Lammy highlights the extensive damage inflicted upon Ukraine since the invasion in 2014, including deaths, displacement, destruction of buildings, infrastructure, farmlands and forests. He calls for justice and accountability from Russia while emphasising that Ukrainians have shown remarkable resilience and determination to rebuild their country.

Supports the idea but raises concerns about historical precedents where reparations led to further conflict, questioning how repurposing Russian assets can be done without impacting ordinary Russians.

Acknowledges the debate's importance and inquires about the specifics of repurposing frozen assets, emphasising their existence and potential use for Ukraine’s recovery.

Calls for transparency regarding the extent of frozen Russian assets to ensure that justice is served for Ukrainians. She emphasises the need for accurate figures on the amount of frozen assets and their sources.

Questions the disclosure practices by the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation, suggesting regular updates to Parliament about sanctions waivers that might undermine the effectiveness of asset freezes against sanctioned individuals.

Agrees with the proposal and suggests amendments to Companies House regulations for better verification of company ownership and cooperation between Companies House and fraud authorities.

Points out inconsistencies in Ministerial positions regarding repurposing Russian assets, suggesting that amending the State Immunity Act could facilitate this process. He also notes the urgency of reconstruction efforts to assist Ukrainians now.

Emphasises the broader aspects of Ukraine's recovery including economic and democratic rebuilding, alongside repurposing Russian assets.

The debate focused on condemning Putin's invasion of Ukraine, praising the resilience and innovation of Ukrainians, and discussing measures to rebuild Ukraine. The Minister thanked colleagues for their support in these efforts and highlighted several initiatives such as a recovery conference where over $60 billion was pledged towards rebuilding efforts. He also detailed new legislation allowing sanctions to remain in place until Russia pays for damages caused by its invasion. Additionally, the Minister mentioned plans to tighten regulations on those hiding assets within the UK and to explore legal routes to use frozen Russian assets for Ukrainian reconstruction.

Called upon the Minister to support an amendment in the House of Lords that would ensure sanctioned individuals disclose all their assets, failing which they could face criminal charges and asset seizure. She urged for swift action on this matter.

Asked the Minister to clarify if it is now a Government strategy to use frozen Russian assets to rebuild Ukraine, referencing a press release from the Foreign Office.

Inquired about the delay in transferring £2.3 billion from Roman Abramovich’s sale of Chelsea FC to Ukrainian reconstruction efforts, questioning the ongoing discussions and concerns preventing this transfer.

Doogan criticises the UK government's slow response to seizing Russian assets, highlighting that London is a notorious safe haven for looted funds from Russia. He points out that while other countries are taking strides to legislate for asset seizure, the UK has yet to do so. Doogan calls for an urgent review of designation criteria and proper funding for economic crime enforcement.

In his intervention, Iain Duncan Smith clarifies the difference between seizing private assets and state assets. He states that sovereign immunity does not stand in the way of seizing private assets if legislation is passed, but state asset seizure requires cooperation with other states to avoid capital flight.

The sanctions regimes have been vital in the Ukrainian resistance, with 1,604 individuals and 228 entities under UK freezing sanctions as of May. An estimated £275 billion-worth of Russian assets are frozen worldwide. The statutory instrument introduced by the Minister aims to maintain freezing order sanctions until Moscow pays compensation to Ukraine. Djanogly supports asset forfeiture for reconstruction needs, suggesting that breaches should open all sanctioned assets to seizure and reallocation. He also emphasises the importance of international cooperation in implementing measures against Russia.

Lewis asks whether consideration has been given to what happens to interest or other income generated by frozen assets during the period they are frozen, arguing that asset owners should not benefit from any earnings of these assets.

I rise to speak in this very important debate on repurposing Russian assets to rebuild Ukraine. I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham on setting out so clearly the case for doing so, and my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth on his work on the issue. In February of this year, I had the privilege of going to Ukraine with the all-party parliamentary group on Ukraine on the anniversary of last year’s invasion, and to see Irpin and Chernihiv. There, we saw the destruction of bridges, homes and schools—a reminder of the fact that Russians have targeted civilian areas so often—and the need for generators, because time after time those areas have been hit by power cuts. However, all of that pales into insignificance against the destruction in the east, where whole cities—homes, hospitals and schools—have been left with no power supply and no water, their populations dispersed abroad, to other parts of Ukraine or to the frontline. We have also seen the flooding from the Kakhovka dam, and of course, vast areas of agricultural land are unusable now because of landmines. The task is absolutely immense. This month saw the Ukraine recovery conference, held in London. A number of events and meetings ran alongside it, including Inter-Parliamentary Union events, which I was able to attend. It was very moving to hear Ukrainian MPs speak of the huge challenges facing their country, but impressive to see their absolute determination to build back better, strengthen democracy and tackle issues such as corruption. Time after time, Ukrainian MPs made clear that they want Russian assets seized to rebuild Ukraine. We have to admire the immense resilience and determination of the Ukrainian people to rebuild. I have found that whether meeting bosses from the biggest telecoms company in Ukraine, whose workforce have repeatedly been the first out there to restore communication after yet another Russian hit; meeting the CEO of Naftogaz, who stated plainly that tackling corruption has to come before reconstruction; and meeting the deputy Minister for digital technology, who described some of the remarkable progress made in the digital sphere. However, he also pointed out that his departmental budget has been cut by 86%, with the money redirected to the Defence department. That reminds us of the huge economic challenges that Ukraine faces. The task is enormous; the World Bank estimates that some $400 billion is needed to reconstruct Ukraine. Using frozen Russian state assets must be part of that, but the UK appears to be lagging behind. In the US, the Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity for Ukrainians Act, which would give the US President the power to confiscate Russian assets frozen in the US, has been introduced in the Senate and the House of Representatives; and in Canada, the Government are looking to seize $26 million from Granite Capital Holdings Ltd. But here in the UK we are still lagging behind. This issue has been raised time after time in this House. We had a whole Backbench Business debate on the issue not very long ago, in which suggestions and mechanisms were set out very clearly by my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill and others. Today, we have heard suggestions on what could be done from my right hon. Friend the Member for Barking and my hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda. Time after time, we have made it very clear to the Government that they need to move faster on seizing frozen Russian state assets so that they can be used for rebuilding Ukraine.

Following the comments that all Members have made, I am sure we all agree that Russia’s appalling assault on Ukraine is an unprovoked, premeditated attack against a sovereign democratic state. Our Government, through their actions, have illustrated that they are completely committed to supporting Ukraine in its fight to liberate the country. We are all supporting Ukraine, as we are the world’s second-largest military donor, with this Government having given £2.3 billion in military aid. This year we have given a total of £9.3 billion of humanitarian, economic and military support. We are also training many Ukrainian pilots and troops in the UK and offering sanctuary to well over 230,000 Ukrainians. I am proud to say that many of them have made Keighley, Ilkley and other parts of my constituency their home, and I have been pleased to meet many of them. We are also punishing Putin’s regime with the most severe set of sanctions that Russia has ever seen. We are sanctioning over 1,500 individuals and entities, and freezing £275 billion of their personal assets. Those sanctions are specifically designed to deal a severe blow to the Russian economy, hobble Russia’s military-industrial complex and punish Putin and his allies, including 120 oligarchs worth over £140 billion combined. In addition to those sanctions, we have ended imports of Russian coal and oil, cutting off a key source of funding for Putin’s regime, while limiting the impact on our consumers. We have also stopped the export of high-end luxury goods to Russia and sanctioned Putin and his political allies, including Sergei Lavrov, hitting the Kremlin regime at its heart.

The cost of rebuilding Ukraine is estimated at $400 billion. Labour has called on the Government to repurpose seized Russian assets worth up to £26 billion for Ukrainian recovery, but progress is insufficient. The UK should follow its allies in enacting measures that allow the transfer of these assets towards reconstruction efforts.

The World Bank estimates a $400 billion recovery cost for Ukraine. The UK, while committed to supporting Ukraine, lags behind allies in developing legislation to repurpose Russian state assets held within its borders towards reconstruction. There is a moral duty and significant opportunity to do so, and the need is urgent.

Byrne supports the call for justice, emphasising the need for Russia to pay reparations for Ukraine's reconstruction. He highlights the moral imperative of holding aggressors accountable and criticises delays in taking action. Byrne calls for legislation that seizes Russian assets to fund reconstruction.

Support for Ukraine needs continuous increase. Russian assets in London must be repurposed for rebuilding Ukraine, honouring the sacrifice of Ukrainian fighters. Other countries are leading; Britain should follow with specific proposals to use Russian money effectively.

Stephen Doughty commended contributions from Labour MPs such as Dame Nia Griffith, Andrew Western, Matt Western, Catherine McKinnell, Liam Byrne, and Ms Rimmer. He also acknowledged valuable input from Government members like Sir Iain Duncan Smith and Sir Julian Lewis. The MP underscored the need for clarity on how Russian state-owned assets can be seized and repurposed to support Ukraine's reconstruction efforts, echoing the UN General Assembly resolution ES-11/5 which mandates Russia to bear legal consequences and provide reparation for damage caused by its actions. Doughty referenced precedents like the compensation mechanism established after the first Gulf War and called on the Government to draft legislation within 90 days.

Asked if the UK has a strong legal base to work with international partners so that they can send out a clear message of hope for Ukraine's reconstruction.

Addressed questions regarding the pace of action in financial services and other areas, highlighting that ideas such as interest have been discussed internally for at least six months.

Inquired if it was time for the UK to regain initiative once again, suggesting that discussions on financial measures had taken place within the UK before being adopted by EU nations.

Asked for a timetable from the Minister regarding recovery of seized assets to contribute towards Ukraine's reconstruction, emphasising that the motion specified 90 days as realistic time frame.

Acknowledged the Prime Minister’s leadership in organising the Ukraine recovery conference, committing at least £2.5 billion for reconstruction once the war has concluded.

Asked why it was taking so long to decide on the repurposing of seized assets towards Ukraine's reconstruction, noting that a parliamentary question from July 2022 stated consideration of all options.