‘Admission of corruption’: Jacob Rees-Mogg mocked after claim about Russian money backfires

Cabinet minister’s evidence apparently shows UK ‘sheltering more dirty money from Russia than anyone else’

Jon Stone
Policy Correspondent
Monday 07 March 2022 11:09
Comments
<p>Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg Speaker</p>

Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg Speaker

Jacob Rees-Mogg has been mocked after his claim that the UK "leads the way" in sanctioning Russian banks backfired spectacularly.

The Cabinet minister took to social media over the weekend to defend the government's record on sanctions, following criticism that it had been too slow.

To make his point the Tory MP produced a chart showing the UK had sanctioned £258.8 billion, compared to £240 billion in the US and £38.8 billion in the EU.

But opposition politicians were quick to point out that the chart suggested there was simply more Russian money worth sanctioning in London than elsewhere.

Labour MP Chris Bryant said: "All this proves is that thanks to the Tories all the dodgy Russian money is in London. It’s an admission of corruption!"

His colleague Karl Turner added that the minister's claim in fact showed the "actual scale of ill-gotten Putin money his utterly disgusting Tory Government have let in".

And ex-Lib Dem leader Tim Farron said: "I think this tells us more that the UK is where most of Putin’s billionaires were enabled to safely put their money in the first place."

SNP MP Peter Grant added: "So that must mean the City of London was sheltering more dirty money from Russia than anyone else?"

Despite the high cash figures produced by Mr Rees-Mogg, the government has sanctioned far fewer individual businessmen with links to the Kremlin than its neighbours – and been slower to do so.

According to figures collated by Bloomberg last week the European Union had sanctioned 490 Russian entities, Canada 413, Australia 407, Switzerland 371, the US 118, Japan 40 and the UK 16.

The UK government says that it has sanctioned far more and claims its figure is closer to 228 following a rush of measures last week.

But an analysis by the BBC's Reality Check unit has found this figure open to dispute because it it includes subsidiaries and individuals within companies. Whatever the precise figure, the UK is widely regarded to have not gone as far or as hard as its neighbours, despite its rhetoric.

The government has also faced criticism more widely for having let the UK become a hub for Kremlin-linked money in recent decades.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in