Speeches by Law.

“That is a very welcome step forward, but regarding some of those excess profits, particularly in asylum hotels, are there any attempts to claw back any of that and use the proceeds to increase spending abroad? What more can be done, beyond that move from your being saver and spender of last resort?”

“Should BII raise debt? If so, would that affect FCDO’s relationship with the organisation?”

“Do you think it is taking enough risk?”

“Coming back to the return, it reflects a reasonably cautious approach in the past from BII, or at least one that is designed, even with different strategies, to yield a positive return overall. What assessment have you made of the impact of that approach on BII being able to get investment into some of the poorest coun…”

“Okay. It is just strange, at a time when the fiscal rules have changed and all this capital has been released, that that has not filtered through. What are the reasons for that?”

“I apologise; I probably sound like a broken record on this point every time we have you but, given the inherit bias towards capital spend across Departments—you can argue the toss whether that filters through to FCDO, because of the nature of the ODA cuts—why is that bias towards capital investment not feeding through …”

“So essentially exceptional capital.”

“Is there any strong indication on the direction of returns for the forward-looking period?”

“I forget the abbreviation, but is that required for it to be the type of capital used?”

“That is still quite a lot in a fund that is supposed to be recycling capital and making exits.”

“Going back to BII—I refer members of the Committee to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests—we heard that the strategy will be forthcoming quite soon. When exactly can BII expect to know how much funding it will receive?”

“If there is so much consensus among MPs and constituents, why is it that the members of the public who were more supportive of digital ID were more likely to be Liberal Democrat voters, at least when they were polled some time back?”

“I will turn the question back on the hon. Gentleman. What is the cost of not doing this? What is the cost of inaction? I have heard very little today from Opposition Members about how much a digital ID scheme will alleviate the costs currently associated with some processes, but I would welcome such input. On a persona…”

“Like many Members who have spoken today, I have received a lot of representations from constituents to speak in opposition to digital ID. It would have been easy enough, given my own personal level of comfort with digital ID, to have let today’s debate pass me by. As my constituents will know, this is a point of person…”

“Will the hon. Lady give way on that point?”

“I wholeheartedly agree. That is why it is important that in the months ahead and through the consultation, this scheme is introduced on a voluntary basis, just as we have set out, and remains that way. I know some might find this difficult to believe, but this really is no conspiracy. If we are not concerned about the …”

“This scheme presents a much better opportunity to ensure that we have the correct security procedures in place, versus some of our current insecure measures.”

“The hon. Member makes an important point that such systems are by no means immune, but I argue that the systems that we have in place at the minute are hardly secure.”

“I certainly hope that there are ways in which we can help to strengthen that. Evelyn, how do you think development partners such as the FCDO can help us better achieve that localisation and the kind of partnership at the local level that we have heard about from Mary?”

“Turning back to Mary, what are the benefits of programming decisions being made at a local level?”