House of Commons

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Commons Chamber

Wednesday 11 March 2026

The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock

Prayers

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Oral Answers to Questions

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Commons Chamber

The Minister for Women and Equalities was asked—

[Mrs Elsie Blundell (Heywood and Middleton North) (Lab)]

1. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help protect the rights of women with endometriosis in the workplace.

[The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)]

While around 1.5 million women live with endometriosis, survey data shows that it can take more than nine years to receive a diagnosis, which will clearly have a significant impact on those women’s careers. We are acting so that women receive medical support earlier, ensuring that they can access diagnostic testing and are not dismissed by doctors. Measures in the Employment Rights Act 2025 will support women in managing the condition at work.

[Mrs Blundell]

Many women across the country living with endometriosis are forced to withstand immense challenges in the workplace, often culminating in them having to curtail their ambitions or leave employment entirely. That is because some workplaces are not putting in place proper protections to support working women, who frankly deserve better. What steps are therefore being taken, in consultation with the Department for Business and Trade, to ensure that our workplaces do not lose out on the immeasurable contribution that these brave women can make?

[Seema Malhotra]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the challenges that endometriosis brings and that workplaces cannot afford to lose such talented women. Action matters. That is why, as part of the Employment Rights Act, we are improving access to flexible working, making changes to statutory sick pay and opening up conversations about women’s health through the employer action plans that we launched last week. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend and other Members to make that support a reality.

[Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)]

One in 10 women have endometriosis, seriously impacting their ability to work. What plans does the Minister have to ensure that employers have clear guidance about the reasonable adjustments that they should be offering, not just for endometriosis but for all gynaecological issues that impact women’s work?

[Seema Malhotra]

That is an incredibly important question. It is why, with the action plans that we launched last week, we are looking for action to tackle gender pay gaps and a strategy for supporting women with the menopause. From conversations with employers, we know that will be important in helping to facilitate other conversations about women’s health and how women can have that vital support in the workplace.

[Afzal Khan (Manchester Rusholme) (Lab)]

2. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help reduce inequalities experienced by children in poverty.

[The Minister for Women and Equalities (Bridget Phillipson)]

Tackling child poverty is the moral mission of this Labour Government. Background should not determine what we can go on to achieve in life, but inequality and poverty are barriers to opportunity. We are investing in our children’s futures through a massive expansion of Best Start family hubs, childcare, breakfast clubs and free school meals, alongside the end to the two-child limit, and our child poverty strategy will deliver the biggest ever reduction in child poverty in a single Parliament.

[Afzal Khan]

In families with disabled children, 25% of those children are living in deep material poverty. The recent uprating of universal credit will be a great help for children growing up in such households, but equipment costs and other expenses, such as specialist childcare, remain significant pressures. Will the Minister set out what more she is doing to address the inequalities felt by children growing up in households with at least one disabled child?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right. We recognise the disproportionate financial strain on families with disabled children, who often face significantly higher costs for essentials. We heard that during the development of the child poverty strategy, through many of the children’s rights groups and other organisations that contributed to that work. Our child poverty strategy sets out a plan to lift over half a million children out of poverty by the end of this Parliament. Alongside that, we are taking specific steps to support children with additional needs, providing £200 million of investment to ensure that every Best Start family hub has a dedicated practitioner for children with special educational needs and disabilities.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for her answers, her positivity, and her commitment to making the necessary changes. When it comes to inequalities in the home, cases of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, and behavioural issues, are so much higher in number than they ever were in my day when I was a youngster—and that was not yesterday, by the way. Given the pressures of the lives we live today, what will be done to help those categories of children in particular?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising this area. It is why, through our SEND consultation that will cover England, we want to make sure that support is available to children much more quickly. Of course, formal diagnosis will continue to have an important role and families will seek that, but we should not be waiting for diagnosis to put in place the support that children need. That is why, through the big investment we are delivering in SEND—an extra £4 billion—we will make sure that children get the support when they need it and where they need it.

[Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)]

3. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to promote equality as part of the Government mission to break down barriers to opportunity.

[The Minister for Women and Equalities (Bridget Phillipson)]

Our recent “Every Child Achieving and Thriving” White Paper sets out our ambition to raise standards for all children and to halve the disadvantage gap between poorer children and their peers at the end of their secondary school career, to make sure that where someone is from does not determine where they end up. We are expanding free school meals and scrapping the two-child limit to lift half a million children out of poverty—that is the difference a Labour Government make.

[Mr Rand]

Poverty and economic inequality scar the education and life chances of children. Is it not right that by lifting the two-child limit, delivering 30 hours of free childcare, rolling out free breakfast clubs and family hubs and opening new school-based nurseries, including at Altrincham Church of England primary school in my constituency, this Government are investing in equality for children, and that that investment will be repaid many times over, when every child has the support they need to reach their full potential?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Yes. Tackling child poverty is not just a moral imperative; it is an investment in our country’s future and in our own economic security. That is why we are determined to give every child the best start in life. The Conservatives might not like that: on their watch record numbers of children were pushed into poverty but this Labour Government will lift half a million children out of poverty.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

On the Secretary of State’s watch, the proportion of young people not in education, employment or training in Gosport has now reached around 5%—the highest in 15 years. Is that any wonder when so many of the job opportunities that used to be there for our young people, such as in retail, hospitality, and hair and beauty, are being battered by this Government? Surely one of the best ways to tackle inequality and poverty is to give people the right education and the right job opportunities, so what are her Government and her Department going to do?

[Bridget Phillipson]

We face a serious challenge about the big numbers of young people who are not in education, employment or training, and we are committed to tackling that. That is why Alan Milburn is leading a review for this Government of what more we can do to support young people, why we have launched our schools White Paper, why we are investing in further education and why we are expanding new routes into apprenticeships. I would say that this problem did not emerge overnight: it has developed over many years, and the Conservatives would do well to reflect on the contribution that they made to the shocking numbers of young people who are NEET.

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

4. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to mark International Women’s Day.

[The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)]

Cabinet colleagues have marked International Women’s Day by highlighting what we are doing to support working women, to halve violence against women and girls and to build a better future for every woman and girl. Last week I was proud to formally launch employer action plans, alongside the Minister for Women and Equalities. Our ministerial colleague, the right hon. Baroness Smith, is currently attending the UN Commission on the Status of Women. We are putting women at the heart of our missions in Government and our foreign policy, because we recognise that progress on gender equality must know no borders.

[Andrew Cooper]

This International Women’s Day I commend the work in my constituency of the Her-Place charitable trust, which supports women’s wellbeing and creates spaces to facilitate conversations about health and other challenges. Her-Place says that many women, especially in deprived areas, visit their GP with poor mental health, but are given medication without any meaningful discussion about what is happening in their lives. With Healthwatch England reporting that many women feel unheard and that those in deprived areas facing 20 fewer healthy years, how will the Government back community-based wraparound services to close those gaps?

[Seema Malhotra]

I join my hon. Friend in commending the work of Her-Place and all community-based support. We are rolling out neighbourhood health centres across the country, prioritising areas with the greatest need. Local authorities and integrated care boards will work together to design those services to reflect the needs of local women. Mental health funding has increased by £688 million this year, and is backed by almost 8,000 extra staff, new mental health centres and talking therapies, which will ensure that women receive the personalised support that they need.

[Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)]

Following International Women’s Day and with English Tourism Week approaching, I have been meeting female entrepreneurs across Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, including Kathleen at the Navigator Hotel, who featured on “The Hotel Inspector” only last week, and many others through my business club. These businesses are vital to coastal economies, but many women say it remains difficult to scale and grow. What assessment has the Minister made of the barriers facing women entrepreneurs in sectors like tourism and hospitality?

[Seema Malhotra]

I thank the hon. Member for that brilliant question. We have to do everything we can to support women entrepreneurs, and it is vital that we look at the challenges we see women facing in a range of sectors. That is why we have work continuing through the Women’s Business Council and why we have the investing in women code, which has been backed by our first female Chancellor. That is also why we want to see the progress of women both in entrepreneurship and in the workplace as a priority. I was proud to attend the 30% Club’s International Women’s Day breakfast this morning in the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

It is sad but true that International Women’s Day rings hollow for far too many women, particularly the three brave women I have just met. They are survivors of Epstein and, for them, important days like that come and go. What is the Minister doing to ensure that we do not just mark important days for women and girls, but give them the protection and justice that they deserve? What is she doing to hold perpetrators such as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor to account for not just reports of sharing state secrets, but the trafficking and sexual abuse of women and girls?

[Seema Malhotra]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The focus must absolutely be on the victims of these appalling crimes and on putting in place support for women and girls who have faced horrendous violence. Multiple police forces are assessing allegations arising from the Epstein files. The National Police Chiefs’ Council has established a national co-ordination group and appointed a senior investigator to support forces in reviewing the extensive material and progressing the resulting investigations. The senior investigator will work with UK forces, the National Crime Agency, specialists on violence against women and girls, the Crown Prosecution Service and US authorities to ensure a consistent and evidence-led approach.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Claire Coutinho (East Surrey) (Con)]

It has been almost a year since the Supreme Court ruling, and I come here time after time to ask what progress has been made. I was going to ask today if the Government can confirm that every Department is fully compliant with the ruling, but honestly there is almost no point; we know that the answer is no. In the week of International Women’s Day, is it not the truth that the former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission had a point when she said that the Labour party seems to have “completely abandoned” women’s rights?

[Seema Malhotra]

I do not think it will surprise the shadow Minister that I disagree with her. It is important to say we have been clear that all service providers must follow the law, as clarified by the For Women Scotland ruling. As she knows, the EHRC has given the Government the code of practice, which we are working through. It is also important to say that any suggestions of delay are completely wrong. She knows that it is a lengthy document, covering all the protected characteristics. We take this matter seriously, and we are working to get it right.

[Alex Easton (North Down) (Ind)]

On International Women’s Day this year, many of us reflected on the scandal of group-based sexual exploitation of young women and girls in Britain. Will the Minister commit that, by International Women’s Day 2027, the Government will have implemented the key interim lessons from the independent inquiry into grooming gangs and from other reports commissioned on this matter by Members of this House?

[Seema Malhotra]

This is an incredibly important topic. The hon. Gentleman will know we have always been clear that our paramount objective is to root out the horrific crimes of grooming gangs, punish perpetrators and protect children from harm. It is important to note, as he will know, that the Home Secretary made a statement accepting the recommendations of Baroness Casey’s audit into group-based child sexual exploitation, which included a national inquiry into grooming. We are committed to changing the criminal law around adults penetrating children under the age of 16. We are also absolutely committed to ensuring that we root out these evil crimes with our work across Government.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

5. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help tackle violence against women and girls.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

We are delivering the commitments set out in the cross-Government “Freedom from Violence and Abuse” strategy, published in December 2025, which sets out actions to prevent violence, pursue perpetrators and support victims. A ministerial group bringing together 14 Departments provides strategic oversight of delivery, driving progress, addressing risk, and ensuring collective ownership of our commitment to halve VAWG within a decade.

[Warinder Juss]

I recently visited Wolverhampton girls’ high school in my constituency of Wolverhampton West, and was pleased to see posters promoting the “Orange Wolverhampton” campaign, which is working with community partners in the fight against gender-based violence and abuse. While the criminal justice system of course has a part to play in tackling violence against women and girls, does the Minister agree that we need to do more to achieve community-based early intervention and prevention, and that educating and raising awareness among our young people—especially our young boys—about VAWG can benefit not only the victims, but the perpetrators and our justice system?

[Jess Phillips]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. This weekend, I was with Black Country Women’s Aid, celebrating its 40th anniversary, and its staff mentioned how my hon. Friend had been incredibly supportive of them. The first of the three aims of our strategy is to stop violence before it starts, focusing on the prevention that he talks about. We will focus on young people, supporting parents and working with schools to challenge misogyny and promote healthy relationships. We will also engage with industry and take decisive action to safeguard young people by making the UK one of the hardest places for children to access harmful content and misogynistic influence.

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

Will the Minister undertake to consult with the Northern Ireland Justice Minister? Violence against women and girls continues to increase, with another woman killed in the past few days in Northern Ireland, and we need to take positive action to stem this misogynistic abuse of both women and girls.

[Jess Phillips]

The hon. Gentleman highlights another incredibly sad case. Of course, I work with the Justice Minister in Northern Ireland—we work very closely with all the devolved Administrations to make sure we are working together to deal with this problem collectively.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

Despite incomplete responses from police forces and nothing from Police Scotland, “Healthcare Today” reported back in 2025 that Women’s Rights Network found via freedom of information requests that one in seven sexual crimes committed in hospitals—that is 266—were committed on hospital wards, and that two in five female medical students reported sexual harassment or assault at university. With just 4% charged for these offences, perpetrators are getting away with it, and are surely committing more attacks. Against the backdrop of Labour’s shameful choices on jury trials yesterday—all appalling—when will the Minister and this Government act to protect women on wards?

[Jess Phillips]

If the hon. Lady were to read the violence against women and girls strategy, she would see that there is a specific section on healthcare workers and workers across the community, specifically targeting the issue of sexual harassment within the NHS. I would also point out to her that the charging rate for sexual crimes fell to a historic low under her Government, and I am very pleased to tell the House that it is now increasing.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)]

Last month, The Guardian revealed that suicides following domestic abuse may be vastly under-reported, with research in Kent suggesting that they could be 15 times more prevalent. There has been just one manslaughter conviction from such a death in the whole of UK legal history. Liberal Democrats in the other place recently tabled an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill, supported by Women’s Aid and Advocacy After Fatal Domestic Abuse, which would require police to investigate suicides as potential homicides where there is a reasonable suspicion of a history of domestic abuse. Given the Government’s reluctance to support that measure, will the Minister commit to making the College of Policing’s published guidance on this matter statutory, so that these cases are properly investigated across all forces?

[Jess Phillips]

I thank the hon. Lady for her question. Once again, I point to this exact issue being covered in the violence against women and girls strategy, with the need to improve police responses. That is why the Government have invested £13.1 million into a policing centre that focuses specifically on VAWG. On this specific issue of suicide following domestic abuse, it has undertaken some absolutely groundbreaking work that I very much hope will lead to change and further convictions, which we all want to see.

[Mohammad Yasin (Bedford) (Lab)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Minister for Women and Equalities (Bridget Phillipson)]

Following International Women’s Day, this Government are taking another step towards a fairer Britain. We have published guidance for businesses encouraging them not just to report their gender pay gaps but to set out plans to tackle them, because reducing the gender pay gap is good for women and good for growth as well. We are expanding childcare, introducing new workplace protections, and implementing a landmark strategy to tackle violence against women and girls.

[Mohammad Yasin]

The latest report from Endometriosis UK shows that the average diagnosis time in the United Kingdom has risen to eight years and 10 months. Constituents of mine in Bedford and Kempston, including a staff member with a rare form of the condition, still face long delays for treatment. Will the Minister set improved targets and mandate GP training on recognising endometriosis in the women’s health strategy to speed up diagnosis?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right: women often spend years being dismissed, being misdiagnosed, or just not being listened to. That is unacceptable, and we are determined to tackle it. In order to improve early diagnosis of the condition, we continue to roll out community diagnostic centres, and our renewed women’s health strategy, which we will publish soon, will focus on speeding up diagnosis and treatment of both mental health and gynaecological conditions, including endometriosis.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Claire Coutinho (East Surrey) (Con)]

Within an hour of the Government’s publication of their Islamophobia definition this week, there were calls from within the Labour party for it to be weaponised to stifle free speech, but we know that there have been multiple cases of our public services being too scared of being called Islamophobic to speak freely to save women and girls from serious harm. Can the Minister explain why the Labour party thought it was worth trading the safety of women and girls for their own narrow political interests?

[Bridget Phillipson]

What absolute rubbish. This is a serious issue. We know that there are people who want to pull our country apart, but I am proud that we live in a multi-ethnic, diverse and tolerant nation where we celebrate our shared values. It is right that we take action against anti-Muslim hatred in our country, as we take action on antisemitism, and we have set out further steps in that regard. It is completely unacceptable that anyone should face intimidation or harassment on the basis of their faith, but that is not in conflict with our fundamental belief in the right to freedom of speech.

[Catherine Fookes (Monmouthshire) (Lab)]

T2. According to Surviving Economic Abuse, an economic abuse victim loses her life every 19 days, with more than 50% of domestic homicide reviews involving that form of abuse by a partner. What steps is the Minister taking with Cabinet colleagues to tackle it, both through the Government’s violence against women and girls strategy and by improving understanding within relevant agencies?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

The cross-Government violence against women and girls strategy to which my hon. Friend has referred contains an ambitious package of measures to prevent and tackle economic abuse and to support victims. It includes exploring how to prevent joint mortgages from being used as a tool of abuse, ensuring that coerced debt is reflected accurately and that the severe problem of victims’ credit files is addressed, and piloting the use of the economic abuse evidence form within the Government to improve our response to victims of economic abuse.

[Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)]

T4. Eighteen months ago in the King’s Speech, the Government announced that they would introduce a draft race and disability equality Bill, but we have not yet seen it. Next week it will be a year since the consultation was launched. When will we see the draft Bill, and what will the process of scrutiny be?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I welcome the hon. Lady’s interest in this issue. Good progress has been made on developing the policy, and we will publish the Government’s response as soon as we can, as well as setting out next steps in respect of legislation that we will present. This was a key manifesto commitment, and we will deliver on it.

[Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

T3. The wage gap between the Isle of Wight and the rest of the UK—[Interruption.] I know that Conservative Members love the Isle of Wight, but they did nothing about it when they were in power. The wage gap between the Isle of Wight and the rest of the UK leaves full-time island employees about £5,500 a year worse off in comparison with the national average, while female islanders are about £8,000 worse off. Will the Minister work with Cabinet colleagues as a matter of urgency to address the island wage gap, particularly for women, and does she agree that closing that gap is good for women, good for communities and good for growth?

[The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)]

I firmly agree that women’s equality and economic growth go hand in hand. That is why I was pleased to join the Minister for Women and Equalities in formally launching the action plans last week, so that large employers will be encouraged to set out the steps that they are taking to narrow their gender pay gap. This will ensure that women are able to thrive in the workplace across the country, including on the Isle of Wight.

The Prime Minister was asked—

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 11 March.

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

Our armed forces are working day and night to protect British lives and British interests in the middle east. RAF pilots have flown over 230 hours of defensive operations over multiple countries, shooting down multiple drones and protecting British lives and our allies. We thank them for their courage and professionalism.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

[Sureena Brackenridge]

Strengthening Britain’s defence capability and rebuilding our industrial base have never been more important. Will the Government’s £1 billion helicopter investment with Leonardo UK support skilled jobs across the UK, including at Tata Steel in Wednesfield and throughout the supply chains in Wolverhampton North East, where we are immensely proud of our Black Country steel and manufacturing heritage? Will the Prime Minister ask relevant Ministers to meet me to discuss securing more of those good jobs in Wolverhampton and Willenhall?

[The Prime Minister]

I am very happy to arrange the meeting that my hon. Friend asks for. Our £1 billion investment in new helicopters is good news for steelmakers in her constituency, and secures thousands of jobs across the United Kingdom. We are making defence an engine for growth and jobs. We are building helicopters, new Typhoons in the north-west and new frigates, and creating a decade of shipbuilding on the Clyde—a Labour Government investing in our armed forces.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

[Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)]

Why does the Prime Minister think now is the right time to increase the cost of petrol?

[The Prime Minister]

We are not increasing the cost of petrol. We are absolutely clear in taking the measures that are necessary to deal with the impact of the conflict in Iran. We are dealing with that with other allies. We are taking the necessary action, but the best thing that we can do is to work with others to de-escalate the situation.

As I said to the House last week, I took the decision that we should not join the initial US-Israeli offensive against Iran. The Leader of the Opposition attacked me for that decision relentlessly. She said that the UK should have joined the US and Israel in the initial offensive strikes. Yesterday, in the wake of the economic consequences, the Leader of the Opposition totally abandoned her position. She told the BBC:

“I never said we should join”.

She told the BBC:

“I haven’t said we should have gone in with the US”.

That is the mother of all U-turns on the single most important decision that a Prime Minister ever has to take: whether to commit the United Kingdom to war or not.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The mother of all U-turns is the Prime Minister saying that the Government are not increasing fuel duty. That is news to us, because last week the Chancellor stood up and said that fuel duty was going to increase in September. The Prime Minister told us at the start of the year that the cost of living was his No. 1 priority. Can he explain how a rise in fuel duty helps with the cost of living?

[The Prime Minister]

Fuel duty is frozen. It is going to remain frozen until September, and we will keep the situation under review in the light of what is happening in Iran. But the most important issue is de-escalating the situation.

I come back to the Leader of the Opposition’s position, because this is one of the most important decisions that a Prime Minister or Leader of the Opposition ever has to take: whether to commit your country to war. The day after the initial US-Israeli strikes started, her shadow Foreign Secretary said that the US-Israeli initial attacks were absolutely right and that

“it’s a position my party supports.”

She asked why I have “not actually worked with” America

“to be much more proactive”.

Last Wednesday, the Leader of the Opposition said:

“we are in this war whether they like it or not. What is the Prime Minister waiting for?”—[Official Report, 4 March 2026; Vol. 781, c. 803.]

Then yesterday she says, “I never said”—[Interruption.] I know the Conservatives don’t want to hear it. [Interruption.] I wouldn’t want to hear it if I were them. After all that, she says—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Enough is enough. I cannot hear it. [Interruption.] Who wants to lead the first ones out? Right. We will have a little bit more silence.

[The Prime Minister]

After nine days of saying, “Join the war, join the war, join the war”, yesterday the Leader of the Opposition says:

“I never said we should join”,

and

“I haven’t said we should have gone in with the US”.

I will tell you what has happened, Mr Speaker: she and the Reform leader have been spooked, because they realise they have jumped into supporting a war without thinking through the consequences, and now she is furiously trying to back-pedal.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister seems to be answering last week’s questions. This week I am asking about fuel duty. He has said that he wants to help—[Interruption.] He has said that he wants to help with the cost of living. My constituents live in a rural area. They rely on their cars to get to the shops, take their kids to school or see their elderly parents, and they tell me that the rising cost of petrol is the single biggest cost affecting family finances. Does the Prime Minister not understand how important cars are to people in rural areas, or does he just not care?

[The Prime Minister]

We are working across all Departments and with allies to deal with the impact of the conflict in Iran, as the House would expect. If I had asked the Leader of the Opposition last week, her position would have been, “We support the initial strikes and we want to join the war.” This week, she says, “We don’t want to join the war.” I am sorry, but that is a screeching U-turn. Mr Speaker, in this job, you do not get a second shot at making the right call on taking your country to war. If she were Prime Minister, we would be in the war, and she would be coming back to Parliament a week later to say, “Oh, sorry. I got that one wrong.”

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Order! I am sorry I am interrupting you, but unfortunately we have to stick to Prime Minister’s questions, not Leader of the Opposition’s questions.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The right hon. and learned Gentleman said, “If she were Prime Minister”, but if I were Prime Minister, HMS Dragon would have left a week ago. The only time—[Hon. Members: “More!”] The only time, he has taken decisive action was stopping Andy Burnham standing in the by-election.

Let us talk about what the people out there are worried about. I heard from a builder who has 115 employees using 75 vans. With the jobs tax, sky-high energy bills and now a hike in petrol prices, that builder is having sleepless nights. How does the Prime Minister justify a rise in fuel duty to that small business owner and millions more like him up and down the country?

[The Prime Minister]

There has not been a rise. Fuel duty is frozen. It is frozen until September.

The Leader of the Opposition mentions HMS Dragon. First, can I start by thanking those in the Royal Navy who are serving on HMS Dragon? Secondly, what has been happening is that it has carefully been loaded with the anti-strike ammunition and capability that it needs, and the Navy and civilians have been working 22-hour shifts. But in relation to those who are taking the action to defend us, what does she say? They are just hanging about—just hanging about. That is how she described our pilots in the region. Let me tell her what they have been doing: flying sorties in seven of the 10 countries in the region day and night, taking out incoming strikes and protecting the lives of others, while risking their own. If she had any decency, she would get up and apologise.

[Mrs Badenoch]

Mr Speaker—[Interruption.] Hang on. I think they should wait for it. I have never criticised our armed forces. I have criticised the Prime Minister. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Swallow, you’re going out. I’ve had enough—week in, week out. Either leave now or I will name you.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I have never criticised our armed forces; I am criticising the Prime Minister and his decisions. Let me remind the House of his record on the armed forces. This is the same man who worked with Phil Shiner, a traitor to this country who made up evidence to put our soldiers in prison for crimes they did not commit. That is his record, so I will not take any lectures from him. By the way, military families in this country are also worried about petrol prices, and he has nothing to say on that.

There is another group of people who have been hammered by this Government: farmers. I spent all last year telling the Prime Minister that his family farm tax was killing British farming. Now, those farmers are being punished with higher fuel prices. Does the Prime Minister think that is fair?

[The Prime Minister]

No apology to our pilots who are risking their lives. And I am not going to take lectures from someone who says we should join the war and a week later says, “Can I change my mind? I got that wrong.” That is deeply embarrassing. But she is not the only one. Last week, the leader of Reform said we should be

“part of this with the US and the Israelis…We have to get rid of the regime.”

He said:

“We should do all we can to support the operation. I make that perfectly, perfectly clear.”

Until yesterday—screeching U-turn—when he said we should not

“get ourselves involved in another foreign war.”

Two parties packed with failed Tories, led by leaders who are not fit to be Prime Minister.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister does not want to talk about fuel duty, because he has absolutely no answers. The Conservatives are on the side of farmers. We are also on the side of drivers. We froze duel duty every year from 2011 and, in fact, we cut it in 2022, because we care about the cost of living. Labour thinks drivers are a cash cow and now it is hiking fuel duty for the first time in 15 years. Everyone in this House knows the pattern: first, he will march his Back Benchers up the hill, then they will be forced to defend fuel duty rises in the local elections, and then there will be another humiliating U-turn. Why does the Prime Minister not just stand up, admit he has got it wrong—again—and scrap the fuel duty hike now?

[The Prime Minister]

In the last two weeks, I have made two of the most important decisions a Prime Minister can make. The first is that we should not join the war in Iran. The second is that we should protect British lives and the British national interest. The Leader of the Opposition decided that we should join the war against Iran and a week later that we should not join the war against Iran, and to insult our armed forces. She has utterly disqualified herself from ever becoming Prime Minister. Thankfully, she never will.

[David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

Q3. As the Prime Minister knows, my mum proudly worked in the pot banks of Burslem and Tunstall, and she is watching at home right now. Tomorrow is International Day of Ceramics and that matters deeply to Stoke-on-Trent, the historic heart of Britain’s ceramic industry. [Interruption.] Yes, and Newcastle-under-Lyme. With energy prices rising again due to global instability, will the Prime Minister please tell my mum and our fellow Stokies what additional support the Government will give to energy-intensive industries such as ceramics, so that the kilns of Stoke-on-Trent can fire for generations to come?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend raises a really important issue and I know that it is not only his mum who will be watching, but his constituents whom he serves very, very well. Our supercharger will significantly reduce costs for thousands of major industries. Eligibility for the scheme is being reviewed this year. I can tell my hon. Friend that we are working with the ceramics industry on whether the scheme can be extended to more firms. Under the previous Government, industrial energy prices doubled and over 1,000 jobs were lost in the sector. We will not tolerate that.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)]

I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Warrington North (Charlotte Nichols) for her powerful and courageous speech in the debate on jury trials yesterday—I really hope the Prime Minister was listening.

Thirty years ago this week, a man carried four handguns into Dunblane primary school and murdered a teacher and 16 children. I was deeply moved by the BBC documentary about it last night and by the courage of the parents who campaigned for a ban on handguns to keep other children safe, including Mick North, who lost his five-year-old daughter, Sophie, on that dark day. Mr North has rightly called on the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) to renounce his description of the handgun ban as “ludicrous”—something the hon. Member still refuses to do. Mr North has also called for a review of firearms legislation to close any loopholes. Does the Prime Minister agree?

[The Prime Minister]

I certainly do. We must never forget the horror of Dunblane and we must never forget the young children and their teacher who did not come home from school. The campaign that families fought to make this country a safer place is a lasting legacy, and we should be enormously grateful for their courage.

[Ed Davey]

I thank the Prime Minister for his reply, and I hope the Government will close any loopholes.

This week, families across the country have seen petrol prices rise at the pump, mortgage rates go up and fixed energy deals get more expensive, all because of a war they did not start and do not support. The Leader of the Opposition has been competing with the hon. Member for Clacton to be Donald Trump’s biggest cheerleader, and the Prime Minister was right to reject their costly warmongering. Last week, I asked him to guarantee that energy bills will not rise by hundreds of pounds in July. He did not answer, so let me try again: will he give people that energy bill guarantee now?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this matter, because people will be really worried about the impact on them. To reassure households, the cap is in place until the end of June—until July—so that deals with the situation for households. We are working with the sector and others, and with allies, to do everything we can to ensure that energy bills do not rise. We are working around the clock on that. The most important and most effective thing we can do is to work with our allies to find a way to de-escalate the situation.

The right hon. Gentleman is right about the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of Reform. Last week, they were urging us to join—[Interruption.] This is serious. [Interruption.] If they had been leading the country, we would be in a war. They have now come to Parliament to say—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Who said “lying” again? I want that withdrawn. Is that withdrawn? [Interruption.] I will deal with it, thank you. I do not want any more from those on the Front Bench. We take this very seriously; calling another Member a liar is not acceptable.

[The Prime Minister]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. As I said, that is our position.

[Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)]

Q5. Too often, I hear from families of children with special educational needs and disabilities in Hertford and Stortford whose children have been left out of education for months or even years because they cannot get a school place that meets their needs within a reasonable distance. I am campaigning for more investment in the bricks and mortar SEND provision that semi-rural communities like ours need, so that families can access support early and easily and their children can thrive in education. Will the Prime Minister back my campaign to expand SEND provision in Hertford and Stortford, and will he arrange a meeting with the relevant Minister to discuss that in more detail?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is right; families are crying out for change, which is why it is critical that we get this right. Our reforms will fix the broken SEND system, where parents have to fight for support, replacing it with tailored support that is personal to a child’s need. A Best Start family hub in every local authority with a dedicated SEND practitioner will also help families with the face-to-face support they need. My hon. Friend is a great advocate on this issue, and I am happy to ensure that he gets the meeting he is asking for.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

Let us be clear on this. Donald Trump’s war in Iran is illegal and the situation that has unfolded since is verging on insane: oil is falling from the skies; sewers are exploding; and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is indiscriminately attacking both civilians across the region and cargo ships, as well as potentially even mining the strait of Hormuz, the economic consequences of which will be stark not just for the global economy, but for every single person living on these isles. Whether the Prime Minister accepts it or not, he did take us into that war when he allowed the Americans to use UK bases last week. [Interruption.] I have a specific question for him. He will have seen the same footage that I have of an American Tomahawk missile landing on a primary school, killing 110 children. Does he believe that to be a war crime?

[The Prime Minister]

We are all concerned by that footage, but let me absolutely clear with the right hon. Gentleman. We have 300,000 UK nationals, including Scottish citizens, in the region. Strikes, missiles and drones are being fired into the region, putting those people at great danger. We are taking action to protect them. I am astonished that the SNP is saying, “Don’t take action to support Scottish citizens in the region.” That is outrageous.

[Peter Dowd (Bootle) (Lab)]

Q8. National Highways, a Government-owned company, has reneged on a promise to replace a demolished footbridge at Park Lane West in Netherton. The footbridge crossed one of the busiest roads and junctions in Merseyside, used by countless residents, particularly children and parents going to and from infant and primary schools. My constituents have requested that that bridge be replaced—no ifs or buts. Will the Prime Minister support my constituents’ very reasonable request to honour that promise made by National Highways?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for campaigning for his constituents who are obviously concerned about this matter. As I understand it, National Highways has concluded that the best option for all users—pedestrians and cyclists—is a new crossing. I thank him for raising the points, and I am happy for Ministers to continue discussing the options with him.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

Q2. This afternoon, the Mandelson papers, or the first tranche of them, will be released, bringing to light for the first time UK institutional knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein and those associated with him. But here in the UK, we have our own Epstein in Mohamed al-Fayed and the institutions that supported his crimes. As co-chair of the all-party group for the survivors of al-Fayed and Harrods along with the hon. Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson), we welcome the actions of the Metropolitan police in recent days, but we continue to call on them to describe those crimes as what they were, which was trafficking. Does the Prime Minister recognise that characterisation and will he meet the all-party group and survivors to hear their asks?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Member for raising that really important issue. I discussed it with my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) last night, particularly the approach of the all-party group. I thank her for her important work on this issue. I am very happy to meet the APPG and the victims; it is very important to do so. She will know that there is an ongoing police investigation, but that does not mean that we cannot have the meeting and listen to those who need to be listened to.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

Q11. Team Derby is our partnership ensuring that the billions of pounds in investment that this Labour Government are bringing into Derby benefits the people of Derby in regeneration, skills and good jobs. The Government’s record investment in Rolls-Royce submarines means hundreds of new jobs and apprenticeships in Derby. Will the Prime Minister firmly reject the Green party’s defence policy that would decimate jobs in Derby and leave the United Kingdom unprotected?

[The Prime Minister]

Derby is part of our industrial heritage and has a bright future. Initiatives such as Team Derby are so important to strengthen key sectors like defence, creating jobs and growth. Our £9 billion deal with Rolls-Royce to boost our fleet of nuclear submarines is testament to that, creating more than 1,000 jobs and safeguarding 4,000 more. Those who oppose all that must answer to the working people whom they claim to represent.

[Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)]

Q4. The Prime Minister will be happy that I am not going to ask about fuel duty. Businesses across South West Hertfordshire are telling me that they are now reluctant to take on young workers due to this Government’s rise in employer national insurance contributions and the crippling Employment Rights Act 2025. With almost 1 million young people now not in employment, education or training, how exactly does the Prime Minister plan to get Great Britain working again?

[The Prime Minister]

We are putting in place the youth guarantee, which helps young people into work. It is a serious issue. I remind the hon. Member that on the Conservatives’ watch one in eight young people were not in education, training or work.

[Graham Stringer (Blackley and Middleton South) (Lab)]

Q12. The National Audit Office report on Northern Powerhouse Rail, which came out on Monday, surprised none of us in its conclusion that the Department for Transport’s lack of engagement with mayoral authorities, local authorities and other involved parties in the north of England was leading to poor programming and a lack of investment in the rail system. We in the north of England deserve a rail system fit for the 21st century, not the 19th century. Investing in the rail system will enable growth in the north of England, which will benefit the whole country. Will the Prime Minister take a personal interest in the slowness of investment in the rail system so that we can get that growth?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that important point. The Conservative party gave nothing but false promises for a decade. We will deliver the biggest transformation of transport in the north for a generation, providing up to £45 billion of funding. We are taking forward all the recommendations from the NAO report; that does not change the planning or trajectory of the project.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

Q6. As a result of grant cuts and over-optimistic Treasury assumptions on council tax base growth, eight fire stations and 96 retained firefighters across Wiltshire and Dorset face the axe. Will the Prime Minister please facilitate an urgent ministerial meeting for Wiltshire and Dorset MPs to discuss extending the precept flexibility permitted elsewhere—at no cost to the Treasury—to our fire and rescue service so that its fire stations and dedicated firefighters can continue to serve our community?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Member for raising that case. I do not know the particular details, but I will ensure that the relevant meeting is set up so that they can be explored.

[Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)]

Russia’s continued assault on Ukraine has devastated its healthcare system: hospitals are under extreme pressure and there is a critical shortage of specialist staff to treat the injured. That is why I, along with other British physiotherapists, travelled to Ukraine to train clinicians who are working under unimaginable strain. Will the Prime Minister join me in thanking Tanisha Sandhu, Daniel Simm, Kay Joe and Anju Jaggi for their remarkable work? Will he commit to expanding UK-Ukraine clinical training partnerships?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I will. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend and the rest of the delegation for their commendable work in Kyiv. We recently announced a new package of support for Ukraine enabling highly skilled British surgeons, nurses and physiotherapists to mentor Ukrainian clinicians treating complex battlefield injuries. On one of my recent trips to Kyiv, I went to one of the hospitals where they were treating the burns of those returning from the frontline and it was humbling to see the work being done. I was extremely proud to know that the UK was helping in treating those who had such awful burns.

[Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)]

Q7. Westminster’s tax on Scotland’s energy is holding back investment, and it is costing thousands of families their livelihoods. After months of refusing to do so, the Chancellor has now finally said that she is committed to change. Will the Prime Minister confirm to the House today when the oil and gas price mechanism will be introduced to provide certainty for jobs, certainty for investment and, crucially, certainty for energy security?

[The Prime Minister]

We all want certainty for energy security, and oil and gas will be part of the mix for many years to come. I remind the hon. Member that 70,000 jobs were lost under the SNP and the Conservatives in the last decade. We want energy security, and we see new nuclear as part of that. What does the SNP do? It blocks that.

[Dame Siobhain McDonagh (Mitcham and Morden) (Lab)]

Silently and in semi-secrecy, London and the south-east of England are experiencing the largest mass eviction by a private landlord in decades. Criterion Capital has issued at least 130 no-fault eviction notices across its portfolio, including in Britannia Point in Collier’s Wood in my constituency. Those affected have done nothing wrong. They have paid their rent, looked after their homes and worked hard, and they are simply the victims of a voracious landlord that always wants more. Will the Prime Minister ensure that in the final weeks before the abolition of no-fault evictions his Government do all they can to hold Criterion Capital to account?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that case. Renters should have security and I condemn any unfair evictions. I am proud to be abolishing section 21, a practice that has pushed thousands of renters into homelessness. I will make sure that the Housing Minister looks at the case that she has raised.

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

Q9. Rural residents in Beverley and Holderness are reeling from the impact of higher fuel prices, yet two days ago, the Chancellor said that in September fuel duty would go up. My constituents want to know, as the Leader of the Opposition repeatedly asked: will that fuel duty go up in September and add to the misery of my constituents—or not? Will the Prime Minister, for once in this place, give the House and the people of this country an answer? Yes or no?

[The Prime Minister]

Fuel duty is frozen and it will be frozen until September. In the light of what is happening in Iran, of course we will look carefully at the situation. The right hon. Gentleman’s constituents need to know, and it is right that they know, that fuel duty is frozen until September—not fearmongering.

[Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)]

The devastating fire on Union Street in Glasgow has destroyed small businesses and an iconic part of the city’s heritage, but the exceptional skill and courage of our emergency services prevented an even greater tragedy. We need a rapid, thorough investigation, with urgent implementation of recommendations. Local businesses, commuters and residents are already feeling the impact, and recovery must be a shared priority. Will the Prime Minister join me in thanking our emergency services and in supporting efforts to rebuild that vital part of Glasgow?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that devastating incident for Glasgow. My thoughts, and I am sure everybody’s thoughts, are with those who have seen their businesses and their livelihoods destroyed. I thank the emergency services, which responded so quickly to the situation. The people of Glasgow have seen far too many historic buildings suffer terrible fires over the last few years. We are investing to protect heritage buildings in England, but we will keep a careful eye on the situation that he raises.

[Stephen Gethins (Arbroath and Broughty Ferry) (SNP)]

Q10. Yesterday in the Welsh Senedd, its Members called out a secret Whitehall memo that showed this Government’s attitude to devolution: a muscular Unionism that Boris Johnson would have been proud of. When Scottish and Welsh voters go to the polls, will the Prime Minister respect their decision? What is it about those elections that so seems to terrify him at the moment?

[The Prime Minister]

I will not make any apologies for spending more money in Scotland or in Wales to improve people’s lives. There has been record investment under this Government into Scotland. The question is: where’s the money gone, John?

[Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)]

Last week, Members from across this House and the other place felt compelled to write to Jo Boydell, the chief executive of Travelodge, following reports that in 2022 staff in one of the company’s hotels gave a man a keycard and the room number of a woman staying alone. He then entered her room and sexually assaulted her. Most alarmingly, statements made by Travelodge implied that staff had acted fully in line with the company’s security and safety protocols and within industry standards. Will the Prime Minister join me in urging Ms Boydell to take us up on our invitation to meet all interested Members of this House and the other place to outline what action Travelodge is urgently taking to meet its duty to safeguard women staying in its hotels?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this absolutely shocking case and for talking to me last night about the details. My thoughts are with the victim, who had a right to be safe and who was failed in the most appalling way. Travelodge must take serious action to ensure such an appalling incident can never happen again. I am concerned at reports that the company has not met Members of Parliament; it should do so. I should add that the Safeguarding Minister wants to meet the company as well, and it should do that too.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

Q13. Two weeks ago it was confirmed that no extra time would be provided in the other place to allow the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill to complete its course. If the will of this democratically elected House is blocked, it will be a travesty for democracy and, more importantly, a tragedy for all those who are relying on the legislation and have waited so long, not least my own dad. Will the Prime Minister act now to prevent the dismissal of the views of 76% of the public, especially as other parts of our country have approved legislation, and so secure a real legacy of social policy in this Parliament?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising that issue. I know there are strong views, and I acknowledge her personal connection, which shows how serious the issues are. It is a matter of conscience. It is for Parliament to decide the passage of the legislation and any changes. Scrutiny is a matter for the other place. We have a responsibility to make sure any legislation is workable, effective and enforceable.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

[Mr Speaker]

Is it about PMQs? The right hon. Lady did not ask a question, so is it relevant? Points of order come after statements and UQs—[Interruption.] I will make that decision. We now come to the urgent question.

Royal Mail: Universal Service Obligation

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Commons Chamber

12:36

[Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)]

(Urgent Question): To ask what assessment the Minister has made of the impact of Royal Mail’s failure to meet its universal service obligation on service users’ wellbeing and on the company’s recent decision making, which has contributed to this situation.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising a question that I know is on the minds of hon. Members across the House. The Government have been clear that Royal Mail’s service has not been good enough, and we recognise the terrible impact that delayed time-sensitive deliveries, particularly relating to medical and financial matters, can have on the users of postal services, especially vulnerable users.

Obviously, Royal Mail is a private company and Ofcom, as the independent regulator for postal services, secures the provision of the universal postal service and sets and monitors Royal Mail’s service standards. As part of that monitoring regime, Ofcom publishes annual post-monitoring reports that consider developments in the sector and users’ experience of postal services, as well as the complaints and compensation data that Royal Mail is required to publish.

I have regular discussions with senior officials from Ofcom as the regulator, and in fact I am meeting Ofcom later this afternoon to discuss these concerns. Ofcom fined Royal Mail £21 million in October for failure to meet standards for 2024-25. This was double the previous year’s fine and the third consecutive annual fine for poor performance. Ofcom continues to monitor Royal Mail’s performance carefully to ensure that it is providing the service that customers expect. It has told Royal Mail that it must publish and deliver a credible plan that delivers significant and continuous improvement.

Ofcom is the regulator, but in response to concerns raised by hon. Members across this House, I met Royal Mail’s chief executive officer, Alistair Cochrane recently to set out the volume of complaints reporting service delays that I had received from colleagues.

In addition to that meeting, the Secretary of State has met Daniel Křetínský, the CEO of Royal Mail’s parent company EP Group and chair of Royal Mail’s board, to raise concerns about Royal Mail’s performance. Senior officials from Ofcom met Mr Křetínský that same day. The chief executives of Royal Mail and its parent company agree that there is more to do to meet service delivery targets and improve stability and reliability for customers. I know that hon. Members will continue to raise their concerns about the service in their areas, and for my part, I will continue to raise this matter, because the current situation is simply not good enough.

[Ian Lavery]

I thank my hon. Friend for his answer, but this goes beyond the delay of a few inconsequential letters. It is not simply a case of receiving post; it is about that being timely and about sending post as well. In my constituency, these failures have led to people missing medical appointments and having financial issues, and to the hindering of democratic participation. One of my constituents missed urgent medical correspondence, turning a routine appointment into a potentially life-threatening emergency. It is not acceptable.

This is happening up and down the country in every single constituency. Allegations from within Royal Mail suggest that these failures may be intentional, designed to pressure the Government into weakening or removing the USO requirements. Royal Mail’s recent letter to the Business and Trade Committee denies operating a parcels-first policy, contradicting repeated internal testimony. It flies in the face of local evidence from the workforce. The letter also reiterates calls for USO reform, reflecting a long-running corporate direction. Over the past few years postal workers—key public servants, who were heroes during covid—have seen their terms and conditions eroded to the point that some can no longer buy additional holiday because doing so would take their pay below the minimum wage.

The Government need to take serious action against Royal Mail. Is it not an option to bring Royal Mail back under public control? This is approaching a situation where one of our constituents will lose their home, their health or their life through these persistent failures. The Government can and must take steps to maintain this critical national service.

[Blair McDougall]

I think my hon. Friend’s anger is shared by hon. Members around the Chamber when they hear the stories of people not just missing hospital appointments, but finding themselves with county court judgments and in other such situations that are entirely not their fault and due to failures of delivery. We have told Royal Mail it is not good enough, the Select Committee has told them it is not good enough, and Ofcom has told them it is not good enough. The seriousness with which we take this issue is exemplified by the fact that, as I said, the Secretary of State has convened that meeting. I have called in Royal Mail and, as I mentioned a moment ago, I am meeting Ofcom later today to raise exactly the issues that my hon. Friend raises.

[Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question. I congratulate the hon. Member for Blyth and Ashington (Ian Lavery) on securing it. We can see from the number of Members who are interested in this topic just how serious it is across all our constituencies. I can testify to the fact that I have had an enormous amount of casework on this issue, which started just before Christmas, involving hospital appointments being missed, and children’s birthday cards, condolence cards for recently widowed individuals and postal voting forms not arriving. This is an absolutely critical issue.

I reiterate that the universal service obligation is an obligation. It is an obligation set out in statute, and it is an obligation to every household in this country. We can all testify to the fact that it has been systematically broken, and that the turning point was when the new owner bought Royal Mail, with this Government’s approval, in April 2025.

The letter from Royal Mail received by the Business and Trade Committee yesterday revealed that over 200 million letters have been delivered late this year. In addition to the meetings the Minister has listed with Ofcom, what assessments has he made of all the stress being caused to our constituents and the impact on people’s wellbeing? Has he had a critical discussion with Ofcom, because it appears that it is not really doing its job as a regulator? The public are paying more but getting less, and the fines he has listed do not reflect the deterioration we have seen recently. In my discussions with Royal Mail, it has said that parcels overwhelm the service at Christmas, but that situation is carrying on into March. Is it not the reality that parcels are much more—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The hon. Lady is over time. I was trying to push her along to finish her question, but there seem to be more pages. Can we now end?

[Dame Harriett Baldwin]

We can certainly now end by asking for the Minister’s plan in terms of—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We have had enough—I don’t need that backchat. I call the Minister.

[Blair McDougall]

I hope that the hon. Member can tell from my body language and tone that I share the anger and frustration of Members across the House. As I mentioned, I am meeting Ofcom later today to raise the very issues she mentions. I slightly take issue with the year zero approach she took. There are very long-standing issues with Royal Mail driven—in fairness—by the changes in consumer habits and the things we are sending and not sending any more. She mentions the new ownership. As part of that deed of undertaking, this Government got the assurance from the new owners that they could not take value out of the company until service improved. That shows that we take this matter seriously.

[Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)]

I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.

It is not just the customers who are rightly angry; it is postal workers as well, because they take pride in their job and the service they give. The last time I was in Corby delivery office, six deliveries never went out that day. The time before that, a postal worker volunteered to cover his own delivery on his day off. He was told that he could not, and when he went back in the day after, the work was still there; the delivery had not gone out. We now have a two-tier workforce, which is leading to a recruitment and retention crisis, and it is a standing joke in the job that the quickest way to get a letter delivered is to put it inside a parcel. Does the Minister agree that instead of Royal Mail imposing top-down changes by people who have never done the job before, it should listen to its workforce, sit down with the union and sort this mess out?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend gives me the opportunity to do what I have not done so far, which is to say that whatever criticisms hon. Members across the House have, they are in no way a critique of the work of our heroic posties up and down the country. I mentioned earlier that the Secretary of State brought together management and unions; Royal Mail is a private company, and we are not seeking to insert ourselves and become mediators, but that was a signal of how seriously we take this matter and how seriously we take the need for management and the unions to come together and address, through mutual understanding, exactly the issues he raises.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)]

In each year since 2023, Royal Mail has been fined by Ofcom over delivery delays, amounting to nearly £40 million. Following recent announcements, it would not surprise me if it were fined again in 2026. When Royal Mail was reprimanded in 2023 and 2024, its leadership promised that reforms would be made to improve its services, but following the £21 million fine in October 2025, the company said it could not publish its improvement plan until negotiations with the Communication Workers Union concluded.

The takeover of Royal Mail, which this Government supported, seems to have done nothing to improve the service so far. Over the past several years, an average of roughly one in four first-class letters arrives late, and recent reports suggest that 219 million letters may arrive late this year. These letters are sometimes urgent and hold important information, so it is clear that Royal Mail is repeatedly failing to meet its universal service obligation. Despite that, its stamp prices have consistently risen. That includes next month’s planned rise of 10p to the cost of first-class postage, taking the cost of a stamp to £1.80. The sorry saga of Royal Mail has gone on for far too long. Does the Minister believe that the British public should be paying more for their postal service, despite Royal Mail repeatedly failing to deliver their letters on time?

[Blair McDougall]

Paying more for postage is obviously part of the journey towards financial sustainability for Royal Mail as a critical piece of national infrastructure, but I absolutely agree with the hon. Lady that if our constituents are paying more for their stamps, they expect those letters to arrive, and it is not good enough if they do not. As I said, I am meeting Ofcom later on. It has asked Royal Mail for an improvement plan, which we think is long overdue. One issue that I will raise with Ofcom is progress on that improvement plan.

[Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)]

I declare an interest as a proud son of a local postie. We know that this is not the fault of the workers; they work day in, day out to get letters out, but are being told to prioritise parcels. Like many Members, I tried to go to my local mail centre just before Christmas—I know that you do the same, Mr Speaker—but I was denied access. An excuse was given, and the visit was never rearranged. Workers in that centre said to me, “They are trying to hide how bad the mail centre is from you, the local MP.”

Will the Minister tell the House and my constituents how we can turn this situation around? I fundamentally disagree with the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin), who said that this started with the new owners. It started with privatisation—end of. How can we get the service back on track? Will the Government consider nationalising it so that our residents can get the letters that they desperately need for their appointments?

[Blair McDougall]

I am troubled to hear that my hon. Friend has not been granted access to talk to his local sorting office. I think visiting the sorting office at Christmas and other times is a diary staple for all MPs—it is a really important part of the job. He refers to the anger that posties themselves feel about this. It is not just a job for them. They feel that this is a service, and they recognise as much as anyone else that this situation is simply not good enough. Ofcom examined the prioritisation of parcels a few years ago and found no evidence that it was a central policy, but I have heard stories from so many Members about the prioritisation of parcels, so I intend to raise it with Ofcom this afternoon.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I met the Minister some weeks ago and suggested that he might have to come back to the House if Royal Mail had not improved its services. May I thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question and the Westminster Hall debate next week, which was secured by another Member?

I raised this issue on the 13 January as a point of order, as you will know, Mr Speaker, and clearly the problem has got worse rather than better. I put on record my thanks to all posties. I think the whole House would like to thank them for all their work in our constituencies. This situation has had a huge social and economic impact on people throughout our constituencies, but what concerns me is that the Minister has referred to being unable to intervene in a private company, and the regulator is of course independent. So what can he do? If there is nothing he can do, perhaps he will come back in a few weeks’ time to repeat that there is nothing he can do, but how does that help people who are waiting for medical results and other important information?

[Blair McDougall]

That is a very fair question. As I mentioned, the Secretary of State brought together the ownership and management to stress the need to get an agreement on reforms to improve service standards. Those things are all connected. I have stressed, in no uncertain terms, my dissatisfaction with current levels of service. On NHS letters, I and Department of Health and Social Care colleagues are pressing to ensure that more NHS bodies take advantage of the barcode system, so that those letters are prioritised. Royal Mail is a private company, but we are exercising the pressure that we can in order to ensure that standards are improved.

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

My understanding is that letters must not be treated less favourably than parcels, but that is happening at the moment through internal Royal Mail targets. That is the case at the Fotherby Street sorting office in Grimsby, where a tracked-first policy is in place, meaning that parcels take priority, while letters and non-tracked mail are not prioritised. First and second-class cards and letters are left sitting in frames for days and weeks. That builds up, as other Members have said.

Route revisions are also an issue for posties, some of whom regularly walk 30,000 to 40,000 steps a day. That is causing exhaustion, injury and illness. It is not acceptable in any way for the Government to say that they cannot do anything. What will they do to force Ofcom to take action that will get things moving and change a policy that leaves people’s letters sat in their frames for days?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend voices her frustration—which is shared across the House—about the disconnect between what she is hearing from local sorting offices and the stated company policy. As I say, I will raise the prioritisation of parcels with Ofcom later. On the wider issue of working conditions for posties, the Secretary of State has brought together the owners and the company to stress the importance of progressing those issues and getting to a situation in which quality of service improves and the workforce feel properly rewarded and respected.

[Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)]

The postal delivery landscape is a fast-moving one, as the Minister will recognise. That is evidenced by the fact that Denmark very recently ended its postal service entirely—everybody now has to use a private courier. What weight does he put on the words of Royal Mail when it says that it recognises the problems and is working hard—does he take that in good faith? A critique from Royal Mail, which clearly recognises that there are problems, is that Ofcom’s slow responses to Royal Mail suggestions are disjointed from a fast-moving landscape in a very competitive sphere. When he meets Ofcom this afternoon, will he urge it to respond speedily and progress issues as they manifest themselves?

[Blair McDougall]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that helpful and practical suggestion. I will certainly add it to the agenda for the meeting, and report back to him on the outcomes of those discussions.

[Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blyth and Ashington (Ian Lavery) for asking this urgent question because, as he will know, too many constituents are suffering this situation. When this first started, I asked Royal Mail why it was happening. I got polite replies, but frankly, at this stage, fine words butter no parsnips. We really need some action. May I urge the Minister to push Ofcom to take action on this issue?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend is, as ever, a doughty campaigner for everyone in the communities she represents. I will certainly be pressing Ofcom on these issues, and I will continue to press Royal Mail directly as well, stressing that we want to see an improvement in standards. The current standards of delivery are simply not good enough.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

In rural parts of the country such as North Shropshire, where broadband, mobile signal and public transport are poor, people really depend on their postal service. Constituents have contacted me to say that they have missed court documents and NHS letters—important things that they need in order to get on with their lives. I have visited the sorting office. Beyond the prioritisation of parcels, which posties have told me about, the rounds are too long and working conditions for postal workers are not good enough, so there are issues in recruitment and retention. What can Ofcom do to ensure that Royal Mail puts in place the resources to ensure that letters can be delivered on time in rural places, like North Shropshire?

[Blair McDougall]

Unfortunately, the story that the hon. Lady tells is familiar, because I have heard it from so many hon. Members around the Chamber. As I say, we have been bringing together workforce and management for talks on reforms to get the business on to a sustainable footing and improve service quality. We will bring that together. I will raise the issue of prioritisation of parcels with Ofcom this afternoon.

[Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)]

I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I thank all postal workers in Stockport and across the UK. It is important to highlight that it was the coalition Government—the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives—who privatised Royal Mail. I ran an online survey about Royal Mail services in my constituency. Some 89% of respondents said that they were unhappy, angry or disappointed by the service in Stockport. There was one example of mail not being delivered for almost two weeks, until it was all delivered on the same day, meaning that important information and appointments were missed. What will the Minister to do improve services for the approximately 3 million people in Stockport and Greater Manchester?

[Blair McDougall]

I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to posties in Stockport and Greater Manchester. Like posties all across the country, they go the extra mile in incredibly difficult circumstances. As I mentioned, we are bringing together unions and management for talks, to make sure that we get to a resolution and progress the future of the business. We are also pressing Ofcom on the enforcement action that it can take to progress the improvement plan that Royal Mail has committed to producing.

[Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)]

Just recently, Royal Mail in Tonbridge introduced a new working model that has been, quite frankly, an abject failure. I welcome the hon. Member for Blyth and Ashington (Ian Lavery) asking this urgent question, because this is quite clearly a matter for not just one constituency or community, but the whole country. I am grateful to the Minister, who is assiduous in his role, for taking it up. Will he raise with management that while we all recognise that this is about not just privatisation or ownership, but the change in the way that people use the post, and our use of emails and so on, the problems have a very real effect on people’s lives, particularly in communities like mine in Tonbridge? I am not the only one who has missed an appointment because the letter arrived weeks, or even months, after I was supposed to attend.

[Blair McDougall]

I know from my talks with officials that the right hon. Gentleman has been in discussions about the issues in Tonbridge, and that Royal Mail is seized of those. He is absolutely right. Members have mentioned hospital appointments; it is worth mentioning the important post that we hon. Members send to often very vulnerable constituents. That is a reminder that the post is a central part of our national life and economy, and we have to see it improve.

[Natasha Irons (Croydon East) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blyth and Ashington (Ian Lavery) for securing this urgent question. In my constituency, we have had a massive uptick in complaints about not only letters being delivered late, but priority service not happening when people have paid for it, and constituents being advised to collect post from delivery offices without prior notification of an attempted delivery; essentially, they are asked to become their own Royal Mail. Having met local workers over Christmas, I know that they are working incredibly hard to keep on top of this, and they are just as frustrated as my residents. My biggest concern is that when Members have raised the issue with Royal Mail, its response has been, quite frankly, rude, dismissive and a bit lacklustre. Will the Minister please outline what he will do to ensure that postal services are protected in my community, and communities across the country?

[Blair McDougall]

I thank the posties in Croydon for their efforts; they do an extraordinary job. My hon. Friend hits the nail on the head. We sometimes might have lower standards for other delivery operators in the economy, but we expect a certain level of service from Royal Mail. When people are paying more for stamps, or are paying for special delivery, they absolutely should expect to get what they pay for. As I said, I am raising these issues directly with Royal Mail. We are bringing together the workforce and management, and I am meeting Ofcom later today.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

As has been well established today, the blame for failures does not lie with postal workers, who are doing all they can to deliver a service. It lies with a private company that is telling its staff to prioritise parcels, but then pretending that is not its policy. My Chichester constituents have received hospital appointment letters four days after their appointment was due to take place. One constituent in Selsey received their letter for a specialist appointment in London an hour before it was due to take place. What can the Minister do to put pressure on Royal Mail, so that my constituents’ health is not put at risk as a result of its failures?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Lady’s constituents in Chichester deserve better, frankly. That is why it is so important that the Government send a clear message that we expect improvement. It is why I am having conversations with Ofcom. It is also why, when the new ownership took over Royal Mail, we received an undertaking that it would not be able to take value out of the company until it improved. That was done to ensure that there is an incentive for it to do better.

[Ian Byrne (Liverpool West Derby) (Lab)]

The Communication Workers Union reported chaos and demoralisation among its members as a result of the imposition of poorer pay and conditions for posties, and the company’s decision to prioritise potential job cuts over service when it comes to USO reform. Will the Minister outline what the Government are doing to ensure that Royal Mail customers and workers are not made to pay the price of the mismanagement of our postal services, and whether the Government will use any powers allocated to them as holders of the golden share?

[Blair McDougall]

As I said a moment ago, when the new ownership took over, part of the deed of undertaking was that we would not allow it to remove value from the company until service improved. On the impact on the workforce, obviously the negotiations are between the workforce and management, but the fact that the Secretary of State has been convening meetings between them shows that we take this issue very seriously, and it is a priority for our Department.

[Aphra Brandreth (Chester South and Eddisbury) (Con)]

Like other hon. Members, I have had many constituents get in touch about poor mail service. One constituent in Kelsall reached out to Royal Mail after experiencing deliveries once per week at best, only to receive a reply stating that service levels in our area are good. The same constituent later received a hospital appointment letter after the appointment, which is certainly not good. Does the Minister share my concern that Royal Mail appears to be dismissing legitimate complaints, while failing to meet its universal service obligation, and what more can be done to hold Royal Mail to account?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Lady has previously pressed me on another aspect of postal services—the availability of post offices in her constituency—and she continues to campaign for her constituents. I share the frustration felt whenever a Member of Parliament who raises a concern is told that everything is fine and not to worry about it. It is precisely because I share this concern that I am having the meeting with Ofcom later today.

[Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)]

The Royal Mail excuses are wearing very thin, are they not? I have constituents who are going to the sorting office and being presented with piles—weeks’ worth—of letters, and others who are getting those same piles delivered in one go. The Minister said he is meeting Ofcom today. Does he think that the regulator needs additional powers? It is clear from his answers so far, and from the fact that we are still discussing something that has been going on for months, that something is not working. I encourage him to consider whether the regulator needs more, and what he can do.

[Blair McDougall]

I will certainly talk to the regulator later today in those terms, and will ask that question. As I say, the business is regulated through Ofcom, but where the Government have power, we are taking it; for example, there is our insistence on putting in the company’s deed of undertaking that money cannot be stripped out of the company until service improves.

[Brendan O'Hara (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber) (SNP)]

Whether it is the failure of Royal Mail to meets its USO or the skyrocketing price of heating oil, it seems that rural communities, such as those in my constituency, are most impacted. We all agree that despite the often heroic efforts of the workforce, the service provided by Royal Mail management is totally unacceptable. The Minister knows that we are 60 days from a Scottish parliamentary election in which 1 million people will vote by post. How confident is he that Royal Mail will be able to cope, and what measures is he putting in place to ensure that it does?

[Blair McDougall]

I have relatives in the most remote parts of Scotland, so I know that while these issues might be an inconvenience for the rest of us, for rural customers, they can be the stripping away of a lifeline. We have sought reassurances from Royal Mail that the current issues with service across the country will not impact postal voting in the upcoming elections. I know that the chief executive of Royal Mail has a meeting in Scotland to discuss preparations in the days ahead.

[Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)]

I would like to put on the record that, despite testimony to the contrary, it is Darlington’s postal workers who are the best in the country. They deliver their service to the best of their abilities, and they also provide a social service; their visit is often the only one that residents get. I want to draw the Minister’s attention to two quite shocking cases that constituents have brought to me. One constituent, despite using the tracking system, has had their application form to join the Royal Navy go awry, which is obviously causing huge delays. Another constituent successfully gained compensation from Royal Mail for a late delivery, but the cheque, which was sent in the post, bounced. I would like the Minister to allay some of our fears about crucial public services, and the postal communications from our Departments and arm’s length bodies.

[Mr Speaker]

That was a very late delivery. I am going to finish this urgent question at 1.30 pm, so let us help each other by being speedy. The Minister will show me how quickly he can reply.

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend makes an important point, although I notice that everything seems to be the best in her constituency. The problem is not just missed post, but missed opportunities, like the one that she described. That is exactly why we will continue to pressurise Royal Mail, directly and through the regulator, to improve the service in areas like hers.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

Posties in my constituency have reported to me that one of the most serious problems is staff absence. Staff go off sick because they have been overworked, and as a result, deliveries do not take place. The final straw for one of my constituents was when they received a Christmas card on 28 February that had been franked before Christmas. Clearly, there is a serious problem, not just in rural areas but in suburban areas. Will the Minister seek an urgent action plan from Royal Mail on getting this right? Otherwise we will be back here in a month’s time with the same problem.

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Gentleman could be mistaken for a CWU trade union official. He will be crossing the Floor. He makes an important and serious point: issues around staff conditions are directly related to the quality of service. That is exactly why the Secretary of State has been convening the meetings that I have mentioned to progress the talks.

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

My constituents in Dulwich and West Norwood, particularly in the SE22 and SE24 postcodes, have been suffering the consequences of Royal Mail’s failings for years. Residents in SE24 recently had no mail for four weeks. A key problem in holding Royal Mail to account is that it is required to report performance data relating to only the first part of the postcode. That means that the failures of individual delivery offices are disguised in the sub-regional data. Will the Minister raise that issue with Ofcom, and ask it to look again at the reporting requirements on Royal Mail, so that it can be held properly to account?

[Blair McDougall]

As a former resident of SE23, I pay tribute to the posties in that part of the world. I will certainly add my hon. Friend’s suggestion to the agenda of the meeting later today.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

Does the Minister recognise that meeting the universal service obligation is a challenge because of poor recruitment and retention? That poor recruitment and retention is no surprise, given that Royal Mail offers new postmen and postwomen little more than minimum wage, and sites are really not fit for purpose.

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Gentleman raises an important point that is core to the talks that are going on right now between unions and management. That is exactly why we are so keen to ensure that the talks are productive and come to a settlement that deals with the issues that he describes.

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for his constructive engagement with me over the past few weeks on Royal Mail’s poor services in my Bolton West constituency. I know that he shares my utter frustration at the current service provision. May I flag with the Minister a letter that I sent to Horwich constituents on 13 February, updating them on the progress that I had made with the Minister on this matter? A constituent got in touch to say that the letter was only received on 25 February, some 12 days later, alongside missing correspondence from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, the NHS and the Department for Work and Pensions. Another constituent in Bolton received a Christmas card on 7 March that had been posted before 14 December. When will my constituents see an improvement in Royal Mail services?

[Mr Speaker]

Can we try to shorten the questions? Some people are not going to get in, and that really worries me, as this subject matters to all of us—especially me, as I have the best post offices and the best posties.

[Blair McDougall]

I reassure my hon. Friend’s constituents that his efforts to transmit their dissatisfaction have been heard at the highest level. If there is a prize for dark irony, I think he has probably just won it. It is because we want this situation to improve as quickly as possible that we are taking the action that I have described, and continue to put on the pressure.

[Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

I pay tribute to the posties across Bromsgrove, but not to the management of Royal Mail. My constituents need action, not more platitudes, like Royal Mail saying to me that it is “very sorry” that letters have not been received. I implore the Minister to get together with the management of Royal Mail and Ofcom to deliver an action plan, for which Royal Mail is accountable to us, via the Minister, so that we see an improved service for all our constituents.

[Blair McDougall]

I reassure the hon. Gentleman that I have communicated exactly the frustration that he describes, which I have heard from so many hon. Members, to Royal Mail, and I will communicate it to Ofcom later as well.

[Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)]

I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Having spoken with postal workers from across Alloa and Grangemouth, I know that morale is at rock-bottom because of years of savage cuts, and restructuring that has negatively impacted their ability to do their job. Does the Government accept that the erosion of the service and workforce morale is due to privatisation, and that an essential public service like Royal Mail should be under public ownership, for the public good? When will the Government effectively hold bodies like Ofcom to account, because its inaction and impotence is costing our constituents dearly?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to point out that the situation is a result of long-standing structural issues in Royal Mail, and with postal services more generally. My focus later today with Ofcom will be to ensure that it is pressed to deal with exactly the issues that my hon. Friend describes.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I align myself with the stories that everybody has told. Constituents in Sturminster Marshall received two postal deliveries in the whole of January, and then Royal Mail tried to blame letters not being delivered on the flooding, which happened at the beginning of February, so I do not trust anything it says. I am concerned about my posties, who are literally being brought to tears on the doorstep. They are being told that they cannot have any overtime even though posts are being advertised, and they cannot complete their rounds. They have explained to me that they are being expected to manage their decline. What is the Minister doing to stand up for these frontline workers who are key to our communities?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Lady is right to pay tribute to her local posties. It is because we recognise the connection between the sustainability of the Royal Mail and the postal service and the conditions of workers and the importance of the talks that are going on, that the Secretary of State has been convening the meetings that I have mentioned, and he will continue to do so.

[Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) (Lab)]

This situation is completely intolerable, as everybody has described. Will the Minister confirm that if the owners continue to fail to discharge their obligations as a matter of urgency, the option of taking Royal Mail back into public ownership will be fully considered, because that is popular with the public?

[Blair McDougall]

Our focus is on ensuring that the talks that are under way are productive, and that they end with measures that will get the delivery service improved and the business on to a sustainable footing. As I have mentioned, we have an undertaking that the owners are not allowed to take value out of the company until service standards improve.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

My constituents who have lodged complaints with the local Royal Mail are receiving messages that say:

“We’re sorry to advise that deliveries in parts of the DN31-DN37 postcodes are being disrupted due to resourcing issues at the Grimsby Delivery Office.”

Will the Minister give an assurance that, if he has not already done so, he will urge Royal Mail to deal with these staffing resources? It is an acceptable reason in the short term, but not in the long term.

[Blair McDougall]

Whenever hon. Members raise local delivery issues with me, I raise them directly with Royal Mail officials. I will certainly do so for his area because his constituents deserve a better service.

[Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) (Lab)]

People across Morecambe and Lunesdale are suffering from late Royal Mail deliveries. In fact, one constituent was told by a frustrated, overworked postie that second class letters were being delivered once a week, at most. What steps is the Minister taking to address that problem?

[Blair McDougall]

The service that my hon. Friend’s constituents are getting clearly is not good enough. We have met Royal Mail to say that the situation is not good enough, we are bringing together workforce and management to progress the talks that will enable us to improve those standards and, as I say, I will be meeting Ofcom later today to express her concerns.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

My criticism is of Royal Mail’s senior leadership; it is certainly not of our local posties. In Upper Bann, the posties are excellent and so is my liaison officer in Royal Mail, who has gone above and beyond to get information flowing. Staff are at breaking point, there are absences and gaps—we have 10 vacancies in Banbridge depot—and letters are delayed. You know the score, Mr Speaker. The big issue is with hospital letters, so will the Minister liaise with health and social care trusts in Northern Ireland?

[Blair McDougall]

I will raise the issues at Banbridge sorting office directly with Royal Mail. In addition to my work with the Department of Health, I will ensure that we are having that conversation with health bodies in Northern Ireland.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

Given that the Government used the National Security and Investment Act 2021 to extract a golden share, because they considered Royal Mail to be national critical infrastructure, I find it slightly odd that, having recognised its importance, we think there is nothing that we can do. Will the Minister commit to, or at least consider, taking powers that he might need to make a direct intervention to ensure that our constituents, including mine in Stoke-on-Trent Central, get their letters when they want them: on time?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend is right to speak on behalf of his constituents and demand better service. As for what we can do, as I said, we are working through the regulator to ensure that services improve, and I am meeting it later today. We are also intervening to bring together the workforce and management to ensure the talks that are crucial for making those improvements progress.

[Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)]

I concur with Members across the House that the fault does not lie with our individual posties. I pay tribute to Dean and Aaron, who have been fantastic as my posties in Brampton in my constituency. I have been written to by Royal Mail employees in my constituency about the new contract and the pressure that it puts on, with 50% of new postal workers leaving in their first year. Can the Minister guarantee that he will speak to Ofcom about equalising pay and conditions to ensure that we do not see as many staff leaving?

[Blair McDougall]

The question of equalising pay and conditions is a matter for those talks. That is why, through the Secretary of State, we are bringing together the owner and the trade unions to have those discussions. I also pay tribute to Dean and Aaron, who can now say that they have had their names mentioned at the Dispatch Box.

[Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) (Lab)]

I am a proud member of the CWU. Posties in my constituency are clear that the problems at Royal Mail are the previous board’s financial mismanagement, along with lower wages, longer hours and poorer conditions. The Conservatives and the Lib Dems were warned that that would happen, but they privatised Royal Mail anyway. Will the Government commit to ensuring that the new owners stick to the agreement with the CWU and the Government, meet the universal service obligation and ensure that my constituents get the service that they deserve?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend is right. Her constituents absolutely deserve better, and she is right to highlight the long-standing issues that we are trying to deal with. Royal Mail should absolutely meet all the obligations that it has entered into.

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

Hundreds of my constituents have written to me about Royal Mail failures. I have raised them with Ofcom, but it tells me that it cannot investigate local complaints, and Royal Mail will not act on them. Will the Minister commit to reviewing Ofcom’s powers to hold Royal Mail to account at a local level?

[Blair McDougall]

As I said a moment ago, I will certainly ask Ofcom for its assessment of its powers in this space, and I will keep the hon. Lady updated.

[Lauren Edwards (Rochester and Strood) (Lab)]

Before I became a Member of Parliament, I worked for the CWU at the time of Royal Mail’s privatisation, and I am sad to say that much of what we feared would happen has come true. Residents in Grain in my constituency reported receiving no first-class or second-class mail for weeks, similar to the reports of other Members.

I will highlight an incident in which Network Rail had to hand-deliver letters to residents to ensure that they were aware of the impending closure of a critical rail crossing, because Royal Mail service could not be relied on. Does my hon. Friend agree that the service to my constituents is completely unacceptable? Royal Mail needs to focus on addressing its significant recruitment and retention challenges, which have been made worse by the introduction of a two-tier workforce in 2022-23.

[Blair McDougall]

The example that my hon. Friend gives about Network Rail is a reminder that, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) said a second ago, this is critical national infrastructure that we rely on at moments like that. The issues that my hon. Friend the Member for Rochester and Strood (Lauren Edwards) discusses in terms of the terms and conditions are exactly why we have made that a priority. The Secretary of State is bringing together the management and workforce to discuss those issues.

[David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)]

I had the opportunity to meet senior management at Royal Mail yesterday, after constituents in Symington and Thankerton in the Clydesdale area of my constituency received no mail at all for more than 10 days. I want to return to the issue of postal voting in the Scottish elections and other elections. I do not think that reassurances from Royal Mail are enough; the Minister and others need to see a plan so that we know postal votes will be delivered, collected and taken to the electoral authorities. Will he reassure us that he will get such a plan?

[Blair McDougall]

We continue to seek those reassurances and the plan behind them. As I mentioned, with regard to the Scottish elections, a specific meeting between the management of Royal Mail—its CEO—and the election authorities in Scotland is coming up to discuss exactly the concerns that the right hon. Gentleman raises.

[Alan Strickland (Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor) (Lab)]

I met a resident at my surgery at the weekend who has a long-term health condition. They have been sent testing packs by the NHS, which arrive late, and appointment letters have been delayed, which is having a huge impact on their health. When the Minister meets Ofcom later, will he raise the serious impacts of unacceptable Royal Mail delays on not just our residents, but our national health service?

[Blair McDougall]

I will certainly raise my hon. Friend’s concerns about important medical post with Ofcom. Royal Mail is part of the critical national infrastructure and can reach every part of the country, and its ability to deliver such things is a business opportunity, and it needs to get that right.

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

On Monday, it was my privilege to visit the Helston sorting office, where I discovered staff burdened with remote, counterproductive micromanagement of their work and inadequate plans to deal with the inevitability of staff absences. I was distressed to hear them describe that they had been abused and threatened when undertaking their work on the frontline. Does the Minister agree that frontline workers should be praised and have management systems that empower them to resolve matters locally?

[Blair McDougall]

I think the hon. Gentleman can tell from the comments around the House how much respect and affection there is for posties around the country, and I am disturbed by what he describes. Ultimately, the only sustainable future for Royal Mail is in bringing together a workforce who are really passionate about what they do and a management who are seeking to get the company into a financially sustainable position. That is why we are prioritising the talks going on at the moment.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

Gloucester residents have been let down by Royal Mail for years; it is prioritising parcels over post and profits over our posties. I have a visit to Gloucester North delivery office on Friday, and I was shocked to find out from the frontlines that it is offering overtime to clear the backlog before I get there. Ofcom has proven to be utterly toothless in this matter; it is not regulating properly, and Royal Mail is baking the fines into its business plans. What more can we do to give Ofcom the bite that it needs to improve service for Gloucester residents?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend has been a constant campaigner and is constantly in my ear on these issues on behalf of his constituents. As I said, I will be talking to Ofcom later today about its role in this matter, and I will keep him updated on that.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

Residents across my constituency, particularly those in the SM1, SM2 and SM3 postcodes, have been reporting issues with their deliveries for years. Local social media is full of people reporting one-day-a-week deliveries and asking which other roads that is occurring on. I have visited my delivery office for the last two Christmases, meeting hard-working posties who have been let down by the system. Let me give a particular shout-out to Timmy, who has been delivering to my road for decades and is approaching retirement—my congratulations to him. Will the Minister add Sutton to the list for his agenda this afternoon? Can he also report back next Wednesday in the Westminster Hall debate, which I imagine he will be coming to, with clear actions from his meeting this afternoon?

[Blair McDougall]

I pay tribute to Timmy and thank him for his years of service. It is exactly because this service is full of people like him who are passionate about their jobs that we need to ensure that Royal Mail’s quality of service is reformed and improved.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Phil from Brereton told me that his wife’s jury service letter arrived too late for her to defer; Colin from Brereton had a hospital letter that arrived three days after the appointment; and Michael from Rugeley waited weeks for a new debit card. Those were first-class letters, so planned reforms to the universal service obligation would not have made much of a difference. Will the Minister impress upon the leadership of Royal Mail the human impact of these delays on posties and residents?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend makes a powerful case about how delays and failings in Royal Mail standards impact on so many different aspects of his constituents’ lives. I will certainly use those examples when I next meet with Royal Mail.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I want to make a quick point about hospital appointments. When someone misses their hospital appointment, they go to the back of the queue and start again, and might have to wait another two years. When the Minister has his meeting with Royal Mail today, can I ask him to convey to its representatives that they should have meetings with health trusts, patient groups and representatives of Northern Ireland to ensure that those who miss appointments due to delays in the Royal Mail will not be disadvantaged, which they clearly are at the moment?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. As I mentioned a moment ago, we are working with the Department of Health and Social Care here to ensure as many health bodies as possible take advantage of the barcode service, to make sure that their letters get through. I will certainly make sure that the issues he has highlighted are raised in Northern Ireland.

[Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)]

Lots of letters are late. One that stood out to me, which a constituent raised, was a parking fine that had almost doubled in price by the time it arrived. Locally, the Royal Mail tells me that it is recruiting 12 new postal workers, but if that does not fix the problem, what should we try next?

[Blair McDougall]

Continue to speak to me. My hon. Friend grabbed me during the votes the other night to raise local Royal Mail issues, and I know she will continue to do so.

[Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)]

Many residents and fantastic posties in Exeter have raised exactly the same concerns as other Members of the House. Can the Minister give an assessment of how he thinks Ofcom has dealt with this issue so far, and does he have confidence in Ofcom to get a grip on it?

[Blair McDougall]

We rely on Ofcom as the regulator of Royal Mail, which is exactly why we are having a meeting later today to discuss what more it can do to deal with the widespread concerns that exist across the House about the quality of service.

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

It is clear that the NHS barcode prioritisation system broke down, but the problem is not limited to NHS letters. I want to highlight the Government’s Tell Us Once service following a bereavement. Many hon. Members will know the urgency and distressing nature of that correspondence, so will the Minister—who has been extremely active in dealing with constituency concerns—look at the issue of prioritisation of non-NHS letters?

[Blair McDougall]

In a previous life, I was very proud to have worked on the Tell Us Once service at its inception, and I know how important that service is to people at the worst possible time of their life. I will certainly raise the issue that my hon. Friend has highlighted.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

As the Labour Member of Parliament for Bournemouth East, I stand by my posties here in the House of Commons and thank them for their dedication and diligence, which stands in sharp contrast to the management of the Royal Mail. The trial that is under way has failed, and the new approach will spectacularly fail if it is put into effect. When the Minister meets Ofcom later, and when he meets the Royal Mail, will he say that he will not stand for the Royal Mail becoming yet another gig economy parcel courier that exploits its employees and lets down customers?

[Blair McDougall]

This is a Government who are improving the working conditions, standards and rights of workers across the economy. My hon. Friend makes the important point that there is wisdom and experience within the workforce. The talks that are going on at the moment are about bringing that together with the ambition and responsibilities of the management, which is why we are taking the actions we are.

[David Burton-Sampson (Southend West and Leigh) (Lab)]

Southend sorting office was part of the original pilot for these changes to the USO. It failed, and nine months later it is clear that it is still failing, so today I have summoned the management to meet me and my constituents to hear at first hand the challenges this is causing. Following that meeting, will the Minister meet me to hear that feedback and take it right up the chain?

[Blair McDougall]

I certainly will. I thank my hon. Friend for raising that issue, as well as all the other hon. Members who have brought to me local intelligence, which informs my own understanding of the issues across the postal service.

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

Residents in Ardsley, Robin Hood, Lofthouse, parts of Tingley and Morley are complaining that they have been waiting up to three weeks for their postal service. It is obviously not the posties’ fault—it is a question of leadership and management. Following the Minister’s meeting with Ofcom, will he meet me to see the evidence for himself? What can he say to reassure my constituents now?

[Blair McDougall]

I reassure my hon. Friend’s constituents that we are expressing the frustration and anger that he has expressed to me directly to Royal Mail and through Ofcom, and of course I will happily discuss developments with him.

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

I agree with residents across Wolverhampton and Willenhall that Royal Mail’s delivery service is just not good enough, but we stand with our frontline postal workers, who are working incredibly hard and bearing the brunt. I call on the Minister to challenge Royal Mail’s leadership, and to have a look at the two-tier employment model and wider issues that are affecting the recruitment and retention of our hard-working staff.

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend’s constituents absolutely deserve better, and posties deserve dignity at work, given the essential job they do for our society and our economy. That is exactly why we are convening meetings between management and unions to make sure that those talks progress.

[Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)]

My speaking notes talk about excuses from Royal Mail. Now that I am in the Chamber, though, I do not think that is the language I will use, because people across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages are sick of being lied to by Royal Mail. I met Royal Mail just before Christmas to complain to it about the total lack of a postal service in Lichfield—we were probably the worst area in the country at that point. When I had that meeting, I was told that all the first-class mail went out last week, but that was a lie—it was an absolute lie, because my constituents told me so. Royal Mail clearly does not have a handle on this issue. It is either not measuring its performance or it is covering it up, so I ask the Minister to use the golden share we have to force Royal Mail to be honest, fess up and fix it.

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend shows passion and anger, which he has also shown to me in private when raising these issues. Again, that speaks to how frustrating it is for us as Members of Parliament to raise a problem—on any issue—and then to be told that it does not exist when our constituents are telling us otherwise. Royal Mail has a responsibility to address the problem in a direct and straightforward manner, because if we are not recognising the problem, we will not deal with it.

[Mr Speaker]

This has been an excellent debate, and I thank Members for the way it has been delivered on behalf of all our constituents. Royal Mail’s management has a problem, and that has certainly been highlighted today.

Protest Policing

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Commons Chamber

13:36

[The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Shabana Mahmood)]

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on public order.

The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Mark Rowley, has requested a prohibition on processions relating to al-Quds Day under section 13 of the Public Order Act 1986. I have consented to that request, placing a ban on those processions for both protesters and counter-protesters that will now last for a month. This is the first ban since 2012, so I wish to explain to the House today why I have done so.

It is important that we start with the context. Initiated by Iran’s then leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, in 1979, al-Quds Day is an event held on the last Friday of Ramadan. The day is marked worldwide by rallies and demonstrations in support of Palestine, including here in Britain. Plans for a procession this Sunday in London have been led by the Islamic Human Rights Commission, an organisation that has been closely associated with the Iranian regime. Of course, this year’s event interacts with the ongoing conflict in the middle east. It comes at a time when the Iranian regime is attacking British forces and bases, as well as those of our allies. It also comes just days after the arrest of four individuals as part of an investigation led by counter-terror police. Those individuals were arrested under the National Security Act 2023 for allegedly spying on Jewish communities on behalf of the Iranian regime.

This context creates clear challenges for the police: heightened attention and therefore larger expected attendance, and heightened tensions between protesters and counter-protesters and therefore greater potential for conflict. The expertise on whether and how those challenges can be safely managed rightly sits with the police, and the legal test is clear. Any request to prohibit a procession must only be lodged with the aim of preventing serious public disorder that could not otherwise be prevented by imposing other conditions on a public procession under section 12 of the Public Order Act. Section 12 conditions typically include specifying the route, location and times of a protest. Under normal circumstances, they are sufficient to ensure protests remain peaceful and the public are kept safe.

However, the commissioner has clearly stated that the Metropolitan police’s view is that serious public disorder cannot be avoided unless a prohibition under section 13 is introduced. That assessment is grounded in the tensions created by international conflict, the scale of the expected march, and the presence of protesters and multiple counter-protesting groups all seeking to march at once.

My first duty is to keep the public safe. Having carefully and thoroughly considered the risk assessment presented to me by the Metropolitan police, I am satisfied that an order under section 13 is necessary. For one month, there will therefore be a prohibition on processions in London related to al-Quds Day involving protesters and counter-protesters, which will come into effect today and end on 11 April. Should the commissioner consider that a further extension is required, he will be able to make a further submission at that time.

I must be clear about what this prohibition does not do. The police and the Home Secretary only have the power to prohibit a public procession. Section 13 cannot be used to ban a static protest, referred to in the legislation as a “public assembly”. Should a static demonstration proceed this weekend, the police will not be able to stop it. Instead, they will be able to impose conditions, such as dictating the precise location and timing. People will therefore be able to exercise their right to peaceful protest, although the full force of the law will be enforced if hate crimes, or other crimes, are committed.

Today’s announcement is confined to specific circumstances, but I know that it will excite scrutiny of the wider issue of policing protests. The House will be aware that I have appointed Lord Macdonald of River Glaven to carry out an independent review of public order and hate crime legislation. His review is ongoing, and I will update the House on its findings at the earliest possible moment. I do, however, want to make a wider point about the right to protest in this country.

What I have announced today is narrowly focused on specific circumstances in a unique moment, but it does not alter an enduring fact. In this country, we rightly pride ourselves on our freedoms, including the right to peaceful protest. It is a precious right and one that I revere, as it sets us apart from autocracies of all kinds across the world. This prohibition is therefore limited and specific. It bans marches, but not static demonstrations, in relation to al-Quds Day. Equally, I must add, there is no prohibition on protesting against the plight of Palestinians, and there never will be. Hundreds of protests have already taken place across the country this year in solidarity with Palestinians, and the Met alone has policed 32. Peaceful and lawful protest, whether for Palestine or for Israel, or for any other cause, must be cherished and protected, and this Government will always defend that sacred freedom.

At the same time, as Home Secretary I have a solemn duty—and it is my first duty—to keep the British people safe. I have been presented with the assessment of the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police that he cannot guarantee the security of our capital and prevent serious public disorder without a prohibition on processions relating to al-Quds Day. I have reviewed his assessment, and it is clear to me that my duty to the public and their safety dictates that I must accept his request. It is right that we prohibit these processions, while continuing to uphold our ancient commitments to the freedoms of which we are rightly proud. That is the balance that I have sought to strike today, and I commend my statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

13:42

[Chris Philp (Croydon South) (Con)]

I fully support a ban on this march. The police assessment of the risk is right, and, in fact, I wrote to the commissioner a week ago urging for exactly this ban. However, the problems with the al-Quds march go beyond simply the risk of serious disorder. In 2024, 10 people were arrested for the assault of an emergency worker, inciting racial hatred, and public order offences. Chants at al-Quds marches in the past have called for intifada and revolution. Calls for intifada and revolution are calls for violence, and calls for violence have no place on our streets.

A leading speaker at these marches has been Nazim Ali, a man who has demanded that Israel

“be wiped off the map”.

Speaking at a previous march, Ali even blamed what he called “Zionists” for the Grenfell fire. He also said:

“"We are fed up of the Zionists. We are fed up of their rabbis. We are fed up of their synagogues.”

The reference to rabbis and synagogues shows that when this despicable man says “Zionist”, he means Jews. That is clear antisemitism. Speech inciting violence and speech inciting antisemitism, which we have heard at these marches in the past, has serious consequences.

Antisemitism is now rampant. Jews are 10 times more likely to be victims of hate crimes than Muslims. We saw an Islamist-motivated murder at a synagogue in Manchester just a few months ago. In the past 25 years, 94% of all terror murders in the UK have been committed by Islamist terrorists, who also make up 75% of counterterrorism caseloads. Does the Home Secretary share my concern about the fact that that the Prevent caseload is only 10% Islamist in nature, and if she does, what does she propose to do about it?

The organiser of the al-Quds march is the so-called Islamic Human Rights Commission, which, as the Home Secretary rightly acknowledged, is in essence a front organisation for the Iranian regime. A former Iranian Deputy Minister of Culture, Aliasghar Ramezanpour, has said that there is a network of Islamic charities in the UK which are, in his words, not autonomous but funded and controlled by the regime in Tehran. Does the Home Secretary share my concern about that, and what does she propose to do about it? In opposition, the Labour party—I think, rightly—pledged to proscribe the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Will the Home Secretary update the House on the implementation of that pledge?

I am also deeply concerned about the many events that have been held recently, particularly at universities, lamenting the demise of Ayatollah Khameini—a man who in the last few weeks was directly responsible for the murder of 30,000 of his own people; a man who supported and sponsored terrorism around the world, for instance backing Hamas and the atrocities on 7 October, and who backed various regional wars. Will the Home Secretary join me in condemning those who mourned his demise and celebrated his evil acts?

More generally, the al-Quds marches are a troubling symptom of a growing division in our society, whereby some people define themselves primarily by their religion or their ethnic heritage, and we have seen that spilling over into the conduct of elections. This is deeply troubling and deeply divisive. It undermines the very foundations of our nation, which depend on a shared identity and shared values. I should be interested to hear the Home Secretary’s views on that, and I hope the House will return to the topic.

Let me finish with a broader point. Extremism has no place in the UK. Support for terrorism or violence has no place in the UK. Religious and racial hatred, including antisemitism, have no place here. I believe that when someone who is not a British citizen expresses extremist, violent, pro-terror or racist views, they should have their visa revoked and be expelled, as set out in section 3 of the Immigration Act 1971. The Home Office’s own guidance makes it clear that support for

“extremism or other unacceptable behaviour”

meets that statutory test. Will the Home Secretary use those powers to expel extremists who are not British citizens?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I thank the shadow Home Secretary for his comments and his questions. He began by talking about some of the unacceptable acts of violence and incitement to violence that have taken place at various marches, not just marches relating to al-Quds Day. It is not unusual for multiple arrests to be made at all the different types of protest marches that take place. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will join me in supporting the police as they ensure that the full force of the law is applied at all times and in all circumstances. I have, of course, recognised that there are some complexities in the legal framework and an inconsistency of application. I have asked Ken Macdonald to carry out a review to ensure that there is much more consistency of practice across the UK, and that there is clarity for the police about what they can and cannot do when it comes to some of the things that are said when protests take place. I hope that we can continue to work together across the House on those matters.

The right hon. Gentleman asked a specific question in relation to Prevent. I do of course keep under review the way in which the Prevent programme is functioning. A large number of recommendations have been made over many years, with many reports on the functioning of Prevent. It is important that Prevent referrals are made in line with the statutory requirements and the guidance, and that they are picking up those whom we want to take away from a mindset and an ideology that could ultimately result in harm. I do not think it appropriate for us to set percentage requirements for what should happen in terms of referrals, but it is important that the right referrals are made. We always work with partners who deliver the Prevent programme, and with local authorities and others, to ensure that that is done properly.

On the Islamic Human Rights Commission, the trust that is responsible for that charity is currently subject to a statutory inquiry by the Charity Commission, and it is important that that work is allowed to continue. Once the Charity Commission has reached a determination, I am sure that it will be discussed in the House.

On the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the right hon. Gentleman will know—we have had this discussion many times at the Dispatch Box, and the answers are not all that different from when the positions of our parties were reversed—that we do not comment on matters relating to proscription, but this Government have accepted the recommendations made by Jonathan Hall KC. We will take forward that work at the earliest available opportunity.

In relation to those who are publicly mourning the death of Khamenei, the deceased supreme leader of Iran, this is where free speech butts up against what most of us would consider to be appropriate conduct. I do not mourn the passing of Ayatollah Khamenei, but it is for others to decide what they do and do not support. I am absolutely clear that, whatever methods people use to express their political views, they must do so in line with the law of this land. That law should always be enforced without fear or favour, and I will always support the police in ensuring that that is the case.

The right hon. Gentleman asks about how we work as a society, and I think his questions are about citizens’ responsibilities in this country. I do not think it is for a Government to dictate to their citizens what political views they are allowed to hold or how they should express themselves or their identity, regardless of whether that is religious, ethnic or something else. It is the job of Government to ensure that we have a set of rules and values that are equally applied—our respect for democracy and the rule of law, and all the norms by which our society operates. That means that we accept free speech and people’s ability to have views that might be offensive. Many of us might disagree with those views, but people are still allowed to express them. I would not want to see these very troubling events lead to a clampdown on the freedoms that are so precious to us. There is always a judgment to be made and a balance to be struck, and it is important that the Government always try to strike that balance in the right way.

On the right hon. Gentleman’s final point, this Government have already taken action, and I will always use my full powers under the law to ensure that those who would cause harm in our country with their extremist views are not allowed to enter our country. I will not hesitate to use my powers under the immigration legislation to exclude from this country people who have no right to be here.

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s decision to ban this weekend’s al-Quds march. Al-Quds was founded by the ayatollah 40 years ago. It has repeatedly featured support for the Iranian regime and terrorist groups, and often promotes dangerous antisemitism too. Given the growing threat to Jewish communities across the UK, will the Home Secretary now move to proscribe the IRGC, consider sanctions on regime-linked assets, and outline what further steps have been taken to protect the Jewish community?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend will know that the IRGC is already sanctioned in its entirety. As I say, we do not comment on matters relating to proscription, but we have accepted the recommendations made by Jonathan Hall KC. The Government will take those forward at the earliest available opportunity.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)]

The Home Secretary is aware that we have concerns about her authoritarian tendencies. We have particular concerns about this Government’s enthusiasm for restricting the right to protest and their use of terrorism legislation to proscribe protest groups. The Liberal Democrats place a much stronger weight on the right to peaceful protest than the Home Secretary does. That is her right. The right to protest is a fundamental freedom, and any decision to ban a march must only be made in exceptional circumstances.

On this occasion, however, it is right to take a cautious approach. The Islamic Human Rights Commission has very concerning views on Iran. The organisers of the al-Quds march have expressed support for the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and have claimed that he stood on the right side of history. Clearly, these values are at odds with those of the British public, who would rightly condemn the ayatollah’s oppression of the Iranian people and sponsorship of terrorism across the world. At a time when Iran is putting the safety of British citizens in the middle east at risk with its indiscriminate attacks, it would be inappropriate for the march to go ahead.

Nevertheless, the decision to ban the march highlights a deeper failure by the Government to tackle the underlying threats that fuel such tensions. Labour has dithered and delayed over the proscription of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the organisation responsible for much of the violence and terror emanating from Iran, and for attacks abroad. It is utterly ridiculous that the Home Secretary has already sunk almost £1 million of taxpayers’ money in fighting in court to keep Palestine Action proscribed while dragging her heels on the IRGC’s proscription, even when the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation has urged immediate proscription. Will the Home Secretary commit to confronting the threat of the Iranian regime by immediately proscribing the IRGC? If not, will she give the House a date for legislation?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I have to say that the hon. Gentleman’s opening remarks were rather disappointing. Let me remind him of what I have actually said and done in relation to the right to protest. I have allowed the cumulative impact on communities that are affected by protests to be one of the reasons why police can place additional conditionality on a procession or public assembly under sections 12 to 14 of the Public Order Act 1986. I am very disappointed that the Lib Dem spokesperson thinks that is an authoritarian tendency, because we are responding to repeat protests that create real tension in our communities.

We are creating the conditions to enable those protests to go ahead, but with additional conditions as to their location and time, and we are ensuring that that framework is very clear for the police. That is actually an argument for allowing the protests to happen,