need for a dedicated Committee in the House to handle economic crime.

The speaker argues that the new clauses are vital to address the institutional cover-up of criminal activity such as money laundering, fraud, and concealment. He emphasises the importance of a free press in exposing weaknesses in the SFO and NCA.

The Labour MP agrees that successive Governments are guilty of naivety and complacency, but highlights a specific point in 2014 when the approach needed to change. He acknowledges the creation of the golden visa scheme under the new Labour Administration.

Supports new clauses proposed by Back Benchers. Highlights importance of protecting whistleblowers, tackling abuse of legal system, and reforming criminal corporate liability. Advocates for cost caps to prevent economic criminals from exploiting the legal system and to fund enforcement agencies effectively.

Supports 'freeze not seize' proposals if they can be used to repurpose seized assets for reconstruction of Ukraine. Expresses openness to hearing ideas that work.

Suggests the problem with cost recovery in successful investigations stems from the division of spoils between Treasury, Home Office, and police. Proposes a better deal where police recover full costs and share profits to incentivize more effective prosecutions.

The new clause aims to encourage support and advise whistleblowers, providing a safe place to share information. The office would enhance protections for whistleblowers while incentivising disclosures by offering confidentiality and protection against retaliation. Evidence from the United States shows that an Office of the Whistleblower within the Securities and Exchange Commission has successfully increased whistleblower tips and awards. This cross-party issue highlights the importance of protecting whistleblowers who expose economic crime, misuse of public funds, and poor medical practices.

Ms Alison Thewliss intervened briefly, highlighting her agreement with Ms Moran about the lack of government curiosity regarding golden visa holders compared to the difficulties faced by constituents in obtaining visitor visas for their relatives from Iran.

Supports new clause 23 which aims to address proceeds of economic crime and proposes measures like converting freezing orders into seizure orders. Mentions lack of proper financing for law enforcement bodies, resulting in a compounding negative effect on taxpayers. He emphasises the need to emulate international actions such as seizing assets of sanctioned individuals. Also highlights the urgency of the matter due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the financial reparations needed.

Ms Moran supports Mr Byrne’s arguments, questioning the legitimacy of allowing sanctioned individuals like the head of the Wagner Group to access British pounds through licensed expenses for legal actions against journalists. She describes the situation as farcical and calls into question whether such individuals had no other means to finance these legal actions elsewhere.

Mr Efford commends Mr Byrne for his long-standing work on this issue. He highlights that London courts see more strategic legal actions against public participants than European or American courts combined, illustrating the urgency of addressing this problem and supporting the proposed amendments.

Rimmer supports new clauses aimed at preventing economic crime, including protection for whistleblowers. She raises concerns about the impact of dirty money on local communities and warns against using legal tactics to silence journalists exposing corruption.

Intervenes briefly, expressing support for the amendments and noting his intention to return during Third Reading. His intervention reflects ongoing interest in supporting new clauses aimed at preventing economic crime.

Orders the House and clarifies that the shadow minister will return for Third Reading, indicating a process-oriented rather than substantive position on the amendments under debate.

Mr. Evans wished everyone a Happy Burns Night and congratulated the House on the progress of the bill, acknowledging its importance.