PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Republic of Belarus (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2023 - 26 June 2023 (Commons/General Committees)

I beg to move,

That the Committee has considered the Republic of Belarus (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2023 (S.I. 2023, No. 616).

The statutory instrument was laid on 8 June under the powers provided by the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, otherwise known as SAMLA for short. It amends the Republic of Belarus (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 by broadening the designation criteria and introducing new financial and trade measures.

These enhanced sanctions reflect our continued condemnation of the role Belarus is playing to facilitate Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. They are designed to disrupt the ability of Belarus to support Putin’s war and to deter it from engaging in further actions that destabilise Ukraine.

The Government introduced their last package of sanctions against the Belarus regime almost a year ago. It included a range of financial and trade measures, and our trade with Belarus has subsequently dwindled. However, Belarus continued to support the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It allowed Russian forces the use of its territory as a launch pad for the illegal invasion. It trained Russian soldiers and supplied materiel and it is providing logistical support to Russia.

Lukashenko’s cronies continue to spread Putin’s poisonous propaganda and disinformation, and there is evidence that Belarus could be providing a route to circumvent the unprecedented suite of targeted sanctions that we and our allies have imposed on Russia. In response, we are determined to scale up our sanctions package against Belarus.

The measures in this latest package seek to block circumvention routes and broaden our designation criteria, while adding new powers to constrain propagandists. Taking each aspect of the package in turn, the instrument contains new trade sanctions, including a ban on UK exports to Belarus of banknotes and a wide range of machinery, as well as chemicals that could be used in the production of chemical and biological weapons. It will prohibit the export of precursor chemicals that could be used in the manufacture of chemical and biological weapons. The instrument also bans the import of Belarusian cement, wood, rubber and gold. This will help further clamp down on revenue streams for the regime. The measures also include further financial sanctions to prevent Belarus from using money markets or transferable securities instruments to raise revenue, thus constraining its ability to support Putin’s invasion.

Another key aspect of this instrument is the broader range of designation criteria, which will allow us to sanction a wider range of the regime’s facilitators and cronies, including Government aides, advisers and Ministers. Where appropriate, it will enable us to target family members of individuals already designated, to prevent them from benefiting from asset transfers designed to circumnavigate the bite of UK asset freezes.

The instrument provides the UK Government with powers to prevent designated Belarusian media organisations from spreading propaganda in the UK, including over the internet. The measures also provide powers to restrict the reach of Russian and Belarusian disinformation and can go some way to reduce the impact of the disgusting practice of posting false confessions online.

These strategic and targeted measures will sit alongside the wide-ranging sanctions that we have already imposed on more than 100 entities and individuals, including Lukashenko and members of his regime, for their role in the violent repression of Belarusian civil society, opposition groups and media. It is important to be clear that we have no grievance with the Belarusian people. It is they who suffer most from Lukashenko’s oppression and his support for Putin’s illegal war. They deserve leadership that works in their interests and not those of President Putin.

To conclude, this instrument targets the Belarusian regime for its continued support of Putin’s illegal actions in Ukraine. It is designed to impose an economic cost on Lukashenko’s regime and to restrict the support it can give in the future. Of course, we reserve the right to introduce further measures in co-ordination with our allies should Lukashenko’s regime continue to prop up Putin’s illegal war. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship, Mr Hosie. I thank the Minister for setting out the regulations to the Committee, and they are particularly timely, given the role that Belarus played in the events of the weekend. Indeed, we have just been discussing them in the main Chamber, and the shadow Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy), just responded to the Foreign Secretary on them. We will not want to speculate too much on what is happening in the relationship between Putin and Lukashenko, but it is clear that Lukashenko and elements of his regime have been actively aiding and abetting Putin throughout the barbarous war of aggression against Ukraine, and we need to watch the situation carefully.

I am pleased that further steps are being taken to isolate the puppet regime in Minsk, not only because of its actions in the war in Ukraine, but for the reasons the Minister set out, including the repression of its own population. In addition, we have seen the movement of tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus, and I am sure that the Minister, like myself, will also have heard the powerful words from Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the leader of the opposition in Belarus, and all those who have been repressed by Lukashenko’s regime over many years.

We will therefore not seek to divide the Committee, and we will fully support the steps the Government are taking to further constrain and isolate Lukashenko’s regime and those who are closest to him. In all the sanctions regulations over the last number of years, the Opposition have been clear that we support the Government in expanding the sanctions regime and emboldening the sanctions taskforce and the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation to ensure that the regulations have teeth and a real impact on those taking these actions across the globe.

Changes that allow the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office to more effectively target persons in the Belarusian regime who support Russia’s illegal war—including persons with the ability to nominate, appoint or remove a director of a relevant entity and persons that are linked to the Belarusian authorities—are common-sense alterations to our existing regime, and we of course support them. However, the Minister will not be surprised that I have a few questions for her.

Enhancing our sanctions regime, although welcome, has to be accompanied by enforcement and investigation. I am sorry to bring this up again but, according to OFSI’s website, no financial penalties for non-compliance have been issued since September 2022. My understanding is that none have issued under the relevant Russia regulations or the original Republic of Belarus regulations since this phase of the war against Ukraine began. I find it slightly hard to believe that that means there has been total compliance with our regimes since that date, however well-crafted they are.

I hope the Minister can set out what we are doing to investigate and enforce these things. I am sure she will not want to comment on live investigations, but it is clear to the Opposition that we need to have a deterrent effect on those involved. We have all heard the reports of sanctions loopholes and of those seeking to circumvent the sanctions, whether through third countries or other means. I would like some assurances from the Minister that investigations and enforcement are under way as we expand the text of these regulations. We can have paper after paper of sanctions, but they need to be implemented. If we look at some of our international comparators, including the United States and the European Union, we do appear to be lagging behind on this enforcement point.

We welcome the export prohibitions on the likes of machinery and banknotes. I was a little concerned that we are only now prohibiting precursive materials for biological and chemical weapons. I understand that sanctions are a work in progress and that we are constantly looking at new areas that may be of risk, but I hope the Minister can explain a little more clearly why it is only now—16 months on from the onset of this phase of the war in Ukraine—that we are dealing with materials that could have been used to develop biological and chemical weapons for export to associates of Lukashenko. I hope she can explain a bit more why it has taken that long.

We welcome the prohibition of imports on cement, wood, rubber and gold, the new measures relating to internet services and online media, and the ban on ancillary services. The Minister made some important points about why these measures are so critical in terms of online and the spreading of propaganda, the intimidation of those opposing the Lukashenko regime domestically, and the spreading of Russia’s lies about this conflict, and they have our full support.

In conclusion, this weekend underscored the extent to which Putin relies on Minsk and on Lukashenko and his regime to further his warped imperial ambitions on our continent and, as we have just seen, to act as a guarantor of security for the Russian regime itself. Although Belarus is the junior in the Union State, it is far from an inconsequential piece of the puzzle, and it is likely that Lukashenko’s influence will only grow as Putin’s handling of the war and his hold on power become more erratic and tenuous. We stand with the Government in bringing these regulations forward, and we stand with the Belarusian opposition movement, which remains steadfast in the face of Lukashenko’s tyranny. All of us, in this place and internationally, need to pay more attention to what has been happening in Belarus as well as in Russia itself. I hope the Minister can provide clarity on the issues I have raised questions about.

I will keep my comments brief, given that I agree with most of what has been said. The SNP has long called for sanctions on Belarus; in fact, only a few years ago, a few of my SNP colleagues joined protesters outside Parliament.

I share some of the concerns of the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth, particularly when we look at things against the backdrop of Putin’s illegal war. The long and the short of it is that I am grateful for the action that the Minister proposes to take, and we will not, therefore, force a Division.

I am grateful to members of the Committee for their thoughts and for their support for this latest set of regulations. As I say, this sadly continues to be a sort of rolling activity as we tackle and try to keep ahead of those who are working to support Putin’s illegal war.

I will do my best to answer the questions. The hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth is rightly a stickler when it comes to keeping us right on the importance of investigations. Of course, that is a continuing challenge as sanctions are set over time and those who have been sanctioned consider testing them. A number of cases have now been tested, and the sanctions have withstood the test of legal stretch from both sides. We are therefore pleased, and comfortable, that the methodology FCDO officials are using is robust and will withstand these things. If that were not so, we would feel that we were not going in the right direction, but we absolutely are.

In terms of the enforcement piece, the FCDO, OFSI, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and the National Crime Agency are working incredibly closely with the financial sector and relevant businesses to ensure that there is effective implementation. Just for reference, OFSI has issued £20 million in fines so far, but I am happy to get the team to write to the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth with the details so that he is fully briefed on that. As I say, we continue to monitor the situation and to look for new sanctions tools if we need them.

I would certainly welcome that clarification in writing, because the information on this on the FCDO website is not clear. However, questions have also been raised in the main Chamber a number of times about potential loopholes involving the export of metals from Belarus specifically. Could the Minister provide an update, perhaps in writing, about those cases, which hon. Members have been raising?

Yes, I will happily take the question of specific metals away and get back to the hon. Gentleman, and make sure that we are following that through. As I say, we do not comment on future sanctions, but we are always happy to hear from colleagues, and indeed those more widely, who think we should consider certain areas, businesses and individuals in our deliberations around future sanctions.

Nuclear weapons are obviously an incredibly difficult area. We are aware of President Putin’s continuing comments about the potential deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus. The position is very simple: we condemn absolutely those words, and we encourage the entire international community to do the same to make it clear that that sort of irresponsible nuclear rhetoric is not acceptable. We hope that even President Putin would consider de-escalating the situation, and we continue to monitor it. I was not in the main Chamber just now, but I know that the Foreign Secretary continues to be clear in his messaging across the piece and with allies on this issue.

To conclude, let me set out again that it remains absolutely in the interests of the UK and our allies to continue supporting Ukraine in the face of Russia’s assault and to impose a cost on Putin and all those who support him in his flagrant attack on the international rules-based order. Lukashenko and his facilitators and cronies continue to provide that support, and we will continue to try to reduce their capacity using our sanctions tools. We are grateful for Parliament’s solidarity over the actions we have taken in response to Putin’s invasion, for the support of the Committee today and for what may yet be to come—thank you to all. This is difficult work, and we have an incredible team working flat out in the FCDO to keep on top of it and to continue making sure that those who so flagrantly disregard international rules will be brought to justice. In the meantime, I thank the Committee, and I hope it will support the regulations.

Question put and agreed to.