Highlights the ease with which criminals use platforms like Binance to move money anonymously; points out under-resourced agencies in tackling economic crime, noting that only 0.8% of resources are dedicated to it despite 40% of crime being economic crime. Calls for legislative changes and personal liability for those who fail to prevent fraud.

Congratulates Kevin Hollinrake on the debate, emphasising the need for digital highway policing rather than traditional methods like bobbies on the beat.

Acknowledges the global impact of economic crime but stresses the importance of addressing individual concerns, highlighting that the issue affects constituents at a personal level.

Points out the strict regulation on local customers compared to large money movements; calls for better regulation of large-scale financial transactions to address economic crime effectively.

Reminded the mover of the motion that they have spoken for longer than their allotted time and suggested focusing on concluding remarks.

Expressed gratitude to the Backbench Business Committee for selecting the debate topic, thanked Kevin Hollinrake for his collaboration on economic crime issues, and inquired about her speaking time constraints.

Interrupted to highlight the urgent need for reform within the Serious Fraud Office due to its current lack of resources, emphasising the £53 million budget against hundreds of billions in dirty money.

Thanked Margaret Hodge and Kevin Hollinrake for securing the debate, endorsed their Economic Crime Manifesto which recommends an office for whistleblowers to combat economic crime. She highlighted that 43% of fraud cases are detected by whistleblowers compared to 15% by internal audits and 3% by external audits. Robinson also stressed the necessity of a positive culture where individuals feel supported in coming forward with information about economic crimes.

Slaughter supported Byrne's points, emphasising that the oligarchs use London as a playground for both leisure and criminal activity due to weak law enforcement. He highlighted how journalists and private investigators are punished through strategic litigation against public participation (SLAPP), adding insult to injury.

Hollinrake recommended that the Minister should read the Treasury Committee’s report on Economic Crime, which sets out similar recommendations to those of the Foreign Affairs Committee regarding measures to combat economic crime.

Mr. Neill congratulates the hon. Members for Thirsk and Malton and Barking on securing the debate and producing reports on fair business banking and anti-corruption. He highlights the need to tighten rules on money laundering, reform corporate criminal responsibility laws by changing the identification test and extending duty to prevent offences. Mr. Neill also suggests that some of the recovered funds from deferred prosecution agreements should be ring-fenced for reinvestment in crime-fighting agencies. Additionally, he discusses the issue of small-scale fraud and its significant impact on victims, urging for better allocation of police resources towards tackling such crimes.

The Government must make tackling economic crime a much higher priority, especially as it is a threat to our national security. We had some discussions on that in the urgent question this morning, and we have had other discussions in this Chamber and in Westminster Hall on the same issue. I would like to start with some figures, to give a real insight into the depth of economic crime in the UK. A total of 14.5% of the UK’s annual £2 trillion GDP is taken in economic crime. That gives us an idea of the magnitude of the issue. Some £190 billion of our losses come from fraud and a further £100 billion from money laundering.

It is a pleasure to come to the House this afternoon. Even with all the chaos and politics outside, we have come together to have a very good debate and to share comprehensive ideas and solutions to the ongoing issue of economic crime. I thank the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake) and the right hon. Member for Barking (Dame Margaret Hodge) for coming together to secure this debate. We often all agree whenever we have such debates, and it is for the Minister to respond to our comprehensive agreement and suggestions. I urge the Minister to work with his colleagues and others to bring those experts together so that we can get to some kind of solution. Enforcement is crucial; if criminals realise they are going to get away with it, the rules do not matter. There is a gap between the rules and the enforcement in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); the Government need to get further into the expertise of this sector because fraudsters are always several steps ahead on technology, skills and expertise. I have highlighted issues with Action Fraud or inAction Fraud and mentioned Scotland’s economic crime unit and the value of the crime campus at Gartcosh just outside Glasgow. A duty to prevent economic crime is crucial; social media companies should be held accountable for fraud happening on their platforms. There needs to be more done on Scottish limited partnerships, Irish limited partnerships, sanctions against Russia, Companies House reforms, and tackling kleptocrats through London's dirty money washing system.

I firmly believe that the UK is lagging behind in dealing with digital crimes and cryptocurrency, as highlighted by my colleague. We need to address the prevention of such issues and hold institutions accountable for their role in laundering money from criminal activities. The enforcement of economic crime has been abysmal, with a significant drop in convictions and prosecutions, especially when considering the cuts to the National Crime Agency (NCA). Fraud is now more than 40% of all crime but receives less than 1% of police resources. I emphasise that whistleblowers need strong protection and that the UK must lead globally against corruption rather than serve as a safe haven for it.

He discussed the technicalities of cryptocurrency and highlighted the issue with Action Fraud, which is often ineffective. He expressed disgust at banks being fined heavily but not facing criminal charges for laundering drug cartel money, underscoring the need for preventive measures against those considering turning a blind eye to such activities due to their financial power.

She referred to Action Fraud as 'inAction Fraud', emphasising its inefficiency. She also highlighted the issue of Companies House and how it has been a place for Russian oligarchs to hide their ill-gotten gains.

She spoke about the importance of protecting whistleblowers, particularly in the context of organised crime. She highlighted instances where whistleblowers have died mysteriously, stressing the need for robust protection mechanisms.

He made an impassioned plea for the UK to lead globally in ending corruption and not be seen as a safe haven for Russia. He emphasised that allowing Russian money into the UK has contributed to killings on our soil without consequence.

He mentioned the recommendations from various committees and all-party groups regarding economic crime, urging for timely action on these suggestions.

Foster acknowledged that economic crime poses a significant threat to UK citizens, acknowledging contributions from colleagues. He praised recent initiatives like the National Economic Crime Centre and the suspicious activity reports regime. He also highlighted the Government's commitment to further legislative reforms through the forthcoming Bill aimed at tackling economic crime and protecting national security.

Margaret Hodge intervened, questioning the effectiveness of current co-operation between agencies despite theoretical descriptions. She noted a decline in prosecutions while economic crime is on the rise, suggesting practical issues within the system.

Thewliss welcomed reforms to Companies House but urged for further measures to make it an independent anti-money laundering supervisor, reducing reliance on third parties.

Neill pressed the Minister to expedite assessments of corporate criminal liability laws following a lengthy debate in political and legal circles. He highlighted the need for urgent reform.

Hollinrake expressed appreciation for Foster's response but cited an example of whistleblower legislation failing to provide redress or compensation, urging for urgent reform to ensure effective protection for whistleblowers.

This has been an excellent debate. I thank all Members across the House for supporting the application for the debate and for their contributions, and the Backbench Business Committee for granting it. We are not going away—we will make sure that future legislation is fit for purpose. It is fair to say that, for whatever reason, we have turned a blind eye to this issue for too long. Ukraine has been an eye-opener because we have suddenly realised what it means and facilitates. I welcome the economic crime Bill mark 1, but mark 2 is coming along, with the reforms that will come from it.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I assure you that I have informed the Minister concerned. I hope you will be able to advise me on how to shed light on a series of confused and potentially misleading comments made by the Prime Minister and his Minister regarding Alexander Lebedev. During his appearance at the Liaison Committee yesterday, referring to a meeting in April 2018 in which he met Alexander Lebedev, the Prime Minister stated: “I have certainly met him without officials.” This is a significant revelation and something no Government Minister has ever commented on under questioning.

I thank the right hon. Lady for her point of order. I note that she says that she informed the Minister, quite correctly. It is not for the Chair to determine these matters, but those on the Government Front Bench will have heard what she had to say, and I hope that they will pass back that we would expect the record to be corrected if it needs to be.