Pabst Theater
Milwaukee, Wisconsin

(February 16, 2021)

7:59 P.M. CST

MR. COOPER:  And welcome.  We are live in the Pabst Theater in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.  This is a CNN Presidential Town Hall — the first with President Joe Biden.  I’m Anderson Cooper.  President Biden is just four weeks into his presidency and facing multiple crises: nearly 500,000 of our fellow citizens — Americans — have died from COVID-19, millions out of work right now, and a nation dangerously divided.

Tonight, we’re going to be answering questions from the American people.  The President will be answering questions from the American people on his first official trip since taking office.  Some of the questioners here voted for him.  Some did not. 

The President and I will not be wearing masks on this stage.  He, of course, has been vaccinated.  Over the past several weeks, I have repeatedly tested negative for coronavirus — as recently as yesterday and this morning as well.  We will however be keeping our distance from one another, and the audience is very limited, socially distanced, and all wearing masks when they’re seated.

With that, I want to welcome the 46th President of the United States, President Joe Biden.  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Hey, Anderson.

MR. COOPER:  How are you, sir?

THE PRESIDENT:  Good to see you, man.  Hey, folks.  How are you?  (Applause.)  Good to be back, man.

MR. COOPER:  Yeah, it’s nice to see you, sir.

THE PRESIDENT:  And you know you enjoy being home with the baby more.  I don’t want to hear this.

MR. COOPER:  (Laughs.)  I do.  Yes.  He’s nine and a half months, so I’m very happy.

THE PRESIDENT:  I get it.  No, no, everybody knows I like kids better than people.

MR. COOPER:  I saw a picture of you with your grandson recently.

THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.

MR. COOPER:  Yeah.  So we got a lot of questions in the audience.  We have about 50 or so people here.  They’re all socially distanced.  We have some folks who voted for you, some folks who did not.  And we’re going to get as many questions in as possible.

Before we get to that, I just want to start with a couple of just big-picture questions about the pandemic and where we are right now.

THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.

MR. COOPER:  New cases of COVID-19 hospitalizations have fallen by half in the last month, so have new cases.  That’s the good news.  There’s this potential threat — potential surge from the variants coming down the pike potentially.  When is every American who wants it going to be able to get a vaccine?

THE PRESIDENT:  By the end of July of this year.  We have — we came into office, there was only 50 million doses that were available.  We have now — by the end of July, we’ll have over 600 million doses — enough to vaccinate every single American.

MR. COOPER:  When you say — (applause) — when you say “by the end of July,” do you mean that they will be available or that people will have been able to actually get them?  Because Dr. Fauci —

THE PRESIDENT:  They’ll be available.

MR. COOPER:  They’ll be available.

THE PRESIDENT:  They’ll be available.

MR. COOPER:  Okay.

THE PRESIDENT:  Here, look, we — what we did — we got into office and found out the supply — there was no backlog.  I mean, there was nothing in the refrigerator, figuratively and literally speaking, and there were 10 million doses a day that were available.

We’ve upped that, in the first three weeks that we were in office, to significantly more than that.  We’ve moved out — went to the Pfizer and Moderna, and said, “Can you produce more vaccine and more rapidly?”  They not only agreed to go from 200 to 400 — and they’ve agreed to go to 600 million doses.  And that’s — and they’re — and we got them to move up the time because we used the National Defense Act to be able to help the manufacturing piece of it to get more equipment and so on.

MR. COOPER:  So if, end of April — excuse me, end of July, they’re available to actually get them in the arms of people who want them, that will take — what? — a couple more months?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, no, a lot will be being vaccinated in the meantime.

MR. COOPER:  Okay.

THE PRESIDENT:  In other words, it’s not all of a sudden 600 million doses are going to appear.  And what’s going to happen is: It’s going to continue to increase as we move along, and we’ll have — we’ll have reached 400 million by the end of May and 600 million by the middle of — by the end of July.

And the biggest thing, though, as you remember when you and I — no, I shouldn’t say it that way, “as you remember” — but when you and I talked last, we talked about — it’s one thing to have the vaccine, which we didn’t have when we came into office, but a vaccinator — how do you get the vaccine into someone’s arm?  So you need the paraphernalia.  You need the needle, and you need mechanisms to be able to get it in.  You have to have people who can inject it into people’s arms.

MR. COOPER:  That’s been one of the problems is just getting enough people.

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, now we have — we have made significant strides increasing the number of vaccinators.  I’ve — I issued an executive order allowing former retired docs and nurses to do it.  We have over 1,000 military personnel.  The CDC is — I mean, excuse me, the — we have gotten the National Guard engaged.

So we have significant number of vaccinators — people who would actually be there.  Plus, we’ve opened up a considerable number of locations where you can get the vaccination.

MR. COOPER:  I want to introduce you to Kevin Michel.  He’s an independent from Wauwatosa.  He’s a mechanical engineer for a vehicle company.

Kevin, welcome.  What’s your question?

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Hi, welcome to Milwaukee.

THE PRESIDENT:  How you doing?

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Good.  My question is regarding education.

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes. 

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  And considering that hybrid and virtual school instruction have been in place for nearly a year now, what is the plan and recommendation to get students back into the brick-and-mortar buildings?  As a parent of four children, I find it imperative that they get back to school as safely as possible.

THE PRESIDENT:  My mother would say, “God bless you, son.”  No purgatory for you — four kids home.  I really mean it.  And, by the way, the loss of being able to be in school is having significant impact on the children and parents as well. 

And so, what we found out is, there are certain things that make it rational and easy to go back to the brick-and-mortar building.  One, first of all, making sure everybody is wearing protective gear — it’s available to students, as well as to teachers, the janitors, the people who work in the cafeteria, the bus drivers.

Secondly, organizing in smaller pods, which means that’s why we need more teachers.  Instead of a classroom of 30 kids in it, you have three classes and that same — of 10 kids each in those.  And I’m — I’m not making the number up; it might be less.  It doesn’t have to be literally 10. 

In addition to that, we also have indicated that it is much better, it’s much easier to send kids K-through-8 back because they are less likely to communicate the disease to somebody else.  But because kids in — sophomores, juniors, and seniors in high school — they socialize a lot more, and they’re older, and they transmit more than young kids do, it’s harder to get those schools open without having everything from the ventilation systems and — and having —

For example, school bus drivers — you know, we — we got to make sure that you don’t have 60 kids, or however many there — depending on the size of school bus — sitting two abreast in every single seat.

And so there’s a lot of things we can do, short of — and I think that we should be vaccinating teachers.  We should move them up in the hierarchy as well.  (Applause.)

MR. COOPER:  Well, let me ask you, you — your administration had set a goal to open the majority of schools in your first 100 days.  You’re now saying that means those schools may only be open for at least one day a week.

THE PRESIDENT:  No, that’s not true.  That’s what was reported; that’s not true.  There was a mistake in the communication.  But what I — what I’m talking about is I said opening the majority of schools in K-through-eighth grade because they’re the easiest to open, the most needed to be opened, in terms of the impact on children and families having to stay home.

MR. COOPER:  So when do you think that would be — K-through-8, at least five days a week if possible?

THE PRESIDENT:  I think we’ll be close to that at the end of the first 100 days.  We’ve had a significant percentage of them being able to be opened.  My — my guess is they’re going to probably be pushing to open all for — all summer — to continue like it’s a different semester (inaudible).

MR. COOPER:  Do you think that would be five days a week or just a couple?

THE PRESIDENT:  I think — I think many of them are five days a week.  The goal will be five days a week.  Now, it’s going to be harder to open up the high schools for the reasons I said — just like, if you notice, the contagion factor in colleges is much higher than it is in high schools or grade schools.

MR. COOPER:  I want you to meet — this is Justin Belot.  He’s a high school teacher from Milwaukee who’s a Democrat.  Justin, thanks for being with us.  What’s your question?

THE PRESIDENT:  What do you teach?

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  I teach English.  High school English. 

THE PRESIDENT:  My wife teaches.  God love you.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Wonderful.  Thank you, Mr. President.  So along the same lines of schools, so this great debate on when to transition to in-person learning: While there are numerous warnings not to be in large groups or to have dinner parties or small parties, why is it okay to put students and teachers in close proximity to each other for an entire day, day after day?  With large class sizes and outdated ventilation systems, how and when do you propose this to occur?  And finally, do you believe all staff should be vaccinated before doing so?

THE PRESIDENT:  Number one, nobody is suggesting, including the CDC in this recent out report, that you have large classes, congested classes.  It’s smaller classes; more ventilation; making sure that everybody has masks and is socially distanced, meaning you have less — fewer students in one room; making sure that everyone from the sanitation workers who work in the — in the lavatories, in the bathrooms, and do the — and do the — all the maintenance, that they are in fact able to be protected as well.  Making sure you’re in a situation where you don’t have the congregation of a lot of people — as I said, including the school bus, including getting on a school bus.

So it’s about needing to be able to socially distance, smaller classes, more protection.  And I think the teachers and the folks who work in the school — the cafeteria workers and others — should be on the list of preferred to get a vaccination.

MR. COOPER:  I want to introduce you to Kerri Engebrecht, an independent from Oak Creek.

Kerri, welcome.  Go ahead.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT:  Kerri, how are you?

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Very good, thank you.  Our 19-year-old son was diagnosed with pediatric COPD at the age of 14.  We’re told he has the lungs of a 60-year-old.  He does all he can to protect himself.  Last month, he even removed himself from the campus of UW-Madison, as he feels it’s safer and he has less exposure here at home.

We’ve tried all we can to get him a vaccine.  I hear of others who are less vulnerable getting it based on far less.  Do you have a plan to vaccinate those who are most vulnerable sooner, to give them a priority?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, the answer is: Yes, there are. 

But here’s how it works: The states make the decision on who is — or in what order.  I can make recommendations, and for federal programs, I can do that as President of the United States.  But I can’t tell the state, “You must move such and such a group of people up.”

But here’s what I’d like to do: If you’re willing, I’ll stay around after this is over, and maybe we can talk a few minutes and see if I can get you some help.  (Applause.)

MR. COOPER:  Let — let me just ask you, though: Johnson & Johnson could be authorized — a new vaccine from them could be authorized in a couple of weeks.  That would be a big deal —

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, it would.

MR. COOPER:  — bringing a lot more vaccines on, millions of more doses to the supply.  Once that happens, given the urgency of these variants, and the potential threat from them, should states stop giving priority to certain groups and just open vaccine access for everyone?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, it depends on how much they have available.  I think there still should be priority groups in case there are not enough for everyone, every- — available to everybody. 

And, look, we don’t know for certain.  Let me tell you what my national COVID team has said: that the variants, the — by “variants,” you mean the Brazilian strain, the South African strain, the British strain —

MR. COOPER:  London.  Yeah.

THE PRESIDENT:  — and London, et cetera.  There’s thus far — thus far, there is no evidence that the existing vaccinations available for Moderna and Pfizer do not either make sure that they apply — they work as well against the strain in the United States.  And there is no evidence that they’re not helpful. 

So if you can get a vaccination, get it whenever you can get it, regardless of the other strains that are out there. There are studies going on to determine it is not only more communicable, but are there vaccine — do the vaccines not provide helpful protection by getting the vaccine.  There are some speculation.  I shouldn’t — I got to be very careful — right? — because millions of people are watching this.  It may be that a certain vaccination for a certain strain may reduce from 95 percent to a lower percentage of certainty that it will keep you from getting —

MR. COOPER:  It may not be as effective as —

THE PRESIDENT:  It may not be as effective.

MR. COOPER:  — against a variant, but it still would be effective.

THE PRESIDENT:  It’d still be effective.  So the clear notion is: If you’re eligible, if it’s available, get the vaccine.  Get the vaccine.

MR. COOPER:  I want you to meet — this is Dessie Levy, a Democrat from Milwaukee.  She’s a registered nurse, former academic dean.  She’s also currently director of a faith-based nonprofit. 

Dessie, welcome.

THE PRESIDENT:  By the way — you’ve heard me say this before, Becky [sic] — if there’s any angels in heaven, they’re all nurses, male and female.  Doctors let you live, nurses make you want to live.  I can tell you as a consumer of healthcare — my family.  You’re wonderful.  Thank you for what you do.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  God bless you.  Mr. President, hello.  My name is Dr. Dessie Levy.  And my question to you is: Considering COVID-19 and its significant impact on black Americans, especially here in Milwaukee, and thus the exacerbation of our racial disparities in healthcare, we have seen less than 3 percent of blacks and less than 5 percent of Hispanics, given the total number of vaccines that have been administered to this point.  Is this a priority for the Biden administration?  And how will the disparities be addressed?  And that’s both locally and nationally.

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, first of all, it is a priority, number one. 

Number two, there’s two reasons for it being the way it is.  Number one, there is some history of blacks being used as guinea pigs and other experiments — I need not tell you, Doctor — over the last 50 to 75 to 100 years in America.  So there’s a — there is a concern about getting the vaccine, whether it’s available or not. 

But the biggest part of it is access — physical access.  That’s why, last week, I opened up — I met with the Black Caucus in the United States Congress and agreed that I would — all — all of the fed- — all of the community health centers now, which take care of the toughest of the toughest neighborhoods in terms of illness, they are going to get a million doses, you know, a week, in how we’re going to move forward, because they’re in the neighborhood.

Secondly, we have opened up — and I’m making sure that there’s doses of vaccine for over 6,700 pharmacies, because almost everyone lives within not always walking distance, but within the distance of being able to go to the pharmacy, like when you got your flu shot.  That is also now being opened.

Thirdly, I also am providing for mobile — mobile vans, mobile units to go into neighborhoods that are hard to get to because people are on — for example, even though everyone is within, you know, basically five miles of a Walgreens, let’s say, the fact is, if you’re 70 years old, you don’t have a vehicle, and you live in a tough neighborhood — meaning you’re — it’s a high concentration of COVID — you’re not likely to be able to walk five miles to go get a vaccine. 

The other thing we found is — and I’m sorry to go on, but this is really important to me.  The other part — portion is, a lot of people don’t know how to register.  Not everybody in the community — in the Hispanic and the African American community, particularly in rural areas that are distant and/or inner-city districts — know how to use — know how to get online to determine how to get in line for that COVID vaccination at the Walgreens or at the particular store.

So we’re also — I’ve committed to spend a billion dollars on public education to help people figure out how they can get in there.  That’s why we’re also trying to set up mass vaccination centers, like places in stadiums and the like.

MR. COOPER:  Are you concerned about the rollout of this online?  Because it has been incredibly confusing for a lot of people, not just —

THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.

MR. COOPER:  — you know, older people.  It’s younger people just trying to find a place to get a vaccine.

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes.  And I have.  Because look — look what we inherited: We inherited a circumstance here, where — and now for the first — we did a lot in the first two weeks — a circumstance where, number one, there weren’t many vaccinators.  You didn’t know where you could go get a vaccine administered to you because there was no one to put it in your arm — number one. 

Number two, there was very little federal guidance; it’s to say, what to look for, how to find out where, in fact, you could go.  You can go online, and every single state now has a slightly different mechanism by which they say who’s qualified, where you can get the vaccines, and so on. 

So it’s all about trying to more rationalize in detail so ordinary people, like me, can understand.  I mean that sincerely.  I mean, I’m not — my — you know, my grandchildren can use that online — you know, make me look like I’m in, you know, the seventh century. 

But all kidding aside, so this is a process, and it’s going to take time.  It took us a — think of what we didn’t do.  And you and I talked about this during the campaign.  We didn’t do from the time it hit the — it hit the United States.  “You’re going to inject something in your arm, it’s going to go away.” “You’re going to be in a — it’ll all be done by Easter.”

We wasted so much time.  So much time.

MR. COOPER:  Another question about vaccines.  This is Jessica Salas.  She’s an independent from the Milwaukee, a graphic designer. 

Jessica, welcome.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Hi, thank you.  As we’ve been talking about, the coronavirus is very real and very scary.  And it’s especially scary for children who may or may not understand.  My children, Layla — eight, here — and my son Matteo — seven, at home — often ask if they will catch COVID, and if they do, will they die.  They are watching as others get the vaccine, and they would like to know when will kids be able to get the vaccine.

THE PRESIDENT:  Well first of all, honey — what’s your first name?

LAYLA SALAS:  Layla.

THE PRESIDENT:  Layla.  Beautiful name.  First of all, kids don’t get the vacci- — get COVID very often.  It’s unusual for that to happen.  They don’t — they — and there — the evidence so far is, children aren’t the people most likely to get COVID — number one. 

Number two, we haven’t even done tests yet on children as to whether or not the certain vaccines would work or not work, or what is needed.  So that’s — so you — you’re the safest group of people in the whole world — number one. 

Number two, you’re not likely to be able to be exposed to something and spread it to mommy or daddy.  And it’s not likely mommy and daddy are able to spread it to you either.  So I wouldn’t worry about it, baby.  I promise you.  But I know it’s, kind of, worrisome.  Are you in first grade, second grade?

LAYLA SALAS:  Second.

THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, you’re getting old.  (Laughter.) Second grade.  Well, has your school — have you been in school, honey?

LAYLA SALAS:  No.

THE PRESIDENT:  No.  See, that’s — that’s, kind of, a scary thing too: You don’t get to go to school; you don’t get to see your friends. 

And so what a lot of kids — and I mean — and big people too, older people — they just — their whole lives have, sort of, changed, like when it used to be.  It used to be, let’s go outside and play with your friends and get in the school bus and go to school, and everything was normal.  And now, when things change, people get really worried and scared.  But don’t be scared, honey.  Don’t be scared.  You’re going to be fine.  And we’re going to make sure mommy is fine too.

MR. COOPER:  You know, let me ask you — (applause) — let me ask you, just for folks who are watching out there — there are a lot of people who are scared, and there’s a lot of people —

THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.

MR. COOPER:  — who are hurting.  When do you think this pandemic is — I mean, when are we — when is it going to be done?  When are we going to get back to normal?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, you know, all the experts, all the committee that I put together of the leading researchers in the world and in the United States who are on this committee of mine, headed by Dr. Fauci and others, they tell me: Be careful not to predict things that you don’t know for certain what’s going to happen because then you’ll be held accountable.  I get that. 

But let me tell you what I think based on all that I’ve learned and all that I’ve studied and all that I think that I know.  It’s fairly — it’s a high probability that the vaccinations that are available today — and the new one, Johnson & Johnson, God willing — will prove to be useful; that with those vaccinations, the ability to continue to spread the disease is going to diminish considerably because of what they call “herd immunity.”  And now they’re saying somewhere around 70 percent of the people have to constitute; some people said 50, 60.  But a significant number have to be in a position where they are — they have been vaccinated and/or they’ve been through it and —

MR. COOPER:  Have antibodies.

THE PRESIDENT:  And have antibodies.

And so, if that works that way — as my mother would say, with the grace of God and the goodwill of the neighbors — that by next Christmas, I think we’ll be in a very different circumstance, God willing, than we are today.  I think a year from now, when it’s 22 below zero here — (laughter) — no, a year from now, I think that there’ll be significantly fewer people having to be socially distanced, have to wear masks, et cetera.  But we don’t know. 

So I don’t want to over-promise anything here.  I told you when I ran and when I got elected: I will always level with you.  To use Franklin Roosevelt’s example, I’ll shoot to give it “straight from the shoulder” — straight from the shoulder what I know and what I don’t know.

We don’t know for certain, but it is highly unlikely that by the beginning of next year’s school — traditional school year in September, we are not significantly better off than we are today, but it matters.  It matters whether you continue to wear that mask.  It matters whether you continue to socially distance.  It matters whether you wash your hands with hot water.  It — those things matter.  They matter.  And that can save a lot of lives while we’re getting to this point, we get to herd immunity. 

MR. COOPER:  You’ve made — (applause) — you’ve made passing a COVID relief bill the focus of your first 100 days.  Those on the right say the proposal is too big; some on the left say it’s not big enough.  Are you committed to passing a $1.9 trillion bill, or is that final number still up for negotiation? 

THE PRESIDENT:  I’m committed to pass- — look, here’s — some of you are probably economists or college professors or you’re teaching in school.  This is the first time in my career — and as you can tell, I’m over 30 — the first time in my career that there is a consensus among economists left, right, and center that is over- — and including the IMF and in Europe — that the overwhelming consensus is: In order to grow the economy a year or two, three, and four down the line, we can’t spend too much.  Now is the time we should be spending.  Now is the time to go big. 

You may recall I managed the last experiment we had with stimulus, and it was 800 — (applause) — no, I don’t mean it that way, but it was $800 billion.  We thought we needed more than that.  And we think we did.  We got — we were — it ended up working, but it slowed things up by about — and it, depending who you talked to — between six months and a year and a half.

We can come back — we can come roaring back.  It’s estimated that if we — by most economists, including Wall Street firms, as well as — as — as, you know, think tanks — political think tanks — left, right, and center — it is estimated that if we pass this bill alone, we’ll create 7 million jobs this year.  Seven million jobs this year.  (Applause.)

And so the thing we haven’t talked about — and I’m not going to go on because I want to hear your question, and I apologize — we haven’t talked about — I remember you and I talking during the campaign, and you had the former guy saying that, “Well, you know, we’re just going to open things up, and that’s all we need to do.”  We said, “No, you got to deal with the disease before you deal with the — with getting the economy going.” 

Well, the fact is that the economy now has to be dealt with.  And what is — look at all the people.  You have over 10 million people unemployed.  We need unemployment insurance.  We need to make sure that, you know, you have — 40 percent of the children in America are — talk about food shortage — 60 percent of — did you ever think you’d see a day, Milwaukee — you’d see in the last six months, people lining up in their automobiles for an hour, for as far as you can see, to get a bag of food?  What — I mean, this is the United States of America, for God’s sake.  We can’t deal with that? 

We promised — look at all the people who are on the verge of being kicked out of their apartments because they cannot afford — they cannot afford the rent.  What happens when that happens?  Everything (inaudible).  Look at all the mom-and-pop landlords that are in real trouble if we don’t subsidize this in the meantime.  Look at all the people who are on the verge of missing — and how many people have missed their last two mortgage payments and are able to be foreclosed on.  That’s why I took executive action to say they cannot be foreclosed on in the meantime.  Because look at what the impact on the economy would be.  You think it’s bad now, let all that happen. 

Look at all the people who’ve lost their insurance.  How many — I’m not asking for a show of hands.  How many of you had jobs with corporations or companies that provided healthcare?  The COBRA healthcare.  Well, guess what?  The company goes under, and guess what?  You lose your health insurance.  Well, we should be making sure you’re able to pay for that so that we keep people moving. 

So there’s a lot — so I think bigger.  And the vast majority of serious people say bigger is better now, not spending less.

MR. COOPER:  This is — this is Randy Lange, an independent who supported Donald Trump in 2020.  Randy is the co-owner of a woodworking company here in Milwaukee. 

Randy, welcome. 

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Good evening.  You’re proposing a $15 minimum wage.  Given the lower cost of living, specifically in the Midwest, many business owners are concerned that this will put them out of business, forcing them to downsize or cut benefits.  How can you instill confidence in small businesses that this will benefit the Midwest business growth? 

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, first of all, the South is not much different than the Midwest in that regard as well.  But here’s the thing: If you look back over the last 40 years, as minimum wages increased, people haven’t — the end — the end result of net employment hasn’t changed.  The vast majority of economists — and there are studies that show that by increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour, it could have an impact on — on a number of businesses, but it would be de minimis, et cetera. 

Here’s the deal: It’s about doing it gradually.  We’re at $7.25 an hour.  No one should work 40 hours a week and live in poverty.  No one should work 40 hours a week and live in poverty.  (Applause.)  But it’s totally legitimate for small-business owners to be concerned about how that changes.  For example, if it went — if we gradually increased it — when we indexed it at $7.20, if we kept it indexed by — to inflation, people would be making 20 bucks an hour right now.  That’s what it would be.

MR. COOPER:  The Congressional Budget Office says that a $15 minimum wage would lift 900,000 people out of poverty but would also cause 1.4 million people their jobs.  Is that —

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, but there’s also — if you read that whole thing about Pinocchios and all the rest — there are also an equal number of studies that say that’s not — that wouldn’t have that effect, and particularly as you do it in terms of how gradually you do it.  So let’s say — you said you’re going to increase the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour, between now and the year 2025, to $12 an hour, to $13 — you double someone’s pay — and the impact on business would be absolutely diminished, and it would grow the GDP, and it would grow and it would generate economic growth. 

But it’s not illegitimate as a small-business person to worry about whether or not increasing it at one fell swoop would have that impact.  I do support a $15 minimum wage.  I think there is equally as much, if not more, evidence to dictate that it would grow the economy and, long run and medium run, benefit small businesses as well as large businesses, and it would not have such a dilatory effect.  But that’s a debatable issue.

MR. COOPER:  I want you to meet another small-business owner.  This is Tim Eichinger, a Democrat from Milwaukee, co- owner of Black Husky Brewing.

Tim, welcome.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Thank you.  My partner and I own a small brewery in the Riverwest neighborhood of Milwaukee, and we have nine amazing employees.  We rely primarily on selling our beer out of our tap room.  And with the pandemic, our business has gone down about 50 percent.  Now, we’ve relied primarily on loans, grants, as well as our own reserves to survive.  However, the new assistance has been too slow, and recently it’s gotten more restrictive on how we can apply it.  What will you do so that small mom-and-pop businesses like ours will survive over large corporate entities?

     THE PRESIDENT:  Change it drastically, first of all, by making sure we have inspectors general.  You may remember when the first bill passed, you may remember there was a guy running, saying, “What’s going to happen is the banks aren’t going to lend you the money.  They’re going to ask you a question, ‘Do you have your credit with us?  How many loans do you have with us?  What is your — what credit cards do you have with us?  How…”  Because even though they were being underwritten, and we bailed their rear ends out — last time out, they weren’t — it was too much trouble to lend to you. 

What did the President do?  And I don’t want to pick on the Pres- — I shouldn’t — I don’t — I’m tired of talking about Donald Trump.  I don’t want to talk about him anymore.  But the last administration spent time — a lot of time talking about how there was no need for inspector generals.  We find out that 40 percent of the money — the PPE loans to go to — PP — PPP loans that go to small businesses went to — went to corporations that were multimillion-dollar corporations.  And you’re going to see an investigation showing that a lot of this was fraudulent where it went. 

So what I’m doing is I’m providing $60 billion for you to be able to make capital investments in order to be able to open safely and make sure you’re in a position that you can do the things that are recommended.  If you’ve noticed, there’s been very little federal direction for you all as to how to safely open your businesses.  Yet, you know, if you’re able to test your employees, if you’re able to be in a situation if you — if you serve people, you have Plexiglas dividers; if you — a whole range.  If you’re able to have everybody with a — with a mask and the like, you can do so much to safely open, but you don’t get that direction. 

So, the money, I guarantee you, is going to go to small businesses with people.  And I’m shooting — and, by the way, the original definition of a small businesses is 500 or fewer employees.  Well, that’s not what I mean by small businesses.  What we meant by small business is the mom-and-pop businesses that hold communities together and keep people together, and particularly in neighborhoods where if you don’t have a beauty shop, a barber shop, a hardware store, a grocery store, et cetera, the center of the community begins to disintegrate some.

So what I’d like to do is, if you are willing to give me an address, lay out for you precisely — without taking more time, I’m going to get in trouble; I’m supposed only took two minutes in an answer — is to let you know exactly how that $60 billion in part of the recovery package will go to small businesses.  (Applause.)

MR. COOPER:  Right.  We’re going to take a quick break.  When we get back, we’ll have more questions for the President of the United States, Joe Biden.  We’ll be right back.

(Commercial break begins.)

(Commercial break concludes.)

MR. COOPER:  And welcome back.  We’re live at a CNN Town Hall Event at the Pabst Theater in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, with President Joe Biden.  We are back. 

Thanks so much for — for being here.  We — before we get back into — to the audience, I want to ask just a question about what we just witnessed. 

Before the Senate voted to acquit the former President in the impeachment trial, you said you were anxious to see if Republican senators would stand up.  Only seven did.  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the rest “cowards.”  Do you agree with her?

THE PRESIDENT:  I’m not going to call names out.  I — look, I — for four years, all that’s been in the news is Trump.  The next four years, I want to make sure all in the news is the American people.  I’m tired of talking about Trump.  (Applause.)  It’s done.

MR. COOPER:  Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the former President is, quote, “still liable for everything he did while he was in office.”  If your Department of Justice wanted to investigate him, would you allow them to proceed?

THE PRESIDENT:  I made it clear: One of the things about — one of the most serious pieces of damage done by the last administration was the politic- — the politicizing of the Justice Department.  Any of you who are lawyers know — whether you’re a Democrat, Republican, conservative, or liberal — it has been more politicized than any Justice Department in American history.  I made a commitment: I will not ever tell my Justice Department — and it’s not mine; it’s the people’s Justice Department — who they should and should not prosecute.  Their prosecutorial decisions will be left to the Justice Department, not me.  (Applause.)

MR. COOPER:  I want you to meet Joel Berkowitz from Shorewood.  He is a Democrat, a professor of Foreign Languages and Literature at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

Joel, thanks for being here.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Thank you, Anderson.

THE PRESIDENT:  I’m not bad at the literature part, but after five years of French, I still can’t speak a word.  So I apologize.  (Laughter.) 

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  I’ll teach you some Yiddish sometime.  How’s that?

THE PRESIDENT:  I — hey, by the way, I understand a little bit of Yiddish.  (Laughter.) 

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  I’m sure you do. 

MR. COOPER:  It would be a shonda if you didn’t.  But — (Laughter.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  More seriously, Mr. President, like millions of my fellow citizens, I was shaken by the attack on the Capitol on January 6th, and on our democracy more broadly, by your predecessor and his followers.  While I appreciate efforts being made to bring them to justice, I worry about ongoing threats to our country from Americans who embrace white supremacy and conspiracies that align with it.  What can your administration do to address this complex and wide-ranging problem?

THE PRESIDENT:  It is complex, it’s wide ranging, and it’s real.  You may — I got involved in politics to begin with because of civil rights and opposition to white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan.  And the most dangerous people in America continue to exist.  That is the greatest threat to terror in America: domestic terror. 

And so I would make sure that my Justice Department and the Civil Rights Division is focused heavily on those very folks.  And I would make sure that we, in fact, focus on how to deal with the rise of white supremacy.  And you see what’s happening — and the studies that are beginning to be done, maybe at your university as well — about the impact of former military, former police officers, on the growth of white supremacy in some of these groups. 

You may remember in one of my debates with the former President, I asked him to condemn the Proud Boys.  He wouldn’t do it.  He said, “Stand by.  Stand ready.”  Or whatever the phrasing exactly was.  It is a bane on our existence.  It has always been.  As Lincoln said, “We have to appeal to our better angels.”  And these guys are not — and women — are, in fact, demented.  They are dangerous people.

MR. COOPER:  I want you to meet James Lewis, an independent from Milwaukee.  He’s a labor attorney. 

James, welcome.

THE PRESIDENT:  James, if I say anything you don’t like, let me know right away, will you? 

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  All right.  You’re all right.

THE PRESIDENT:  About as big as a mountain.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Good evening, President Biden.  I was a public defender in Kenosha County when the police shot Jacob Blake.  I witnessed the city I worked in burned and devastated.  And recently, District Attorney Michael Graveley denied to prosecute the police officers responsible. 

So my question to you is: What will your administration do to correct these wrongs that we witnessed not just in Kenosha, but across this country?  And what will we do to bridge the gap between communities and their police? 

THE PRESIDENT:  Three things.  First of all, I was a public defender as well, and I think it’s high time that we had public defenders being paid the same as prosecutors.  My son, by the way, was a great prosecutor; he was the attorney general of the state of Delaware, and he was a federal prosecutor before that.    And so I’m not condemning all prosecutors, but I am saying that it matters that you have adequate defense and you are able to attract people who, in fact, can live on being able to be that public defender — number one. 

Number two — we are pushing very hard, and I think we’ll get it done — is the legislation relating to what is appropriate police behavior and studying police behavior, and coming down with recommendations that are consistent with the legislation that was put in place as a consequence of all the world seeing one man shoved up against the curb and murdered after 8 minutes and 46 seconds. 

And so there’s a number of things relating to everything from no-knock warrants and — and a whole range of things you know.  But there’s legislation that’s being introduced separately.  I hope it will pass.

But thirdly, I think we have to deal with systemic racism that exists throughout society.  And one of the things I’m going to recommend there is that we look at an entire panoply of things that affect whether or not people of color, primarily, are — are treated differently.  And that goes through everything from prosecutorial discretion — you know, as a public defender what, by that, I mean.  What happens is — it’ll take too long to go through the whole explanation, but let me do it — try to go quickly. 

What happens now is, if you in fact are going to — you arrest someone because they had — and you want to charge them, you can charge them with robbery or armed robbery.  If you charge them with armed robbery, you get a lot more time than if you don’t charge with robbery.  But if you want to make sure that someone who doesn’t know much about their representation is able to (inaudible), you engage in prosecutorial misconduct by offering them to plead to, essentially — it’s not the same — burglary, which gets them two years in probation and — so you don’t even get a trial.  You plead because you don’t have adequate representation.  You feel like everything is against you, and you’re in trouble.  When I did the sentencing act, that was designed to keep — make sure we had the same time for the same crime.

As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I looked at all 10 federal districts — and we took six months to do it — and found out if you’re black, and you — or your first-time offense of being accused of burglary — and maybe you committed it and you were white and you did the same exact crime — in all 10 districts throughout the United States of America, a person — and don’t hold me to the exact numbers, but the percentages are right — if you’re a first-time white guy, you’d get two years; you’d get seven years if you were black.

So in order to make sure that you could not send people to jail for the same crime, I came up with this pr- — this Sentencing Commission, which said that you — everybody who commits the crime has to receive between — instead of zero to 20 years, you drastically cut down the number of years you could go to jail.  But say you have to — if you — if it’s a one — first-time offense, you have to get sentenced between one and a half and three years.  Okay?

Well, what happens is prosecutors use that as a mechanism to send people to jail.  It makes it look like they’re — we’re dealing with mandatory sentencing, which it wasn’t designed to do at all.  It was designed to make sure that people were treated fairly. 

There’s much — I’m sorry to go on.  There’s much more to talk about, but —

MR. COOPER:  Yeah.  We actually have a related question over here.  This is Dannie Evans, a pastor in Janesville, who works as a supervisor for the juvenile justice diversion program in Rock County.  He’s an independent, voted for Donald Trump in 2020.  He’s also a member the state’s 32-member Racial Disparity Task Force, created in the wake of the Jacob Blake shooting last summer. 

Dannie, welcome.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Good afternoon, Mr. President.  “Defund the Police” is discussed as an option for reforming policing; however, there are communities where people live in fear not of the police, but in fear of the violent gangs who commit crimes —

THE PRESIDENT:  Exactly.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  — in those neighborhoods.  How can we be sure that we don’t over-legislate police officers so that they can’t do their job to protect the law-abiding citizens who live in these high-crime neighborhoods, and yet train officers to police with compassion?

THE PRESIDENT:  By, number one, not defunding the police.  We have to put more money in police work so we have legitimate community policing and we’re in a situation where we change the legislation.  No one should go to jail for a drug offense.  No one should go to jail for the use of a drug.  They should go to drug rehabilitation.  (Applause.)  Drug rehabilitation.  Number one. 

We should be in a position where we change the system — of sentencing system — to one that relates to a notion of — they start telling you to — as related to making sure that what you do is you focus on making sure that there’s rehabilitation.

The idea that we don’t have people in prison systems learning how to be — spending the money — learning how to be mechanics, learning how to be cooks, learning how to have a profession when you get out; the idea that we deny someone, who served their time, access to Pell Grants, access to housing, access to — right now, as you well know, most places you get out of prison, you get 25 bucks and a bus ticket.  You end up back under the bridge exactly where you were before. 

And the fact is that — the concern in many minority communities is black-on-black, Hispanic-on-Hispanic, not just —

But here’s the deal: There has to be much more serious –how can I say it? — much more serious determination as to what the background and the attitudes of the recruit is, where — what their views are.  There should be much more psychological testing, like you would if you’re going to the intelligence community.  What is it?  What are the things that make you respond the way you do?  Because there is — there is inherent prejudice built into the system as well. 

And we also need to provide for — and it’s happening — more African American and more Hispanic police officers.  And, by the way, they don’t get it all right either, by a long shot.  But every cop, when they get up in the morning and put on that shield, has a right to expect to be able to go home to their family that night.  Conversely, every kid walking across the street wearing a hoodie is not a member of a gang and is about to knock somebody off.  (Applause.)

So it’s about education.  I’d love to talk to you more about it because it’s — it is the answer, in my view — that and education — actually, access to education. 

And one of the things that I talk a lot about — and I’m sorry to go on about this, but it’s important: I don’t think we can look at opportunity in the Af- — let’s stick with African American community for a minute — in terms of the criminal justice system.  That is only one small piece of why people are the way they are.  You realize — I don’t know what home you live in, but if you go ahead and you want to get insurance, and you’re in a black neighborhood, you’re going to pay more for the same insurance that I’m going to pay for the exact same home.  Your car — you never had an accident in your car.  If you live in a black neighborhood, you’re going to pay a higher premium on your car.  You’re going to —

So, there’s so many things that are built in institutionally that disadvantage African Americans and Latinos that we — in fact, I think — and one of the great advantages — I’m sorry, but one of the great advantages — as bad as things are — I keep reading from presidential historians how I’ve inherited the worst situation since Lincoln, worse than Roosevelt, because — economic crisis, political crisis, racial crisis, et cetera.

But the fact is that everyone has gotten a close-up look now and seen what’s happened.  That kid — that kid holding that camera for 8 minutes and 46 seconds awakened the whole world.  When I met with his little daughter, after he was dead, she said, “My Daddy has changed the world.”  Guess what?  Not only here in the United States.  Around the world, people said, “Whoa, I didn’t know that happened.” 

Dr. King — when my generation — when I got involved in the Civil Rights Movement as a high school student in the early ’60s — and you had Bull Connor and his dogs in the late ’50s sicking on those ladies going to — in their black dresses going to church — and little kids and fire hoses ripping their skin off.  He said, “What happened there was — it was a second emancipation.”  Because people in places where there weren’t black communities said, “That really happens?  I didn’t believe it.”  They saw it happen.  And so it generated the — the Voting Rights Act.  It generated the Civil Rights Act.  And he called it the “Second Emancipation.”  We have a chance now — a chance now to make significant change in racial disparities. 

And I’m going to say something that’s going to get me in trouble, which — I couldn’t go through the whole show without doing that.  And that is that — think about it: If you want to know where the American public is, look at the money being spent in advertising.  Did you ever, five years ago, think every second or third ad out of five or six you’d turn on would be biracial couples?  (Applause.)

No, no, I’m not — I’m not being fac- — the reason I’m so hopeful is this new generation — they’re not like us.  They’re thinking differently.  They’re more open.  And we got to take advantage of it.  (Applause.)

MR. COOPER:  I want you to — (applause) —

THE PRESIDENT:  I’m sorry.

MR. COOPER:  I want you to meet LuVerda Martin, a Democrat from Mequon or Mequan [sic].  

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Mequon. 

MR. COOPER:  Mequon, sorry.  LuVerda is a certified nurse, midwife. 

Welcome.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Good evening, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT:  Good evening.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Our nation’s experiences with and through COVID-19 and other recent tragedies have strengthened the foundation of division among Americans.  What are your immediate and tangible plans to address how deeply divided we are as a nation?

THE PRESIDENT:  I take issue with what everybody says about the division.  For example, my plan on COVID: 69 percent of the American people support it — 69.  In this state — recent poll — 60 percent.  Sixty percent.  Forty-five percent of Trump voters and fifty-five percent of Republican voters.  The nation is not divided.  You go out there and take a look and talk to people.  You have fringes on both ends, but it’s not nearly as divided as we make it out to be.  And we have to bring it together. 

You may remember how — trouble I get in.  I said there were three reasons I was running: One, to restore the soul of the country — decency, honor, integrity; talk about the things that matter to people, treat people with dignity.  Secondly, I said, to rebuild the backbone of the country, the middle class, and this time bring everybody along and have a chance.  And the third reason was unite the country.  On my own primary, I got la- — “Unite the country?  What are you talking about?” 

You cannot function in our system without consensus, other than abusing power at the executive level. 

So I really think there’s so many things that we agree on that we don’t focus enough on.  And that’s, in large part, I think, because we don’t just condemn the things that are so obviously wrong — obviously wrong — that everybody agrees on.  The way they were raised.  The way we were raised.  As my mother would say, if half the things that occurred in the last campaign came out of my mouth, as she’d say as a kid, we’d wash my mouth out with soap.  (Laughter.)

I mean, we have to be more decent and treat people with respect, and just decency.

MR. COOPER:  But let me —

THE PRESIDENT:  And — 

MR. COOPER:  Let me ask about — a question which does often divide many people in this country: immigration. 

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes.

MR. COOPER:  Your administration, along with congressional Democrats, expected to unveil an immigration reform bill just this week.  You want a pathway to citizenship for the roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants.  Would you sign any immigration bill if it did not include that: a pathway for the roughly 11 million undocumented —

THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, there’s a whole range of things that relate to immigration, including the whole idea how you deal with — you know, what confuses people, is you talk about refugees, you talk about undocumented, you talk about people who are seeking asylum, and you talk about people who are coming from the — that are coming from camps or being held around the world. 

And there are four different criteria for being able to come to the United States.  The vast majority of the people, those 11 million undocumented, they’re not Hispanics; they’re people who came on a visa — who was able to buy a ticket to get in a plane, and didn’t go home.  They didn’t come across the Rio Grande swimming — excuse me.  (Laughter.)  And — and — sorry, that’s the Irish in me.  (Laughter.)  

But all kidding aside.  So there are a lot of things that relate — but I think that we can no long- — look, you’ve he- — I’m — even if you’re not involved in politics at all, you’ve probably heard me say this a thousand times, and matter of — that everyone is entitled to be treated with decency, with dignity.  Everyone is entitled to that. 

And we don’t do that enough.  For the first time in American history, if you’re seeking asylum — meaning you’re being persecuted, you’re seeking asylum — you can’t do it from the United States.  You used to come, have an asylum officer determine whether or not you met the criteria, and send you back if you in fact — but you can’t even do that.  You’ve got to seek asylum from abroad.

MR. COOPER:  But just to be clear, though — and I know you’re going to be announcing stuff later this week, or that’s what I’ve heard — you do want a pathway to citizenship —

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes. 

MR. COOPER:  — for ele- — roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants.

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes.

MR. COOPER:  And that would be essential in any bill for you? 

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, yes.  (Applause.)  But, by the way, if you came along and said to me, “In the meantime, we can work out a system whereby we’re going to…”  For example, we used to allow refugees — 125,000 refugees in the United States in a yearly basis.  It was as high as 250,000.  Trump cut it to 5,000. 

Come with me into Sierra Leone.  Come with me into parts of Lebanon.  Come with me around the world and see people piled up in camps, kids dying, no way out, refugees fleeing from persecution.  We, the United States, used to do our part.  We were part of that.  We were — and, you know, that’s — you know, “send me your huddled masses.”  Come on.

And so I would, if you had a refugee bill by itself — I’m not suggesting that — but I would — there’s things that I would deal by itself, but not at the expense of saying, “I’m never going to do the other.”  There is a reasonable path to citizenship. 

And it shows up — one of the reasons why we have been able to compete with the rest of the world so well is most of our major competitors are xenophobic.  You remember quite — I remember you questioned me when I came back from China.  And I said, “I predict, within less than a year, they’re going to end their One China policy.”  And I got clobbered by — saying — because they said Biden didn’t talk about the fact that — how immoral it was.  And it was when we were running against a Republican ticket, led by Mitt Romney — a fine guy.

MR. COOPER:  You just talked to China’s President, I believe.

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, for two hours.

MR. COOPER:  What about the Uyghurs?  What about the human rights abuses in China?

THE PRESIDENT:  We must speak up for human rights.  It’s who we are.  We can’t — my comment to him was — and I know him well, and he knows me well.  We’re — a two-hour conversation.

MR. COOPER:  You talked about this to him?

THE PRESIDENT:  I talked about this, too.  And that’s not so much refugee, but I talked about — I said — look, you know, Chinese leaders — if you know anything about Chinese history, it has always been — the time when China has been victimized by the outer world is when they haven’t been unified at home.  So the central — to vastly overstate it — the central principle of Xi Jinping is that there must be a united, tightly controlled China.  And he uses his rationale for the things he does based on that.

I point out to him: No American President can be sustained as a President if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States.  And so the idea I’m not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uyghurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan, trying to end the One China policy by making it forceful — I said — and by the — he said he — he gets it.  Culturally, there are different norms that each country and they — their leaders — are expected to follow. 

But my point was that when I came back from meeting with him and traveling 17,000 miles with him when I was vice president and he was the vice president — that’s how I got to know him so well, at the request of President Hu — not a joke — his predecessor, President Hu — and President Obama wanted us to get to know one another because he was going to be the president.

And I came back and said they’re going to end their One China — their one child policy, because they’re so xenophobic, they won’t let anybody else in, and more people are retired than working.  How can they sustain economic growth when more people are retired?

MR. COOPER:  When you talk to him, though, about human rights abuses, is that just — is that as far as it goes in terms of the U.S.?  Or is there any actual repercussions for China?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, there will be repercussions for China, and he knows that.  What I’m doing is making clear that we, in fact, are going to continue to reassert our role as spokespersons for human rights at the U.N. and other — other agencies that have an impact on their attitude.

China is trying very hard to become the world leader and to get that moniker.  And to be able to do that, they have to gain the confidence of other countries.  And as long as they’re engaged in activity that is contrary to basic human rights, it’s going to be hard for them to do that.

But it’s much more complicated than that.  I’m — I shouldn’t have tried to talk China policy in 10 minutes on television here.

MR. COOPER:  Well, let me — let me bring it back to the United States.  I want you to meet Joycelyn Fish, a Democrat from Racine.  Joycelyn is the director of marketing for a community theater. 

Joycelyn, welcome.  Your question?

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Hello.  Good evening, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT:  Good evening.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Student loans are crushing my family, friends, and fellow Americans.

THE PRESIDENT:  Me too.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Laughs.)  The American Dream —

THE PRESIDENT:  You think I’m kidding.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  — is to succeed.  But how can we fulfill that dream when debt is many people’s only option for a degree?  We need student loan forgiveness beyond the potential $10,000 your administration has proposed.  We need at least a $50,000 minimum.  What will you do to make that happen?

THE PRESIDENT:  I will not make that happen.  It depends on whether or not you go to a private university or public university.  It depends on the idea that I say to a community, “I’m going to forgive the debt…” — the billions of dollars in debt for people who have gone to Harvard and Yale and Penn and schools my children — I went to a great school.  I went to a state school.  But is that going to be forgiven, rather than use that money to provide for early education for young children who are — come from disadvantaged circumstances?

But here’s what I think: I think everyone — and I’ve been proposing this for four years — everyone should be able to go to community college for free.  For free.  (Applause.)  That’s — that costs $9 billion, and we should pay for it.  And the tax policies we have now — we should be able to pay for you.  We spend almost that money as a break for people who own race horses.

And I think any family making under $125,000 whose kids go to a state university they get into, that should be free as well. 

And the thing I do in terms of student debt that’s accumulated is provide for changing the existing system now for debt forgiveness if you engage in volunteer activity.  For example, if you were — if you’re teaching school, after five years, you — you would have $50,000 of your debt forgiven.  If you worked in a battered women’s shelter, if you worked — and so on.  So you’ll be able to forgive debt.

Thirdly, I’m going to change the position that we have now to allow for debt forgiveness — because it’s so hard to calculate — whereby you can now, depending on how much you make and what program you sought, you can work off that debt by the activity you have, and you cannot be charged more than X percent of your take-home pay so that it doesn’t affect your ability to buy a car, own a home, et cetera.

Each of my children graduated from school.  I mortgaged the house.  I was listed as the poorest man in Congress for — not a joke — for over 30 years.  And — but I was able to bo- — I bought a home I spent a lot of time working on, and I was able to sell it for some profit.

But my — my oldest son graduated, after undergraduate and graduate school, with $136,000 in debt after working 40 — I mean, excuse me, 30 hours a week during school.  My other son, who went to Georgetown and Yale Law School, graduated $142,000 in debt, and he worked for a parking service in — down in Washington.  My daughter went to Tulane University and then got a masters at Penn.  She graduated $103,000 in debt.

So I don’t think anybody should have to pay for that, but I do think you should be able to work it off.  My daughter is a social worker.  My other son became a — ran the World Food Program USA, and so on.  They — they didn’t qualify.

But my point is: I understand the impact of the debt, and it can be debilitating.  And I think there is a whole question about what universities are doing.  They don’t need more skyboxes.  What they need is more money invested in — in making — so that’s why I provide, for example, $80 billion — $70 billion over 10 years for HBCUs and other minority-serving universities, because they don’t have the laboratories to be able to bring in those government contracts that can train people in cybersecurity or other future endeavors that pay well.

But I do think that, in this moment of economic pain and strain, that we should be eliminating interest on the debts that are accumulated, number one.  And number two, I’m prepared to write off a $10,000 debt, but not 50.

MR. COOPER:  Mr. President, let me ask you —

THE PRESIDENT:  Because I don’t think I have the authority to do it by signing the pen.

MR. COOPER:  You have, over the years — over your career, you’ve obviously spent a great deal of time at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, except now you’re living there and you’re President.  It’s been four weeks.  What’s it like?  How’s it different?

THE PRESIDENT:  I get up in the morning, look at Jill, and say, “Where the hell are we?”  (Laughter.)

No, it’s — look, it’s — you know, I’ve only been President four weeks.  And sometimes — because things are moving so fast, not because of burden — it feels like four years.  It’s not because of the burden; it’s because there’s so much happening that you focus on.  You’re constantly focusing on one problem or opportunity, one right — ad seriatum.

But what happens is that it’s — what I didn’t realize: I had been in the Oval Office a hundred times, as Vice President — or more than that, every morning, for the initial meetings — but I had never been up in the Residence.  And one of the things that — I don’t know about you all, but I was raised in the way that you didn’t look for anybody to wait on you.  And it’s — we’re — I find myself extremely self-conscious.  There are wonderful people who work at the White House.  But someone, you know, standing there and, you know, making sure — hands me my suitcoat or —

MR. COOPER:  You’d never been in the Residence of the White House?

THE PRESIDENT:  I’d only been upstairs in the — in the Yellow Room.  You know, the — the Oval upstairs.

MR. COOPER:  I don’t know, I’ve never been there either.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  No.  And — but it’s — but, look, the people down there are wonderful.  And I find that, you know — like, my dad — you’ve heard me say this before — my dad used to say, “Everybody…” — “Everybody is entitled to be treated with respect.”  And it’s interesting how decent and incredible these folks are.

MR. COOPER:  Is it different than you expected it to be, in some ways?

THE PRESIDENT:  You know, I don’t know what I ever expected it to be.  I — it is different in that — I’ll get in trouble in here.  I said when I was running, I wanted to be President not to live in the White House but to be able to make the decisions about the future of the country.  And so living in the White House, as you’ve heard other presidents who have been extremely flattered to live there, has — it’s a little like a gilded cage in terms of being able to walk outside and do things.

The Vice President’s residence was totally different.  You’re on 80 acres, overlooking the rest of the city.  And you can walk out, and there’s a swimming pool.  You can walk off a porch in the summer and jump in a pool, and — and, you know, go into work.  You can ride a bicycle around and never leave the property and work out.  And you can — but the White House is very different. 

And I feel a sense of — I must tell you, a sense of history about it.  Jon Meacham, who you know, and several other presidential historians, helped me with my — I asked my brother, who’s good at this, to set up the Oval Office for me, because it all happens within two hours, you know?  Literally.  They move everything out and move something. 

And it was interesting to hear these historians talk about what — what other presidents have gone through in the moments, and who were the people who stepped up to the ball, and who’s the people who didn’t.  And what you realize is the most consequential thing for me is — although I’ve known this watching seven presidents who I got to know fairly well — is I always, in the past, looked at the presidency in the terms of Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt and George Washington and how can — (inaudible).  They’re super human. 

But I had to remind myself, they’re really fine men that I knew well — the last seven presidents — and at least there are people who I knew well enough to know that I play on the same team with. 

So it took away the sense of, “This is — my God, you know, I’m not Abraham Lincoln.  I’m not Franklin Roosevelt.  How do I deal with these problems?” 

MR. COOPER:  Have you picked up the phone and called any former president yet? 

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, I have. 

MR. COOPER:  Do you want to say who?

THE PRESIDENT:  No, I don’t.  They’re private conversations.  (Laughter.)  But — and, by the way, all of them have, with one exception, picked up the phone and called me as well.  (Laughter.)

MR. COOPER:  I know you don’t want to talk about him, but — (laughter).

THE PRESIDENT:  No, but, look, it’s a — it’s the greatest honor I think an American can be given, from my perspective.  And I literally pray that I have the capacity to do for the country what you all deserve need be done. 

But one thing I learned after eight years with Barack is, no matter how consequential the decision — I got to be the last person in the room with him, literally, on every decision — I can make a recommendation, but I walked out of the room, and it was all him, man.  Nobody else.  The buck stops there. 

And that’s where you pray for making sure that you’re looking at the impact on the country and a little bit of good luck at the judgment you’re making. 

MR. COOPER:  Mr. President, thank you so much for joining us —

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.

MR. COOPER:  — in this town hall.  (Applause.) 

                         END                 9:13 P.M. CST

This privacy notice is for anyone who has dealings with the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) in connection with a financial product provided under the COVID-19 loan schemes. It includes the following schemes delivered by the British Business Bank (BBB):

• Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CBILS)
• Coronavirus Large Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CLBILS)
• Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS)
• Recovery Loan Scheme (RLS)

BEIS is committed to protecting the privacy and security of your personal information. This notice describes how we collect and use personal information about you in accordance with data protection law, including the General UK Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018.

BEIS is a data controller. This means that we are responsible for deciding how we hold and use personal information about you.

We are required under data protection legislation to notify you of the information contained in this privacy notice.

This notice, together with the British Business Bank privacy notice, other BEIS privacy notices and the BEIS Personal Information Charter, explains your rights, and the reasons we are using your information.

COVID-19 loan schemes: background

The COVID-19 loan schemes provide finance to businesses facing disruption because of the coronavirus pandemic. They are arranged in the following way:

• BBB accredits lenders and works with them to deliver the loan schemes
• accredited lenders process the loan applications and offer finance
• BEIS own the schemes and guarantee the loans.

All 3 parties are data controllers for the personal data they process under the loan schemes.

BEIS is the data controller for all data referred to here.

Data protection officer contact details

You can contact the BEIS Data Protection Officer at:

Email: [email protected]

Data protection principles

We will comply with data protection law. This says that the personal information we hold about you must be:

1. Used lawfully, fairly and in a transparent way.

2. Collected only for valid purposes that we have clearly explained to you and not used in any way that is incompatible with those purposes.

3. Adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are processed.

4. Accurate and kept up to date.

5. Kept in a form that identifies you for only as long as necessary for the purposes we have told you about.

6. Kept securely.

The kind of information we hold about you

Personal data is information that relates to an identified or identifiable individual and only includes information relating to natural persons who:

• can be identified or who are identifiable, directly from the information in question
• who can be indirectly identified from that information in combination with other information

We receive data regarding loans which includes:

• identity of loan applicant
• business type
• trading names
• personal names (sole trader and partnerships)
• company name and company number
• business address and postcodes
• details of loans (including amounts applied for)

As a large proportion of companies, sole traders and partnerships trade under an individual’s name, trading names, address, postcode may be considered personal data.

Through our role as a government department with responsibilities towards the loan schemes (including activity in relation to criminal enforcement and civil recovery of funds), we may hold data which includes:

• names, addresses, contact details, dates of birth, National Insurance numbers
• employment history
• location data
• online identifiers, including IP addresses, cookie identifiers from third party websites
• information relating to a person’s economic identity, including credit ratings, financial information and banking records
• an individual’s personal views and opinions, including recordings and transcriptions of interviews undertaken as part of an investigation

We may also hold special categories of more sensitive personal data which require a higher level of protection including:

• personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin
• personal data revealing political opinions
• personal data revealing religious or philosophical beliefs
• personal data revealing trade union membership
• genetic data
• biometric data (where used for identification purposes such as fingerprints and facial recognition)
• data concerning health
• data concerning a person’s sex life and sexual orientation
• criminal records and allegations of criminal offences

How your personal information is collected

We collect personal information directly from you in circumstances such as:

• you have made a complaint or enquiry to us
• you have made an information request to us
• you are representing your organisation

We collect loans data as follows:

• BBB accredit lenders and work with them to deliver loans
• accredited lenders process the loan applications and offer finance
• BBB provide BEIS with information on all loan applications where an accredited lender has offered finance to a business under a COVID-19 loan scheme

We also receive personal information indirectly, from the following third parties and/or in the following scenarios:

• we have seized personal information as part of an investigation
• from other public authorities, regulators or law enforcement bodies
• where you have made your contact information available on your organisation’s website and we use this to contact you and your organisation in our role as a government department and/or guarantor of the scheme
• publicly available sources, including Companies House
• banks and other financial institutions
• credit reference agencies
• anti-fraud organisations
• other government departments and public authorities
• your agent or representative

How we use your information

We will only use your personal information when the law allows us to. Most commonly, we will use your personal information where:

• we need to comply with a legal obligation
• it is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of our official authority as a government department
• it is necessary for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences including fraud

In limited circumstances we will ask you for your consent to use your personal information, but your consent is not required if any of the above apply.

Situations in which we will use your personal information

We will also process your personal data in the following circumstances:

• when carrying out any of our lawful functions
• to check the data we hold about you is accurate and up to date
• to compare it against other information to help combat fraud and crime
• when investigating an offence, engaging with parties to the investigation, including evidence gathering, fulfilling disclosure obligations and discussions to agree appropriate outcomes
• for case management, including evidence analysis and storage in line with statutory obligations
• to prevent, detect or prosecute a crime
• to bring civil proceedings and/or debt recovery as loan guarantor
• to undertake statistical and analytical analysis
• to respond to questions sent to the department

We process the loans data received from BBB to:

• analyse and review the take up, impact, performance and costs of the loan schemes
• research the effectiveness of the loan schemes and support future policy development
• prevent and detect crime; including the use of fraud analytics to look for unknown or undetected criminal patterns and behaviour
• to take action to mitigate the risk of loss in relation to fraud against a public authority including:
  • preventing, detecting, investigating and prosecuting fraud
  • bringing civil proceedings as a result of fraud
  • taking administrative action in connection with fraud

How we use particularly sensitive personal information

Special categories of particularly sensitive personal information require higher levels of protection. We need to have further justification for collecting, storing and using this type of personal information.

We will, if necessary, process special categories of personal information in the following circumstances:

• where we need to carry out our legal obligations and it is in line with our data protection policy
• where it is in line with our data protection policy, it is substantially in the public interest to do so and necessary for:
  • performing our functions as a government department
  • the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences
  • preventing or detecting unlawful acts
  • preventing or detecting fraud
• where we have your explicit consent to do so – we do not require your explicit consent where any of the above apply

Read our Appropriate Policy Document to find out how BEIS processes particularly sensitive personal information.

Information about criminal convictions

We will only use information relating to criminal convictions or alleged criminal behaviour where the law allows us to do so. This can arise when it is necessary for us to carry out our official functions.

We will only collect information about criminal convictions or allegations of criminal behaviour where it is appropriate and where we are legally able to do so.

We are allowed to use your personal information in this way where it is in line with our data protection policy.

Read the BEIS Appropriate Policy Document to find out how we process information about criminal convictions.

Lawful basis for processing

Legal basis for processing personal data for non-law enforcement purposes

Where BEIS processes personal data for non-law enforcement purposes, the processing will fall under the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018). There are a number of requirements listed in the DPA 2018 to ensure this is lawful. Annex A provides a detailed explanation of how BEIS achieves this.

Legal basis for processing personal data for law enforcement purposes

As part of our responsibilities under the COVID-19 loan schemes, BEIS plays an enforcement role to protect the government guarantee to lenders in respect of loans provided to borrowers.

The processing will fall under Part 3 of the Data Protection Act 2018 as BEIS processes data for the purpose of conducting criminal investigations and/or prosecutions. BEIS is a competent authority for the purposes of the DPA 2018.

Where an investigation is of a civil nature or in relation to civil litigation, processing is subject to the UK GDPR. Processing in the context of a criminal investigation or proceedings will be subject to provisions of the DPA 2018.

Annex B provides a more detailed explanation of the legal basis for processing.

Data sharing

We will not share your information with any third parties for the purposes of direct marketing.

We use data processors who are third parties who provide elements of services for us. We have contracts in place with our data processors. This means that they cannot do anything with your personal information unless we have instructed them to do it. They will not share your personal information with any organisation apart from us. They will hold it securely and retain it for the period we instruct.

In some circumstances we are legally obliged to share information. For example, we might also share information with other regulatory bodies in order to further their, or our, objectives. In any scenario, we will satisfy ourselves that we have a lawful basis on which to share the information and document our decision making.

We may also share your information for the purposes of debt recovery in circumstances where we are obliged to pay out to accredited lenders as guarantor of the COVID-19 loan schemes. If the debt remains outstanding after the specified timeframe for payment, no payment plan is in place or an agreed payment plan is not being adhered to, we may initiate formal proceedings to recover the full amount of the outstanding loan and associated interest. As a result BEIS will share personal data with the litigation and recovery agents it instructs in order for them to identify assets and undertake recovery action through the courts.

Where required by law, information relating to individual COVID-19 loans (which may include amongst other details the identity of the borrowers and size of loan) will be shared with the European Commission under the State aid Temporary Framework and the approval for the ‘COVID-19 Temporary Framework for UK Authorities’. The European Commission will make this information publicly available in due course on its State Aid Transparency public search website.

Where required by law, information relating to individual COVID-19 loans (which may include amongst other details the identity of the borrowers and size of loan) will be shared on the UK’s public transparency database to enable compliance with the UK’s international subsidy reporting requirements with regards to the UK-EU Trade and Co-operation Agreement, World Trade Organisation Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and other Free Trade Agreements.

We may share data with the Bank of England. This may be as part of their responsibility to regulate and supervise accredited lenders or in their official functions to gather, analyse and publish data, which inform their policy decisions and response to key economic events or crises.

We will, in some circumstances and where the law allows, share your data with third parties, including:

• British Business Bank
• other government departments
• public authorities (including local authorities)
• law enforcement agencies both in the UK and overseas
• regulatory bodies
• debt collection agencies
• credit reference agencies
• anti-fraud organisations
• banks (including accredited lenders)
• other financial institutions

When we may share your personal information with third parties

We will share your personal information with third parties where:

• required or allowed by law
• it is in the public interest to do so
• you authorise us to do so
• it is necessary for the performance of our functions as a government department or a function of the Crown, another government department or another public authority

This includes:

• our executive agencies, including the Insolvency Service and Companies House
• the Cabinet Office
• HM Revenue and Customs
• the Department of Work and Pensions
• the Home Office
• local authorities
• the security and intelligence services, for their functions
• courts and tribunals
• your agent or legal representative

Personal data shared with third parties may be disclosed onward to other third parties for specific purposes where there is a lawful basis and subject to BEIS’ authority. For example, DWP may disclose information obtained from BEIS to local authorities for certain social security, welfare and council tax purposes.

We will also share your personal information with the police and other law enforcement agencies where it is necessary to do so for the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences, and other regulatory authorities when it is necessary for the purposes of their regulatory functions.

This will, in some circumstances, involve sharing special categories of personal data and, where relevant, data about criminal convictions or allegations.

Disclosure to a specified anti-fraud organisation – Serious Crime Act 2007

BEIS may disclose information to a specified anti-fraud organisation (SAFO) for the purposes of preventing fraud.

Section 68 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 was introduced as part of the government’s commitment to preventing fraud. It enables public authorities to disclose information for the purposes of preventing fraud, as a member of a SAFO or otherwise in accordance with any arrangements made with such an organisation. A SAFO enables or facilitates the sharing of information for the prevention of fraud and is specified by an order made by the Secretary of State. Disclosures of information from a public authority to a SAFO are subject to a code of practice and this, along with a full list of SAFOs we may share information with, is available on GOV.UK: Data sharing for the prevention of fraud: code of practice. In addition, all disclosures must be made in accordance with data protection legislation.

Disclosure of information to combat fraud against the public sector

Section 56 of the Digital Economy Act 2017 enables public authorities to share information in order to take action in connection with fraud against a public authority. This type of information sharing helps us to improve our ability to identify and reduce the risk of fraud against the public sector and recover public sector funds.

Fraud in this context means a fraud offence which involves:

a) loss to a public authority, or
b) the exposure of a public authority to a risk of loss

Taking action includes:

• preventing
• detecting
• investigating and prosecuting fraud
• bringing civil proceedings
• taking administrative action as a result of fraud

Where BEIS has entered into information sharing under this power, it has taken steps to ensure that information sharing proposals are balanced and proportionate and come under an appropriate level of scrutiny. This includes ensuring that such arrangements are set out in appropriate information sharing agreements.

We only use personal information shared under this power for the purpose for which it was disclosed, unless certain exceptions apply including:

a) if the information has already lawfully been made available to the public
b) the prevention or detection of crime
c) for the purposes of a criminal investigation
d) for the purposes of legal proceedings (whether civil or criminal)

BEIS undertakes fraud analytics in respect of data from all loan applications (company name and registration number, trading name, post code and lender demand date) for the purpose of quantifying and/or identifying fraud and to look for potential fraudulent behaviour, patterns and trends. This activity is not limited to those applications where potentially fraudulent or suspicious activity has been identified.

As part of the fraud data analytics programme, we share loan data with the Cabinet Office to match it with other government data sets. The results of this will be shared with BEIS, the BBB, accredited lender(s) and other government bodies and law enforcement agencies as appropriate.

Data security

We have put in place measures to protect the security of your information.

Our third-party service providers will only process your personal information on our instructions or with our agreement, and where they have agreed to treat the information confidentially and to keep it secure.

We treat the security of your data very seriously. We have strict security standards, and all our staff and other people who process personal data on our behalf get regular training about how to keep information safe.

Where possible the personal data is minimised, aggregated, or anonymised, for example in reporting performance, estimated losses and so on.

We have put in place appropriate technical, physical and managerial procedures to safeguard and secure the information we collect about you.

In addition, we limit access to your personal information to those persons, or agents who have a business or legal need.

We have put in place procedures to deal with any suspected data security breach and will notify you and the regulator of a suspected breach where we are legally required to do so.

All organisations we work with are required to agree to move, process and destroy data securely i.e., in line with the principles set out in HM Government Security policy framework, issued by the Cabinet Office, when handling, transferring, storing, accessing or destroying information.

Retention of your personal data

Personal data is retained in accordance with the BEIS retention and disposal policy. We aim to retain your personal information for only as long as it is necessary for us to do so for the purposes for which we are using it and in line with our retention and disposal policy.

In some circumstances we will anonymise your personal information so that it can no longer be associated with you, in which case we will use such information without further notice to you.

Your data protection rights

Under data protection law, you have rights we need to make you aware of. The rights available to you depend on our reason for processing your information.

Your right of access: you have the right to ask us for copies of your personal information. This right always applies. There are some exemptions, which means you may not always receive all the information we process.

Your right to rectification: you have the right to ask us to rectify information you think is inaccurate. You also have the right to ask us to complete information you think is incomplete. This right always applies.

Your right to erasure: you have the right to ask us to erase your personal information in certain circumstances.

Your right to restriction of processing: you have the right to ask us to restrict the processing of your information in certain circumstances.

Your right to object to processing: you have the right to object to processing if we are able to process your information because the process forms part of our public tasks, or is in our legitimate interests.

Your right to data portability: this only applies to information you have given us. You have the right to ask that we transfer the information you gave us from one organisation to another, or give it to you. The right only applies if we are processing information based on your consent or under, or in talks about entering into a contract and the processing is automated.

Your rights – law enforcement processing

If we are processing your information for law enforcement purposes, your rights are slightly different.

You have a right to access your personal data held by or for us. You also have a right to get inaccurate data rectified and incomplete data completed, and for your personal data to be erased in certain circumstances.

We will provide further information directly to data subjects in specific cases to enable them to exercise their rights. This might be in cases where we are processing your personal data that was collected without your knowledge.

We will not do this where doing so would be prejudicial to our investigation or for other reasons set out in section 44(4) of the Data Protection Act 2018.

International transfers

Your personal data will not be processed outside the UK and European Economic Area (EEA), or by an international organisation.

Complaints

If you consider that your personal data has been misused or mishandled, you may make a complaint to the Information Commissioner, who is an independent regulator. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

0303 123 1113
Email: [email protected]

Any complaint to the Information Commissioner is without prejudice to your right to seek redress through the courts.

Changes to this privacy notice

We keep our privacy notices under regular review. If there are any changes we will update this page to tell you, for example, about any new uses of personal data.

Check this page to make sure you are aware of what information we collect, how we use it and the circumstances we may share it with other organisations.

From time to time, we may also tell you in other ways about the processing of your personal data.

Annex A: Detailed explanation of the legal basis for processing – non-law enforcement purposes

Our lawful basis for processing loans data is UK GDPR Article 6(1)(e) – processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller, which in this case is in the exercise of a government function in the delivery of the COVID-19 loan schemes.

For the purposes of UK GDPR Article 6(3) the legal basis for the establishment and operation of the fraud data analytics program for the purposes of taking action in connection with fraud, is covered by Part 5, Chapter 4, section 56 of the Digital Economy Act (DEA) 2017. This provides powers for government departments / organisations to share information for the purposes of taking of action in connection with fraud against a public authority.

BEIS also relies on the following legal bases under Article 6(1) of the UK GDPR (depending on the context of the data processing) where processing personal data for non-law enforcement purposes:

• 6(1)(a) the data subject has given consent to the processing of his or her personal data for one or more specific purposes
• 6(1)(c) processing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which the controller is subject
• 6(1)(e) processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller
• 6(1)(f) processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual, particularly where the individual is a child

Where BEIS relies on legitimate interests as a reason for processing data, it has considered whether or not those interests are overridden by the rights and freedoms of individuals and has concluded that they are not.

In addition, where the processing for any of the non-law enforcement purposes is sensitive processing, BEIS processes data under the following article 9(2) conditions of the UK GDPR:

• where we have your explicit consent, this will be appropriately documented, and you will be able to ‘opt out’ at any time
• where processing is necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims or whenever courts are acting in their judicial capacity
• where processing is necessary for reasons of substantial public interest

In order for BEIS to process special category data for reasons of substantial public interest, the processing must meet one of the conditions set out in Part 2, Schedule 1.

The condition(s) BEIS relies on in Schedule 1 will depend on the context of the data processing concerned.

Archiving, research and statistics

In order for BEIS to process special category data in reliance upon this Article 9 condition, the processing must meet one of the conditions set out in Part 1, Schedule 1. This applies where the BEIS transfers material to the National Archives.

Read our Appropriate Policy Document to find out how BEIS processes special category data.

Annex B – Detailed explanation of the legal basis for processing – law enforcement purposes

As a United Kingdom government department (Data Protection Act 2018, section 30 and Schedule 7(1)), BEIS is a competent authority for the purpose of Part 3 of the DPA 2018 which applies to the processing of personal data by such authorities for law enforcement purposes.

These purposes are set out at s.31 DPA 2018 and are the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, which might include the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security.

Our processing is either done because it is necessary for the performance of a task relating to one of these purposes (s.35(2)(b) DPA 2018) or with the consent of the individual (s.35(2)(a) DPA 2018).

We process personal data for the purposes of law enforcement in the following 3 areas:

• criminal investigations
• intelligence
• financial recovery

Our processing can also include sensitive processing which means processing special category data for law enforcement purposes. Where this is the case, we rely on either the consent of the individual (s.32(4)) or, provided the processing is strictly necessary for the law enforcement purposes, on a condition set out in Schedule 8 of the DPA 2018 (s.35(5).

The relevant conditions in schedule 8 of the Data Protection Act 2018 are:

i. for statutory purposes where BEIS is processing data through exercising powers under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 or Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (to conduct cases that involve the proceeds of crime) or any other relevant law, and where case teams ensure processing is necessary for reasons of substantial public interest.

ii. for the administration of justice.

iii. for the safeguarding of children and of individuals at risk where the BEIS is processing data of victims, witnesses or other individuals connected to investigations and prosecutions who are under 18 or are considered vulnerable or at risk. The BEIS case teams will ensure that processing is necessary for BEIS to effectively investigate offences and fulfil our statutory function, and handle consent in line with the Victims’ Code of Practice.

iv. personal data already in the public domain – this condition is met if the processing relates to personal data which is manifestly made public by the data subject.

v. preventing fraud – where it is necessary to prevent fraud, and

a) consists of—
i) the disclosure of personal data by a competent authority as a member of an anti-fraud organisation

ii) the disclosure of personal data by a competent authority in accordance with arrangements made by an anti-fraud organisation

iii) the processing of personal data disclosed as described in sub-paragraph (i) or (ii)

An ‘anti-fraud organisation’ has the same meaning as in section 68 of the Serious Crime Act 2007.

vi. Legal claims – where it is necessary for or in connection with legal proceedings or to obtain legal advice or to establish, exercise or defend legal rights.

vii. For Archiving purposes where data is contained within files that meet the criteria of ‘long term interest’ defined by the BEIS Retention Schedule and will therefore be transferred to The National Archives (TNA) under the Public Records Act 1958. BEIS will make decisions as to the archiving of data under the guidance of the Keeper of Public Records.

Read our Appropriate Policy Document to find out how BEIS conducts sensitive processing.

Globe Newswire

Annual Financial Report

Octopus Apollo VCT plc Final Results14 May 2021 Octopus Apollo VCT plc, managed by Octopus Investments Limited, today announces the final results for the year ended 31 January 2021. These results were approved by the Board of Directors on 13 May 2021. You may, in due course, view the Annual Report in full at www.octopusinvestments.com. All other statutory information can also be found there. Year to 31 January 2021Year to 31 January 2020Net assets (£’000)168,237132,373Profit after tax (£’000)19,7674,144Net asset value (“NAV”) per share (p)49.245.7Cumulative dividends paid since launch (p)76.474.1NAV per share plus cumulative dividends paid (p)125.6119.8Total return %*12.73.4Dividends per share paid in the year (p)2.33.0Proposed final dividend (p)**1.31.1 *Total Return is an alternative performance measure calculated as movement in NAV in the period plus dividends paid in the period, divided by the NAV at the beginning of the period. **The final proposed dividend of 1.3p per Ordinary share for the year ended 31 January 2021 will, subject to shareholder approval at the Annual General Meeting, be paid on 23 July 2021 to all Ordinary shareholders on the register on 9 July 2021. Key Dates Annual General Meeting 30 June 2021 Final dividend payment date 23 July 2021 Interim results to 31 July 2021 published September 2021 Chair’s Statement PerformanceI am pleased to present the annual results for Apollo for the year ended 31 January 2021. The NAV plus cumulative dividends per share at 31 January 2021 was 125.6p, an increase of 5.8p per share from 31 January 2020. The NAV per share increased during the year from 45.7p to 49.2p which represents, after adding back the 2.3p of dividends paid in the year, a total return for the year of 12.7% compared to 3.4% in the previous year. As shareholders are aware, the Coronavirus pandemic hit around the end of 2019 and on 2 April 2020, following a review of the impact of the pandemic on Apollo’s portfolio, we announced a 6.1% reduction in the NAV per share to 42.9p. I am happy to say that Apollo, in a year the like of which none of us has ever experienced, has performed strongly since then and financial year 2021 has been the strongest year ever for the Company with a 12.7% total return. Our focus on the technology sector played a major role in Apollo’s performance and we have seen exciting growth in the value of a number of our investee companies. Whilst the commentary presented below refers primarily to the position at 31 January 2021, post the year-end we reviewed the portfolio in advance of recent share allotments and this led to our announcing an increase in the NAV per share from 49.2p to 50.1p on 12 March 2021. In part, this reflects the successful conclusion of certain exits which were still uncertain at 31 January 2021. Investment Activity In the year under review the Company invested £15.9 million, representing £7.6 million into two new investments and £8.3 million of follow-on capital into existing investee companies to fund their growth plans, further details of which can be found in the Investment Manager’s report. There were two partial exits and two full exits of portfolio companies during the year generating total proceeds to the Company of £3.4 million. Dividend and Dividend PolicyIt is your Board’s policy to maintain a regular dividend flow where possible in order to take advantage of the tax-free distributions a VCT is able to provide, and work towards the targeted 5% annual dividend yield policy. I am pleased to confirm that the Board has proposed a final dividend of 1.3p per share in respect of the year ended 31 January 2021. This is in addition to the 1.2p interim dividend paid on the 15 January 2021, and will bring the total dividends declared to 2.5p for the year. As in previous years, dividends will first be paid out of any revenue reserves, with any remaining balance to be paid from the special distributable reserve. The dividend will be payable on 23 July 2021 to shareholders on the register at 9 July 2021. Dividend Reinvestment Scheme (DRIS)In common with a number of VCTs, the Company has a dividend reinvestment scheme which was introduced in November 2014. This is an attractive scheme for investors who would prefer to benefit from additional income tax relief on their re-invested dividend. I hope that shareholders will find this scheme beneficial. During the year to 31 January 2021, 3,189,125 shares were issued under the DRIS, returning £1.4 million to the Company. Share BuybacksYour Company has continued to buy back and cancel shares as required. Subject to shareholder approval of resolution 8 at the forthcoming Annual General Meeting (AGM), this facility will remain in place to provide liquidity to investors who may wish to sell their shares, subject to Board discretion. Details of the share buybacks undertaken during the year can be found in the Directors’ Report. Dividends, whether paid in cash or re-invested under the DRIS, and share buybacks are at the discretion of the Board, and in light of the present circumstances, may be reviewed when necessary. VCT Regulations StatusPwC provides both the Board and Manager with advice concerning ongoing compliance with HMRC’s rules and regulations concerning VCTs. The Board has been advised that the Company is in compliance with the conditions laid down by HMRC for maintaining approval as a VCT. A key requirement is to maintain at least a 80% qualifying investment level which, at 31 January 2021, was at 87.4%. Further information on VCT regulation is detailed in the Directors’ Report. Annual General MeetingFollowing government guidelines, our AGM will be held remotely at 10.00am on Wednesday 30 June 2021. We will also be hosting a virtual shareholder event after the AGM at 10.30am. This will enable shareholders to receive an update from the Portfolio Manager and provide an opportunity for questions to the Board and the Portfolio Manager. You can register for the event at octopusinvestments.com/apollo-shareholder-event/. Shareholders’ views are important, and the Board encourages shareholders to vote on the resolutions within the Notice of Annual General Meeting using the proxy form, or electronically at www.investorcentre.co.uk/eproxy as there will be no opportunity to vote in person. The Board has carefully considered the business to be approved at the Annual General Meeting and recommends shareholders to vote in favour of all the resolutions being proposed. We encourage shareholders to submit their votes by proxy. We always welcome questions from our shareholders at the AGM but this year, to ensure we are able to respond to any questions you may have for either the Portfolio Manager or Apollo VCT Board, please send these via email to [email protected] by 5:00pm on 25 June 2021. All questions received will be included on the website along with the relevant replies at www.octopusinvestments.com/our-products/venture-capital-trusts/octopus-apollo-vct/. Board of DirectorsJames Otter will be standing down from the Board of Apollo on 31 July 2021. James was Chair of Octopus VCT and joined the board when it was merged into Apollo in 2014. On behalf of shareholders and other board members, I would like to thank James for his insightful contributions to the board during the uncertain and challenging times which we have experienced. The Board have begun a process to identify a replacement for James and will notify you of its outcome as soon as it is concluded. Outlook and future prospectsWe continue to be optimistic about the Company’s future investment prospects and its current diverse portfolio. Even during the past year which was filled with uncertainty due to the Coronavirus pandemic, the Company has shown great resilience and has shown a record 12.7% total return in the year. The majority of our investee companies have been performing very well and only a small minority have been negatively influenced by these events. The investment team completed two new investments and seven follow-on investments during the year and expects to be able to continue with further new investment activity in 2021, with one new investment of £4.0 million and one follow-on of £2.5 million already made since year end. This favourable position led your Board to announce on 3 March 2021 that it is in the interest of shareholders for the Company to extend the current fundraising from £35 million to £75 million. This will allow the investment team to continue making investments on behalf of the Company, helping to further diversify the assets and create opportunities for future growth. Murray SteeleChair13 May 2021 Investment Manager’s Review Personal Service At Octopus we focus on both managing your investments and keeping you informed throughout the investment process. We are committed to providing our investors with regular and open communication. Our updates are designed to keep you informed about the progress of your investment. Octopus was established in 2000 and has a strong commitment to both smaller companies and to VCTs. We currently manage four VCTs, including Apollo, and manage over £1.6 billion of assets in the VCT sector which makes us by some distance the UK’s leading VCT manager. Investment PolicyThe majority of companies in which Apollo invests operate in sectors where there is a strong opportunity for growth. Ideally, we invest in companies that have recurring or repeating revenues from financially sound customers. We also seek to invest into companies that will provide an opportunity for the VCT to realise its investment typically within three to five years. PerformanceThe Company made a total return per share of 12.7% in the year 31 January 2021, which is the highest total return since the inception of Octopus Apollo VCT plc. The NAV per share increased from 45.7p to 49.2p. In addition, 2.3p of dividends were paid over the period, bringing cumulative dividends paid to date to 76.4p and the total return (NAV plus cumulative dividends) to 125.6p per share. Despite the fact that the past year was full of uncertainty caused by the Coronavirus pandemic, in the first six months of the year, the Company reported a total return per share of 0.9%. The second half of the year generated a total return of 11.8% after adding back 2.3p of dividends. This demonstrates a good level of resilience as well as validation of the change in Apollo’s investment strategy over recent years. Apollo provides three pillars of growth from its funding – expansion of sales and marketing functions, incremental R&D, and geographic expansion. These were the common themes running through the portfolio companies in the period, with the resulting company growth being the key driver of performance. As seen through the Top 10 Investments in the year, the performance during the year was largely attributable to strong performance in the new investments made in recent years. Pleasingly, however, the legacy part of the portfolio also contributed positively in aggregate during the year. Performance is discussed further in the Portfolio Review below. Since the year end, the Investment Manager along with the Board assessed the latest position of all the underlying portfolio companies. This resulted in a revised NAV of 50.1p per share which was an increase of 1.8% from the 31 January NAV. This NAV change reflects valuation adjustments across the portfolio, which are carried out at fair value. Portfolio ReviewAs at 31 January 2021 the Company’s portfolio is comprised of 50 companies with a total valuation of £143.8 million. This represents 85.5% of the net assets of the fund with 18.6% of the net assets held as cash or liquid assets at the year-end. The portfolio includes eight quoted AIM investments (4.8% of net assets), eight Octopus Titan VCT plc (an Octopus managed VCT) co-investments (3.8% of net assets), with the balance (76.9% of net assets) being Apollo-only investments in private companies. During the year, the value of the invested portfolio increased by £25.9 million, excluding additions and disposals. The increase is as a result of positive valuation movements across a number of investments in the portfolio including the fund’s investments in Veeqo Limited, N2JB Limited (trading as Natterbox), Hasgrove Limited, Countrywide Heathcare Services Limited, Healthcare Services and Technology Limited and Simply Cook Limited. These increases were offset by negative valuation adjustments during the year from the three Reserve Power companies, namely Kabardin Ltd, Valloire Power Ltd and Red Poll Power Ltd which had a combined £3.5 million valuation decrease. As part of liquidity management, during the early part of the year £12 million was invested in the Octopus Portfolio Manager (“OPM”) funds, while later in the year £9 million was withdrawn from such funds, taking total OPM holdings at 31 January 2021 to £16.7 million, at year end valuations. Octopus has waived its management fees in relation to OPM. The Company’s investment portfolio is set out below. It continues to hold appropriate investments to meet VCT requirements. Investment ActivityDuring the year, the Company disposed of two investments, Cello Health plc and Acquire Your Business Ltd, and made two part-disposals for total sale proceeds of £3.4 million. In the year, we saw a net realised gain of £0.9 million on these transactions, primarily as a result of the part-disposals of Hasgrove Limited and Ergomed Limited. The Company made the following new investments during the year: Sova Assessment £3.0 million – Sova is a candidate assessment and talent management software platform. It provides technology to blue-chip organisations across a range of sectors that conduct large volumes of hiring with a need to digitise the candidate experience; andRyte £4.6 million – Ryte is a website quality management software business. It helps organisations optimise the performance of their website to enhance the customer experience, improve SEO results and ensure compliance with regulatory standards. In addition to the new investments above, the Company invested £8.3 million in follow-on capital to seven existing investee companies to continue their growth plans. Since the year end, the Company has also made one follow-on investment of £2.5 million and one further new investment of £4.0 million. Outlook and Future ProspectsThis time last year we wrote about the Coronavirus pandemic and the high level of uncertainty that existed in an economic sense. The rapid development of the Coronavirus pandemic since the Apollo prior year end had spread fear and disrupted global economic activity. Central banks had reduced interest rates and Governments had announced unprecedented peacetime financial support and stimulus in response. After three national lockdowns, I am hoping that the worst is behind us and that the Coronavirus pandemic can be brought under control as the vaccines are being rolled out. Although Apollo faced some challenges in the first half of its financial year, I am happy to say that it has been a record year for the Company with a 12.7% total return. The nature of the current investment portfolio and the characteristics of the businesses that the Company supports are largely contracted recurring revenue business models, which means that several assets have been insulated from any direct impact from the pandemic. They are therefore well-positioned to be more resilient (e.g. they are not like business which have seen revenues fall dramatically due to the social distancing measures imposed, such as businesses in the travel, leisure or retail sectors). We therefore remain optimistic about the Company’s future investment prospects and its current diverse portfolio. The investment team has continued to create a healthy pipeline of new growth capital investments that meet the investment criteria of the Company owing to its origination activities during the previous year. This level of investment activity, as noted in the Chair’s Statement, has led to the extension of the current fundraising process from £35 million to £75 million to ensure that the Company has sufficient capital available for the investment team to make new investments to support further diversification of the investment portfolio and any potential follow-on investments into existing assets. If you have any questions on any aspect of your investment, please call one of the team on 0800 316 2295. Richard CourtOctopus Investments Limited13 May 2021 Investment Portfolio Top 10 InvestmentsSectorInvestment cost as at 31 January 2021 £’000Total movement in fair value since investment £’000Fair value as at 31 January 2021 £’000Movement in fair value in year to 31 January 2021 £’000% equity held by Apollo VCT Natterbox LimitedTechnology12,9908,27121,2613,9759.0 Healthcare and Services Technology LimitedHealthcare7,1863,72510,9112,41510.0 Ubisecure Holdings LimitedTechnology5,5754,4219,9962,24530.0 Veeqo LimitedTechnology4,3505,1989,5484,80323.9 Simply Cook LimitedConsumer Goods6,7502,6059,3552,60523.5 Countrywide Healthcare Supplies Holdings LimitedHealthcare2,6755,5668,2412,88420.7 Anglo European Group LimitedManufacturing5,0002,2747,27432126.7 One Team Logic LimitedTechnology3,7002,3326,0322,15417.5 Fuse Universal LimitedTechnology5,0006025,6024340.0 Ryte GmgHTechnology4,5479855,53298516.2 Other* 57,682(7,603)50,0803,036 Total investments 115,45528,376143,83225,857 Current asset investments 16,657 Cash at bank 14,680 Debtors less creditors (6,932) Net assets 168,237 *Other comprises the remaining 40 investments whose valuation is outside the top 10: Angelico Solar Limited, Artesian Solutions Limited, Augean plc, Barrecore Limited, Behaviometrics AB, Bramante Solar Limited, British Country Inns plc, Canaletto Solar Limited, CurrencyFair Limited, Dyscova Limited, Ecrebo Limited, EKF Diagnostics Holdings plc, Ergomed plc, Eve Sleep plc, Fiscaltec, Hasgrove Limited, Kabardin Limited, Leonardo Solar Limited, Luther Pendragon Limited, Mi-Pay Group plc, Modigliani Solar Limited, Nektan plc, Origami Energy Limited, Oxifree Group Holding Limited, Pirlo Solar Limited, Red Poll Power Limited, Renalytix plc, Secret Escapes Limited, Segura Systems Limited, Sourceable Limited, Sova Assesment Limited, Superior Heat Limited, Tintoretto Solar Limited, Tiziano Solar Limited, Trafi Limited, Triumph Holdings Limited, Valloire Power Limited, Vertu Motors plc and Winnipeg Heat Limited. Directors’ Responsibilities Statement The Directors are responsible for preparing the Strategic Report, the Directors’ Report, the Directors’ Remuneration Report and the Financial Statements in accordance with applicable law and regulations. They are also responsible for ensuring that the Annual Report and Accounts include information required by the Listing Rules of the Financial Conduct Authority. Company law requires the Directors to prepare financial statements for each financial year. Under that law the Directors have elected to prepare the financial statements in accordance with United Kingdom Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (United Kingdom Accounting Standards and applicable laws) including FRS 102 – “The Financial Reporting Standard applicable in the UK and Republic of Ireland”. Under company law the Directors must not approve the financial statements unless they are satisfied that they give a true and fair view of the state of affairs and profit or loss of the Company for that period. In preparing these financial statements, the Directors are required to: select suitable accounting policies and then apply them consistently;make judgments and accounting estimates that are reasonable and prudent;state whether applicable UK accounting standards have been followed, subject to any material departures disclosed and explained in the financial statements;prepare the financial statements on the going concern basis unless it is inappropriate to presume that the Company will continue in business; andprepare a Strategic Report, a Directors’ Report and Directors’ Remuneration Report which comply with the requirements of the Companies Act 2006. The Directors are responsible for keeping adequate accounting records that are sufficient to show and explain the Company’s transactions and disclose with reasonable accuracy at any time the financial position of the Company and enable them to ensure that the financial statements and the Directors’ Remuneration Report comply with the Companies Act 2006. They are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the Company and hence for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities. In so far as each of the Directors is aware: there is no relevant audit information of which the Company’s auditor is unaware; andthe Directors have taken all steps that they ought to have taken to make themselves aware of any relevant audit information and to establish that the auditor is aware of that information. The Directors are responsible for preparing the annual report in accordance with applicable law and regulations. Having taken advice from the Audit Committee, the Directors consider the annual report and the financial statements, taken as a whole, provide the information necessary to assess the Company’s position performance, business model and strategy and is fair, balanced and understandable. The Directors are responsible for the maintenance and integrity of the corporate and financial information included on the Company’s website. Legislation in the United Kingdom governing the preparation and dissemination of financial statements may differ from legislation in other jurisdictions. The Directors confirm that, to the best of their knowledge: the financial statements, prepared in accordance with United Kingdom Generally Accepted Accounting Practice, including FRS 102, give a true and fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial position and profit or loss of the Company; andthe Annual Report and Accounts (including the strategic report), give a fair review of the development and performance of the business and the position of the Company, together with a description of the principal risks and uncertainties that it faces. On behalf of the Board Murray SteeleChair13 May 2021 NON-STATUTORY ACCOUNTSThe financial information set out below does not constitute the Company’s statutory accounts for the years ended 31 January 2021 or 31 January 2020 but is derived from those accounts. Statutory accounts for the year ended 31 January 2020 have been delivered to the Registrar of Companies and statutory accounts for the year ended 31 January 2021 will be delivered to the Registrar of Companies in due course. The Auditor has reported on those accounts; their reports were (i) unqualified, (ii) did not include a reference to any matters to which the Auditor drew attention by way of emphasis without qualifying their report and (iii) did not contain a statement under Section 498 (2) or (3) of the Companies Act 2006. The text of the Auditor’s reports can be found in the Company’s full Annual Report and Accounts at www.octopusinvestments.com. Income Statement Year ended 31 January 2021Year ended 31 January 2020 Revenue£’000Capital£’000Total£’000Revenue£’000Capital£’000Total£’000Realised gain on disposal of fixed asset investments –946946–4,8724,872Realised (loss)/gain on disposal of current asset investments –(3)(3)–4646Change in fair value of fixed asset investments –25,85725,857–1,6411,641Change in fair value of current asset investments –1010–261261Investment income 2,063–2,0633,309–3,309Investment management fees (653)(6,885)(7,538)(559)(3,411)(3,970)Other expenses (1,568)-(1,568)(2,015)–(2,015)(Loss)/profit before tax (158)19,92519,7677353,4094,144Tax on return on ordinary activities ––––––(Loss)/profit after tax (158)19,92519,7677353,4094,144(Loss)/earnings per share – basic and diluted (0.1)p6.5p6.4p0.3p1.3p1.6p The ‘Total’ column of this statement is the profit and loss account of the Company; the revenue return and capital return columns have been prepared under guidance published by the Association of Investment CompaniesAll revenue and capital items in the above statement derive from continuing operationsThe Company has only one class of business and derives its income from investments made in shares and securities and from bank and money market funds The Company has no other comprehensive income for the period. Balance Sheet As at 31 January 2021As at 31 January 2020 £’000£’000£’000£’000Fixed asset investments 143,832 104,534Current assets: Investments 16,657 13,649 Debtors 2,335 1,982 Cash at bank 14,680 16,637 33,672 32,268 Creditors: amounts falling due within one year (9,267) (4,429) Net current assets 24,405 27,839Net assets 168,237 132,373 Share capital 34,206 28,994Share premium 45,141 70,947Special distributable reserve 52,397 16,975Capital redemption reserve 6,315 5,046Capital reserve realised (9,046) 5,714Capital reserve unrealised 39,382 4,697Revenue Reserve (158) –Total shareholders’ funds 168,237 132,373Net asset value per share – basic and diluted 49.2p 45,7p The statements were approved by the Directors and authorised for issue on 13 May 2021 and are signed on their behalf by: Murray SteeleChairCompany number: 05840377 Statement of Changes in Equity Share Capital£’000Share Premium£’000Special distributable reserves*£’000Capital redemption reserve£’000Capital reserve realised*£’000Capital reserve unrealised£’000Revenue reserve*£’000Total£’000As at 1 February 202028,99470,94716,9755,0465,7144,697–132,373Total comprehensive income for the year––––(5,942)25,867(158)19,767Contributions by and distributions to owners: Repurchase and cancellation of own shares(1,269)–(5,414)1,269–––(5,414)Issue of shares6,48123,070–––––29,551Share issue cost–(569)–––––(569)Dividends paid––(7,471)––––(7,471)Total contributions by and distributions to owners:5,21222,501(12,885)1,269––– 16,097Other movements: Prior year fixed asset gains now realised––––942(942)––Transfer between reserves––––(9,760)9,760––Cancellation of share premium–(48,307)48,307–––––Total other movements–(48,307)48,307–(8,818)8,818––Balance as at 31 January 202134,20645,14152,3976,315(9,046)39,382(158)168,237 Share Capital£’000Share Premium£’000Special distributable reserves*£’000Capital redemption reserve£’000Capital reserve realised*£’000Capital reserve unrealised£’000Revenue reserve*£’000Total£’000As at 1 February 201925,25053,25629,6023,9147,698(696)–119,024Total comprehensive income for the year––––1,5071,9027354,144Contributions by and distributions to owners: Repurchase and cancellation of own shares(1,132)–(5,017)1,132–––(5,017)Issue of shares4,87618,376–––––23,252Share issue cost–(685)–––––(685)Dividends paid––(7,610)–––(735)(8,345)Total contributions by and distributions to owners:3,74417,691(12,627)1,132––(735)9,205Other movements: Prior year fixed asset losses now realised––––(3,491)3,491––Total other movements––––(3,491)3,491––Balance as at 31 January 202028,99470,94716,9755,0465,7144,697–132,373 *Included in these reserves is an amount of of 43,193,000 (2020: £22,689,000) which is considered distributable to shareholders. Cash Flow Statement Year to 31 January 2021£’000Year to 31 January 2020£’000Cash from operating activities Profit after tax 19,7674,144Adjustments for: (Increase)/decrease in debtors (353)598Increase in creditors 4,343257(Gain) on disposal of fixed assets (946)(4,872)Loss/(gain) on disposal of current assets 3(46)Gain on valuation of fixed asset investments (25,857)(1,641)Gain on valuation of current asset investments (10)(261)Net cash utilised in operations (3,053)(1,821) Cash flows from investing activities Purchase of fixed asset investments (15,851)(29,277)Proceeds on sale of current asset investments 3,35617,794Purchase of current asset investments (12,000)–Proceeds on sale of current asset investments 9,0005,000Net cash flows utilised in investing activities (15,495)(6,483) Cash flows from financing activities Movement in applications account 4952,533Purchase of own shares (5,414)(5,017)Proceeds from share issues 28,10821,727Cost from share issues (569)(685)Dividends paid (net of DRIS) (6,029)(6,820)Net cash flows generated from financing activities 16,59111,738 (Decrease)/increase in cash and cash equivalents (1,957)3,434Opening cash and cash equivalents 16,63713,203Closing cash and cash equivalents 14,68016,637 Post Balance Sheet EventsThe following events occurred between the Balance Sheet date and the signing of these financial statements: • The Company invested a total of £4.0 million into one new investment and £2.5m into a follow-on investment. • The Company fully disposed of five investments for a total proceeds of £31.6m. RNS ends.

Month after raise a Series C worth $ 45 million, based in Chicago M1 Finance today announced a new round table. A Series D, the new $ 75 million investment was led by Coatue, with two previous investors – Left Lane Capital and Clocktower Technology Ventures – also participating.

The new funding comes after M1 raised twice in 2020, including the aforementioned C Series and a smaller $ 33 million Series B.

While rapid fundraising has become increasingly common in recent years, M1 Finance’s recent capital increase remains remarkable for its pace and scale. And because the company has been relatively free with both growth metrics and notes on its long-term business model, TechCrunch has been able to keep tabs on its expansion in recent quarters.

Growth of M1 Finance

In February 2020, M1 announced it had hit the $ 1 billion mark in assets under management (AUM) after starting the year at $ 800 million. At the time, the company’s CEO Brian Barnes told TechCrunch that his company aimed to generate revenue of around 1% of assets under management from consumers. This kept track of the speed at which the startup increased its revenue as it increased its asset base.

In June 2020, the company announced its Series B and a new AUM milestone: $ 1.45 billion. It was something akin to 50% growth in less than six months. Not bad.

When M1 Finance lifted its Series C later that year, it had $ 2 billion in assets under management. This was double his total from the previous year, and it was big enough to get our attention even more. Then in January 2021, the company announced $ 3 billion in assets under management.

As you can quickly calculate, 1% of $ 3 billion is $ 30 million in annual revenue, provided M1 meets its revenue targets. Today, as part of its Series D, the company announced it has reached $ 3.5 billion in assets under management.

How did she manage such rapid growth, adding $ 500 million in assets under management in just a few months? According to Barnes, in part because of an expanding product mix. The startup added a cash management product at the start of 2019. This service has reached hundreds of millions of dollars in assets, the CEO said. The company’s debt product has also grown rapidly, quadrupling as a percentage of assets last year, he added.

The expansion of AUMs is also due in part to the company’s user base. Barnes told TechCrunch his company has about 500,000 funded accounts, a growing number that has helped word of mouth marketing in recent quarters. And, finally, the growth in assets under management came from cohorts of existing users adding more capital to their M1 accounts over time, the CEO said.

Of course, the business is not the only service in the savings, investment and spending spaces that has seen growth over the past year. Robinhood and public did of course the investment side of things, and Chime has scaled quickly in the spending and savings markets.

What awaits us

M1 has more money than ever after this round, with its CEO telling TechCrunch that he has no plans to raise any new capital and that his company has barely touched its Series B while its entire C series is untapped. But now, with a new fundraiser, M1 may be able to increase their ad spend to help maintain strong user growth; and the extra capital won’t hurt when it comes to competing against even better-funded rivals who also want to build great consumer fintech apps.

We will check with M1 Finance when it reaches $ 10 billion in assets under management. Its CEO believes the company could reach billions in double-digit assets under management by the end of the year, or early 2022. Let’s see how quickly it reaches that next milestone.

Former Macomb County District Attorney Eric Smith has agreed to plead guilty to a federal obstruction of justice charge for encouraging two of his deputy prosecutors to help cover his theft of $ 70,000 from a campaign fund .

US attorney Matthew Schneider said Smith stole money from his re-election account to use it on “his personal whims.” Schneider, the highest federal prosecutor in Southeast Michigan, said in a video describing the case that he thinks Smith should serve at least 15 months in federal prison for betraying public trust.

Schneider described Smith’s attempts to cover the $ 70,000 that his campaign said he spent on rent and political advice which, in effect, was sent back to Smith.

According to federal prosecutors, in September 2019, Smith attempted to lie to a person described only as “Person A” about $ 50,000 in rent that ended up in Smith’s pockets. Person A was asked to describe the payments as a loan that Smith intended to repay.

Then Smith on two separate dates in February dismissed deputy prosecutors – after first making sure they didn’t have cellphones that could record him – and asked them to help him cover up his ploys, according to prosecutors.

First, he met an underling identified only as Prosecutor A in a stairwell inside the DA’s office, said the FBI was investigating, and asked the assistant to create a fake council agreement to explain a campaign expense of $ 20,000 paid in 2016 for the council, according to prosecutors. . The plea agreement stated that Attorney A was allowed to keep $ 5,000 of that expense while Smith took the rest.

A week later, prosecutors said Smith took Attorney B for a walk and asked Attorney B to claim that the assistant searched Person A’s offices to justify the alleged rent payments from the campaign account.

The plea deal didn’t say how any of Smith’s potential accomplices reacted.

Smith said in a statement he “respects that he must be held accountable for his wrongdoing,” but said he never started a case.

“I have never traded justice for money or any other advantage. Let’s be clear: the Macomb County District Attorney’s office has never been for sale under my watch. I have acted irresponsibly and recklessly. , and I will be held responsible for my actions. “

Martin Crandall, Smith’s attorney, agreed with Schneider that sentencing guidelines provide for 15 to 21 months in prison, but said he would “work to mitigate that position.”

Of Smith’s expected guilty plea, Crandall said: “It’s always a tough decision, but it’s a decision that is evidenced by Eric’s decision to accept responsibility and do the right thing. thing by the county, its constituents and its family. ”

Black-smith resigned from his post on March 30 after being indicted by a state court with 10 counts, including racketeering, embezzlement and misconduct in the performance of his duties for his use of confiscated drugs and alcohol. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed a complaint after a state police investigation.

Schneider said federal officials forced Smith to resign. He also praised Nessel’s work on the state’s charges against Smith.

The case is not part of the long-drawn, high-profile federal investigation into payment-to-play programs involving government procurement in the Detroit subway, but it is an offshoot of the FBI’s focus on corruption in Macomb County.

An attorney general spokesperson declined to comment on how the federal charges could affect the state’s case, which is due to go to a preliminary hearing next month to determine whether Smith will be bound to stand trial .

In the state case filed in March, Nessel accused Smith of using the confiscated money as a slush fund to pay for gifts, moving expenses, office parties, country club events, a system security for Smith’s house and even pens with Smith’s name and “One Tough Attorney.” The money is supposed to be used for law enforcement purposes.

When he resigned in March, Smith said he intended to “wholeheartedly defend himself” against the allegations.

“I have been in the criminal justice system for almost 30 years. Please know that I have absolute confidence that our precious justice system will bring the truth to light and exonerate me,” said Smith, who has become a deputy prosecutor. in 1993 and was first elected Macomb County District Attorney in 2004.

Nessel’s office also laid felony charges against Smith’s COO, Derek Miller, and his former COO, Benjamin Liston. They were charged with misconduct in the line of duty and other counts for their role in the alleged misuse of confiscated funds which state police said began in 2012. William Weber, owner of Weber Security Systems, has been charged with aiding and abetting embezzlement and other counts in providing false invoices totaling nearly $ 28,000.

If convicted of the charges against the state, Smith and Liston face up to 20 years in prison. Weber risks up to 10 years and Miller risks up to 5 years behind bars. Smith’s lawyers called the allegations “baseless.”

Macomb County Director Mark Hackel, who has called for an investigation into the prosecutor’s use of confiscated accounts, praised Nessel for indicting Smith. The three elected are Democrats.

“It’s not about politics. It’s about someone doing the wrong thing,” Hackel said after Smith resigned. “She’s also indicting one of the state’s most popular prosecutors. It wasn’t about partisan politics or whether she liked Eric or not.”

Nessel said no one is above the law and in March explained his decision to indict Smith and his co-defendants in this video.

Editor Christina Hall contributed to this report.

ML Elrick is a Pulitzer Prize-winning and Emmy Award-winning investigative journalist. Contact him at [email protected] or follow him on Twitter at @elrick, Facebook at ML Elrick and Instagram at ml_elrick. Become a subscriber.

Reports claim the Premier League is investigating a breach of the Robert Snodgrass transfer agreement between West Ham and West Brom, and the rule in question has a distinctly American flavor.

Sam Allardyce’s Baggies acquired Snodgrass, 33, from West Ham on January 8 and the Scotland international made his West Brom debut on Saturday against Wolves.

Although the move is a permanent move and not a loan, the West Brom social media team tweeted that Snodgrass was not available for the Baggies on Tuesday due to a deal between the two clubs.

[ MORE: West Ham 2-1 West Brom ]

And that can be a big no-no.

The PL are said to be looking into the matter and The Athletic has said such permanent ‘Okay but he can’t play against us’ transfers have been banned since Tim Howard moved from Everton to Manchester United.

Athletics:

Howard initially joined Everton on loan in the summer of 2006. When the two clubs negotiated a permanent transfer in February 2007, the deal contained a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ that he would not play against United later in the campaign. His understudy Iain Turner was in Everton’s goal in that game, which United won 4-2, taking a big step towards the Premier League title.

“The Premier League felt that the integrity of the competition could be compromised if a club were allowed to dictate the availability of a player from another club after selling him.”

Players on loan, of course, aren’t allowed to face their host clubs in the Premier League, but that’s a different animal.

It seems unlikely that either party would face a heavy penalty – perhaps a fine is in order – but it certainly gave rise to an odd subplot. Snodgrass could have made the difference in a relatively close competition.

That said, we’re sure there have been instances where clubs waited to execute a transfer until they played. And there were probably nodding examples just like the incident on Tuesday, it’s just Allardyce couldn’t help but say it out loud.

Follow @NicholasMendola

Private lenders reached an agreement in late April with the governments of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Vermont, Virginia and Washington state. New York, the state hardest hit by the coronavirus, had already put in place a similar initiative.

The agreement calls on private lenders and affected loan managers to:

• Offer to suspend forbearance payments for 90 days.

• Waive late fees.

• Do not issue a negative credit report.

• Suspend proceedings for debt collection.

• Help borrowers enroll in debt relief programs.

The agreement applies to private college loans and commercially owned FFELP loans.

How To Get State Student Loan Relief

Contact your lender or service agent to find out how to get forbearance – some can do it automatically and others only on demand – and when you can expect the payment to start again.

You should also ask if the accrued interest will be capitalized – will be added to your loan balance, so that you pay interest on it – when the repayment resumes. Your lender may or may not capitalize the accrued interest.

And even if you’re not in one of the affected states, check with your lender or service agent to see if they’re listed below. Companies such as Nelnet NNI,
+ 0.25%
and Earnest are offering borrowers in all states 90 days of forbearance during which interest will accrue but not be capitalized.

Also see: Does it matter if I don’t pay off my credit card every month?

In the multi-state agreement, the following loan holders offer relief. This list includes lenders and service providers in multiple states, but it may be more specific to your state:

• Suck up resources.

• College Avenue.

• Serious operations.

• Financial.

• Kentucky Higher Education Student Loan Corp.

• Lendkey.

• MOHELA.

• Navigate.

• Nelnet.

• SoFi.

• Tuition options.

• United Guarantee Services.

• Network upstart.

• Utah Higher Education Aid Authority.

• Vermont Student Assistance Corp.

Student loan relief options by state

Here’s a look at how states are helping student loan borrowers:

California: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs. People in debt cannot be given any financial assistance related to COVID-19.

Colorado: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs.

Connecticut: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs.

District of Colombia: Suspension of all debt collection activities, including student loans.

Illinois: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs. Any wage garnishment for private debts is also suspended.

Iowa: Suspension of all wage garnishment actions.

Kentucky: Suspension of all forced collection actions on debts, including student loans.

Massachusetts: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs. Debt is also deferred from April 2020 to July 2020 for borrowers who have incurred debt under the Massachusetts Department of Higher Education’s interest-free loan program. The state also suspends private loan debt collection activities for at least 90 days.

Michigan: Suspension of student debt collection serviced by the Michigan Guaranty Agency until September 30, 2020.

New Jersey: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs.

New York: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs. All collection of student debts owed to New York State is also suspended.

North Carolina: Suspension of collection of public debts, including student loans.

Texas: Collection suspended until May 7, 2020.

Vermont: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs.

Virginia: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs. The wage garnishment is suspended.

Washington: Has an agreement with private loan services to provide 90 days of forbearance; waive late fees; do not give any negative credit report; stay proceedings for debt collection; and working with borrowers to enroll in other borrower assistance programs.

Why is state aid needed?

All federal loan borrowers are entitled to six months of interest-free forbearance until September 30 (the start date is retroactive to March 13), under a provision of the coronavirus assistance program.

Read also : Smart ways to help your credit score weather a storm

But the law did not provide relief for private loans and federal loans held in commerce. This is where states fill in the gaps.

What to do if you cannot get relief

If you are in a condition where rescue options are available but you are having difficulty obtaining rescue from your service agent, contact your state attorney general’s office. Your state may also direct you to its consumer protection office, banking department, or student loan advocate.

There are additional ways to make a student loan claim, including escalation to the federal government. But your lender or manager is the best place to start.

More from NerdWallet:

Thai police have made the rare arrest of a local politician – along with six others – on suspicion of smuggling Burmese migrants on fishing trawlers and into debt bondage.

Tuesday’s arrests by the Federal Special Investigations Department come as the kingdom tries to clean up complex supply chains in its multibillion-dollar seafood industry.

Thailand’s fishing industry was rocked in 2016 when a Pulitzer Prize-winning Associated Press investigation uncovered slavery and abuse of migrant labor, criticizing its fruit sector for sea, the seventh in the world, supplying tuna, shrimp and pet food to global supermarkets.

The revelations prompted the European Union to threaten a costly ban on imports of fish from the country and a consumer awareness campaign that has tarnished the image of seafood made in Thailand.

Thai authorities have worked to clean up an industry marked by obscure brokers, middlemen and influential local figures who dominate its ports and profit from trafficked, unpaid or indebted labor. The EU lifted its threat in 2019.

Dawn raids on Tuesday by armed police in the port of Si Chon in the southern province of Nakhon Si Thammarat in the Gulf of Thailand saw seven people arrested – including a deputy mayor of one of the province’s municipalities and a boat captain.

The detainees are accused of trafficking five Burmese nationals after allegedly trapping the workers in debt bondage by tricking them into a boat with an upfront payment which was then reframed as a loan that had to be repaid, police said.

“After recovering the first catch, they snatched the crew,” said Deputy Commissioner General of the Thai Police Force, Lt. Gen. Jaruwat Waisaya. “The objective was to plunge workers into a cycle of debt where they must continue to work to repay it,” he added, without revealing the names of the suspects.

Images shared with VOA show one of the arrested men sitting on his bed next to several handguns, a sign of dangers in and around Thai ports where a lot of money can be made with a labor force. cheap work.

“Don’t think that we don’t know what you are doing … we will continue to bring the criminals to justice so that Thailand can be freed from human trafficking and this scourge of labor exploitation,” Jaruwat warned. .

The arrest of a local official, who is believed to have been instrumental in the labor abuse at the port for several years, was a wake-up call to those whose positions ensure them impunity, told VOA a high ranking police source.

“We wanted to make an example of a case where a local politician is involved in the crime because the punishment will be more severe than for an ordinary person,” said the source, who asked not to be identified.

If convicted, the politician faces 60 years in prison, three times the normal maximum sentence.

His arrest sheds a rare light on the pyramid of power that rules Thailand’s notoriously shady ports, where activists claim multiple layers of bribes are paid by dubious boat operators to hide the identities of members of the crew, volume of catches and actual ownership of vessels. Normally, only low level brokers or boat captains are arrested in cases of abuse and human trafficking.

“It’s a chicken and egg situation,” added the police source. “Are these guys business people before they become politicians or is it really the other way around?

Catch Me If You Can

Nakon Si Thammarat, with 225 kilometers of coastline, reported 115,274 tonnes of marine catches in 2019, according to data from the Thai Ministry of Fisheries.

The Southeast Asian country has introduced a series of measures to control an industry made up mostly of migrants from Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos – all countries sharing porous borders with the kingdom.

These measures include the registration of workers, computer monitoring of boats and their catches and spot checks of captains and crew.

Thailand’s largest seafood conglomerate is Thai Union, which markets Chicken of the Sea brand tuna. It has sought to eradicate the exploitation of its vast chain, in part by sourcing labor directly from Myanmar.

This has been applauded by labor rights groups.

“Gaps remain, but in our experience of working with Thai government partners in the criminal justice system, the government is making efforts to improve the system and extend more effective protection to victims,” ​​he said. said Andrew Wasuwongse of International Justice Mission, an NGO whose mission is to end slavery in the seafood industry. It was information from his group that led to Tuesday’s arrests.

Thailand’s fishing boat lobby says the measures crush their profits and place the financial burden of strict labor and environmental standards on the link in a global fisheries supply chain with the lowest profit margin – rather than on conglomerates, supermarkets and consumers.

In a cat-and-mouse game that takes place over vast expanses of the open sea, unscrupulous boat operators sink deeper into the Indian Ocean as fish stocks run out in Thai seas. These operators seek to evade detection by swapping their flags and crews, repainting ships and staying at sea for months.

“Today’s arrest demonstrates that the power of law can be used to protect migrant workers in Thailand, who are among the most vulnerable and powerless,” Wasuwongse said. “All the more so when their employer is a powerful businessman with an official position in local government. ”