The Shadow Minister asked why the Representation of the People Bill was introduced before receiving Rycroft's report. He also questioned which recommendations will require primary legislation and whether there would be adequate time for it.

The Shadow Minister asked for a full consultation with political parties and regulators before making substantive changes to the Bill. He questioned why domestic philanthropy was being treated as distasteful.

The Shadow Minister inquired about steps to enforce current legislation and tightening rules on foreign donations. He specifically asked how the forthcoming elections would be protected.

Asked why the Representation of the People Bill was introduced before the Rycroft report, which recommendations require primary legislation, and if a full consultation will be conducted.

Paid tribute to Sir Philip Rycroft, supported the moratorium on cryptocurrency donations, and questioned if recommendation 17 would be accepted.

Asked about the Government's intent to accept all 17 recommendations, raised concerns over overseas donations through UK companies, and inquired if calls for investigating Donald Trump’s Administration would be addressed.

Proposed meeting the Secretary of State to incorporate her amendments on deepfakes, bots, disinformation, political ad libraries, and investigatory powers for the Electoral Commission.

As a former elections policy Minister and member of the defending democracy taskforce, may I thank the Secretary of State for launching this inquiry? He also thanked Philip Rycroft for his work. Simon Hoare asks two questions: if amendments to reflect the Rycroft report are not tabled at Committee stage but on Report, will he ensure through the usual channels that the length of time devoted to Report stage reflects the fact that the House will be debating for the first time amendments to the legislation which were not included on Second Reading? Additionally, Simon Hoare inquires about additional demands on the Electoral Commission both in terms of power and resource.

I thank Sir Philip Rycroft for his important work and notes from his review about the online environment creating a cheap means of undermining trust in political processes. He asks if the Secretary of State agrees with those findings and what can be done to address the challenge of misinformation and disinformation on social media.

Mr Rycroft’s wide-ranging review makes the non-inclusion of China—or, failing that, its constituent entities—in the foreign influence registration scheme look increasingly bizarre. Will the Government look at this again as a matter of urgency? If it is inadequate to include state entities in the scheme, will he review and perhaps replace it?

She welcomes the Secretary of State’s comments on the Rycroft review and presses him further on what actions the Government are taking to give the Electoral Commission both resources and powers needed to deter and punish breaches of political financial rules.

Putting on record thanks to Sir Philip Rycroft for his public service. He asks how this work will be impacted in terms of the elections and political donors who happen to find themselves as Members of the House of Lords if they break rules.

Welcomes Sir Philip Rycroft’s review. He notes questions about association with significant foreign donors living abroad for long periods. He also highlights recommendations from his Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy, including higher penalties which will be welcomed by enforcement agencies.

Grateful to the Secretary of State for talking about integrity in politics, but as purdah arrives, she sees a mess of dithering and delay affecting her constituents. Decisions are apparently taken on a case-by-case basis, leading people to say that political gerrymandering is happening.

Welcomes Rycroft’s review and commitment to take action on crypto donations and capping foreign donations from overseas donors. She draws attention to the report's comment that social media seeks to exacerbate division and increase polarisation, making it dangerous for electoral candidates.

Thinks the Secretary of State should go further on corporate donations given CenTax report revealing one in four donations from corporate entities being opaque and relying on persons with significant control rules. Recommends tightening up the system so people cannot circumvent rules by donating via British companies.

In his report, Sir Philip Rycroft references the amplification of divisive content on social media. She notes design algorithms are determined by foreign billionaires and asks if political bias in algorithms constitutes a donation in kind.

I think the Government are very wise to try to close the potential loophole that somebody might make a giant donation between today and the conclusion of the legislative process, but I can think of at least one other rather glaring loophole, which hopefully the Secretary of State has also considered. If somebody is an elector living abroad, he will be limited to £100,000 per donation, but what about other members of his close family to whom he could channel indefinite numbers of packages of £100,000 apiece? What is to stop them from making similar donations? Has the Secretary of State considered how the limit will work in practice?

I welcome the measures announced today to tackle foreign interference in our elections. Will the Secretary of State go a step further and support my proposal to break the link between wealthy donors and the parties they help to elect by banning their firms from subsequently holding Government contracts?

Constituents like Andrew from Crewkerne have told me how worried they are about funding from the United States for right-wing UK think-tanks and political parties. Recommendations 4 and 16 of the review would strengthen transparency and reporting around donations to think-tanks and lobbying groups, which can advance foreign influence. Will the Secretary of State tell my constituents whether the Government will implement those recommendations, and when that will be?

I thank the Secretary of State for making this important statement. Like the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean), I am concerned about the ability of shell companies to make political donations. Clearly that is not transparent, and that is rightly recognised in the Rycroft review. What steps will the Government take to close that loophole? Crucially, what will the Government do to strengthen the monitoring of donations?

I am going to mention the elephant in the room. Earlier this month, the husband of a sitting Labour MP—the hon. Member for East Kilbride and Strathaven (Joani Reid)—was arrested on suspicion of spying for China. The hon. Member was subsequently suspended from the Labour party. It has been reported that she received a donation from her husband’s firm, which presumably would be covered by the Government’s plans. I do not expect any comment on that live investigation, but in the light of that and the historic case of Christine Lee, Labour MPs and the Chinese Communist party, will the Secretary of State confirm that the measures he has announced will apply equally to members of his own party who find themselves compromised by the Chinese Communist party?

At the time of the Boston tea party, the American colonists demanded, “No taxation without representation.” Does my right hon. Friend agree that we should instil the principle that there should be no ability, in a game-changing way, to influence representation without taxation? Will he elaborate a little on the principles in his statement?

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for his comments. The Rycroft report has come at a really important time. As a member of the Bill Committee, I look forward to working with the Government to ensure that all the recommendations are brought through, because they are incredibly important. I return to the comment of my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) about the importance of a report relating to US interference in our democracy. What steps are the Government and the defending democracy taskforce taking to protect our democracy from foreign interference more generally before the Representation of the People Bill passes through the House?

I strongly welcome the report and the Government’s speedy and decisive response to it. Evidence from Germany and from Moldova shows how online attempts at foreign interference can combine with real-life attempts at foreign interference in the run-up to elections. First, was I right in hearing that the Government will look at a transparent protocol for dealing with information emergencies related to foreign actors in the run-up to elections? Secondly, is the Secretary of State aware that in countries where crypto interests have unfairly influenced elections, donations have often been given in domestic currency? Will he look at that broader context?

I warmly welcome the Rycroft review and the Government’s swift action set out today on crypto and on overseas donations, although I would like to see them go much further. The Secretary of State said that he will amend the Representation of the People Bill wherever necessary. As a member of the Bill Committee, I would love to see those amendments tabled while we are still in Committee so that we can give them the line-by-line scrutiny that, as he referred to, is the normal practice of this House. Will he please pull out all the stops to ensure that happens? On stopping the spread of disinformation on social media, Philip Rycroft refers on page 47 of the report to the significant benefits that could come from having a real-time online library of social media adverts so that we get that transparency and that light shone on how all sorts of actors are influencing people below the surface. Does the Secretary of State support Philip Rycroft’s view on that? Will he table an amendment to deal with that problem?

As an individual who has dedicated my life to tackling corruption in all its forms and as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, I thank the Secretary of State and the Minister for Security, my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Barnsley North (Dan Jarvis), for their commitment to addressing foreign interference in our politics, as well as thanking Philip Rycroft for his review. I am grateful for the immediate measures that the Government have announced today on crypto donations and the size of donations made by British nationals abroad. They are very welcome and very much needed. May I press the Secretary of State on three particular questions? First, to what extent can he assure the House that the Electoral Commission is sufficiently supported to monitor and police the perimeter of the new announcements that have been made today? Secondly, will he confirm that, contrary to the remarks of the shadow Secretary of State, there was ample opportunity for political parties of all stripes to feed into the review? Thirdly, on “know your donor” checks and the risk factors that will be introduced through the Bill, there is a recommendation in the report that they should be more aligned with the anti-money laundering requirements that have been in place for quite some time for banks and other financial services firms. Will the Secretary of State commit to working with other regulators—for instance, the Financial Conduct Authority—to understand how those would best be implemented, working with parties?

I welcome the Secretary of State’s reference to the rights of British overseas electors and the cap on donations as a proportionate response, yet their right to cast their vote is constantly stymied by late arrivals of the post. While the Secretary of State is considering amendments to the Representation of the People Bill, will he meet me to consider my amendments that would address that issue and seek to secure the voting rights of overseas citizens?

Welcomes the report and recommends switching to profit-based donations to prevent shell companies from funneling dark money. Asks if the Government will take a close look at this recommendation.

Welcomes the review and raises concern about Sinn Féin's ability to fundraise in the USA and transfer funds into Northern Ireland.

Welcomes the ban on cryptoasset donations and capping foreign donations. Asks about when and how the Government will take forward Rycroft’s recommendations regarding banning foreign-funded adverts and requiring imprints for online ads.

Encourages extending retrospectivity of crypto and foreign donations measures back to previous general elections.

Thanks Philip Rycroft for including points from the Fair Elections APPG and raises concerns about foreign online interference. Asks if UK is considering modalities, capabilities, and powers to implement recommendations.

Welcomes the review and seeks clarification on whether changes will apply immediately without a legislative consent motion for devolved elections.

Welcomes the review, references paragraph 75 on reporting requirements for campaign spending outside regulated periods and asks about urgency of dealing with this issue.

Welcomes the report, particularly the cap on donations from overseas voters. Raises concerns about domestic big-money politics influencing parties and asks how to promote fairer representation.

Welcomes focus on social media threats to democracy. Asks if recommendations extend to Members of Parliament receiving income from platforms like X.

Highlights case of Nathan Gill’s conviction for promoting pro-Russian narratives, asks what additional steps can be taken against foreign interference.

Thanks for quick action on crypto donations. Asks what further steps will be taken to ensure influence does not move from politics into lobbying or think-tanks.

Asked for clarification on the adequacy of safeguards against political funding originating from Ireland and the US, ensuring accountability and transparency in elections.

Requested a meeting with the Secretary of State to discuss an amendment banning developers from donating to political parties to restore trust in the planning system.

Inquired about activating section 10 of the Political Parties and Elections Act 2009 to restrict only UK domiciled individuals from influencing democracy with donations.

Asked about criminal penalties for breaking the new rules on overseas electors and cryptocurrency donations, seeking an effective deterrent.