text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill - New Clause 2 - Report on Funding of Enforcement Agencies
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  @ MP voted aye to require a report on the funding of enforcement agencies in connection with powers which can be used to require people to explain the origin of assets.
  
  @ MP voted no against requiring a report on the funding of enforcement agencies in connection with powers which can be used to require people to explain the origin of assets.
  
  The majority of MPs voted against requiring a report on the funding of enforcement agencies in connection with powers which can be used to require people to explain the origin of assets.
  
  MPs were considering the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill.[1][2][3]
  
  The proposed new clause rejected by a majority of MPs in this vote was titled: ''Report on funding of enforcement agencies'' and stated:
  
  :Within 28 days of this Act being passed, the Secretary of State must publish and lay before Parliament a report on the funding of enforcement agencies in connection with the provisions of Part 2 of this Act.
  
  The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following explanatory statement from its proposer:
  
  :This new clause would require the Secretary of State to publish and lay before Parliament a report on the funding of enforcement agencies in connection with the reforms to unexplained wealth orders, as provided for in Part 2 of the Bill.
  
  Part 2 of the Bill[2][3] provided for an expansion in the scope of the "Unexplained Wealth Orders" to: cover requests for information made to officers of an organisation; enable orders to be used in cases where it is suspected that the property in question has been obtained through unlawful conduct. On the subject of Unexplained Wealth Orders the Bill also seeks to: extend the period for which interim freezing order has effect and  limit an enforcement authorityâs costs liability. 
  
  The explanatory notes[3] state:
  
  :An Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) requires a person who is a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_exposed_person PEP] or reasonably suspected of involvement in, or of being connected to a person involved in, serious crime to explain the origin of assets (minimum combined value of Â£50,000) that appear to be disproportionate to their known lawfully obtained income
  
  
  --
  
  * [1] [https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3120 Parliament's webpage on the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill], Parliament.uk
  * [2] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-02/0262/210262v2.pdf Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill, as introduced 1 March 2022], Parliament.uk
  * [3] [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-02/0262/en/210262env2.pdf Explanatory notes to the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill, as introduced 1 March 2022], Parliament.uk
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  