Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)
The Minister for Digital Government and Data (Ian Murray)
By means of commercial and subsidised delivery, the Government are ensuring that gigabit-capable connections are available to 99% of UK premises by 2032 through, for instance, Project Gigabit. This is critical for all UK communities if the public are to take advantage of the opportunities of technology, including the transformational investment in AI that the Chancellor announced yesterday, and if the United Kingdom is to win the global race for AI and be at the forefront of quantum computing as a result of the Government’s pledge to procure those connections. If everyone in every community across the UK is to win, they need to be connected, including those in Hexham.
Joe Morris
Yesterday I spoke to my constituent Luca, who has spent months campaigning for the investment that is needed to secure a reliable internet and phone connection for his community in the village of Lambley. He has been pushed from pillar to post between private companies, national agencies and local government, and meanwhile the residents of Lambley continue to live without effective internet connection. The solutions depend on funding and co-operation, which are challenging owing to the location and the lack of accountability. Will the Minister meet representatives of Coanwood parish council, Luca and me to try to find a way forward for Lambley and other rural communities?
Ian Murray
I am happy for that to be arranged with Luca, the parish council and my hon. Friend, along with officials from Building Digital UK, so that we can explore the solutions that are possible for his constituents. The Minister for Digital Economy, who sits in the other place, will be holding a surgery for Members of this House on 14 April, and I think my hon. Friend should go along and discuss these issues with her as well.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
I could reel off countless examples of villages in my constituency where hard-to-reach areas simply have no broadband at all, let alone fibre broadband. Constituents and businesses are tearing their hair out. At what point will the Government possibly accept that if the millions—if not billions—of pounds are to reach those hard-to-reach places, it would probably be better to help those people to get, for instance, satellite broadband instead, so that they can have access to the internet now rather than having to wait for years?
Ian Murray
I am happy for the hon. Gentleman also to meet representatives of BDUK and the Minister for Digital Economy. He is absolutely right; while there will continue to be gaps for the very hardest-to-reach places, there are solutions out there, like wireless solutions, fixed-wireless access and, indeed, satellite broadband, which BDUK is examining now.
Mr Speaker
I call the Chair of the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee.
Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)
Starlink is a US telecoms company owned by a South African American who advocates civil war in the United Kingdom. OneWeb is a European satellite telecoms company, which is part-owned by the UK. Yesterday the Science Minister told my Committee that OneWeb could be used to ensure domestic communications resilience in remote areas. Can the Minister tell me whether our critical rural broadband infrastructure is more dependent on Starlink or on OneWeb?
Ian Murray
We are a shareholder in Eutelsat, of which OneWeb is a part, and we will be examining all these issues. We have asked for Eutelsat to come forward with proposals to ensure that we have that resilience here in the UK, and we want to make more use of that shareholding.
Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)
The roll-out of Project Gigabit in my constituency has been a failure because Freedom Fibre has handed back the contract, with many thousands of properties unconnected, and the replacement contract is likely to take many more years to deliver gigabit access to thousands of my constituents. The all-party parliamentary group on digital communities, which I chair, has suggested some solutions to the problem. Will the Minister come to one of our meetings, and meet us, in order to understand how critical this is for rural communities?
Ian Murray
I am happy to ensure that the Minister in the other place who deals with this particular issue meets the APPG. However, Project Gigabit is designed to adapt in the event of a contracted supplier no longer being able to complete its planned delivery, using a mix of contracts and interventions. We are keen to hear from the hon. Lady about the experiences of her constituents.
Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Kanishka Narayan)
One of the defining impacts of this Government is the action that we are taking to tackle violence against women and girls, and that means making illegal online that which is illegal offline. Intimate image abuse is now a priority offence; cyber-flashing is a priority offence; nudification apps are being banned, and we are standing up to Grok, and as a result the spread of intimate deepfakes has stopped; and non-consensual intimate images are now taken down within 48 hours. We will of course continue to engage with the BBFC and a range of other organisations in fulfilling our demands for parity.
Emily Darlington
Like many colleagues in this House and the other place, I am deeply concerned about the current unacceptable regulatory gap between online and offline pornography, and the public share that concern. The findings of recent research conducted by the BBFC indicate that 64% of pornography users believe that violent pornography contributes to violent sexual behaviour in the real world, and 80% would support new regulation. Does the Minister recognise the clear public demand for online-offline parity, and will he commit himself to introducing legislation to ensure that content that it would be illegal to supply on our high streets is no longer permitted online?
Kanishka Narayan
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s engagement in her constituency and on this debate nationally. She has been a strong champion for the voices of victims, particularly in relation to this question. I entirely agree with her demands for parity, and that is exactly the commitment we have made as a Government. We have set up a cross-Government unit to make sure that we deliver on that plan within six months.
Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)
Some 50% of boys aged 11 to 13 have already viewed online pornography. Clearly, frequent exposure to violent sexual content is damaging young people’s minds and their understanding of relationships. Does the Minister agree that, alongside engagement with platforms, the criminal law must be modernised to ban online extreme pornography?
Kanishka Narayan
I thank the hon. Member for that incredibly important point. That is exactly why we have already made a series of legal changes, not least to ensure that cyber-flashing and intimate image abuse are priority offences under the Online Safety Act 2023. We have mandated highly effective age assurance on pornography sites and sites with content that is harmful to children. We want to go further still where there is clear evidence to do so, and we will do that through the national consultation that we have launched.
Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Liz Kendall)
This Government have already launched five AI growth zones, creating 15,000 jobs and unlocking £40 billion of investment in industrial heartlands across the country. The east midlands AI growth zone— a high-potential bid for that is under active consideration —could bring thousands of good jobs to the region, including in Nottinghamshire, unlocking investment, creating opportunities and regenerating the area in partnership with local businesses and universities.
Steve Yemm
Fourteen years of Conservative economic decline saw jobs and opportunity leave places such as my constituency of Mansfield, and AI now presents a chance to turn that around. How will the Secretary of State ensure that the Government roll-out of AI growth zones, creating opportunity across the country, will translate into local jobs and skills in left-behind communities?
Liz Kendall
In the 14 months we have been in government, our AI growth zones have done more to level up the country than Conservative Members achieved in 14 years; these zones are being built in the areas that once led the industrial revolution and will now lead the technological revolution. We are also upskilling 10 million workers with free AI skills, introducing the first dedicated national apprenticeship in practical AI and automation, and delivering our £27 million TechLocal programme to help people from all walks of life move into AI. We are determined to ensure that AI benefits people in Mansfield and every part of the country, so that no one is left behind.
Naushabah Khan (Gillingham and Rainham) (Lab)
Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Liz Kendall)
Every child deserves the best possible start in life, and that applies as much to the online world as it does to the real one. We know that families everywhere are grappling with the impact of phones and social media. That is why we have launched our national consultation, and we have had over 25,000 responses so far. We want to hear from everyone, particularly children and young people themselves, and the consultation—with a child-friendly design—will be one of the first of its kind to hear specifically from them. We also want to make sure that we particularly reach out to children with special educational needs and disabilities, and those in care, for their views.
Naushabah Khan
Parents in Gillingham and Rainham strongly back this Government’s efforts to keep children safe online. Does the Secretary of State agree that repealing the Online Safety Act, as Reform has pledged to do, would recklessly expose our children to online predators and leave them without the protections they deserve, and that any party serious about families must have a credible plan for children’s online safety, not simply tear one up?
Liz Kendall
I think the party that wants to repeal the Online Safety Act puts children at risk. Its Members do not stand for British values and they do not stand for British law; Labour Members do.
Jacob Collier
There are strong and differing views across this House and the country on a social media ban for under-16s. Indeed, when I have spoken to young people, that has come out, and there was not a strong feeling in my old school, de Ferrers academy, about this. Can the Secretary of State say what engagement she will have with young people, so that decisions about their lives are directly fed into this consultation?
Liz Kendall
Not for the first time, my hon. Friend is spot on. I spoke to young people at Fullhurst school in my constituency and they had very different views about this proposal. We really want to hear directly from young people themselves—we have already had over 1,700 responses—but especially from children. We are partnering with UK Youth and Volunteering Matters to run a series of seven youth-led events across England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. We will also pilot other potential interventions, including overnight curfews and daily screentime limits, working with children and parents to see what works in practice and its impact on family life.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
I hope this is a helpful suggestion to the Secretary of State. There have been some objections to a social media ban for young people based on the fact that it would create a cliff edge, whereby they have no involvement with it and then total involvement with it. Does she agree with me that one way to minimise that danger is to encourage children to use the internet, which is not interactive, as that will gradually acclimatise them for the day when they are able to use interactive services more safely?
Liz Kendall
The right hon. Gentleman is always helpful—well, not always, but on this occasion he has been very helpful. The cliff-edge argument has been made to me personally by the NSPCC, the Molly Rose Foundation, the Internet Watch Foundation and others, and it is one that we should take seriously. I have spoken to schools in my constituency about how best to handle it if we were to go ahead with the ban. There is a really important point about young people’s education and awareness, because life is online now and we have to prepare children for the future. That is at the heart of the issues we are debating in the consultation.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
I recently visited Lytchett Minster school and Queen Elizabeth’s school, and I held a session asking the young people about their views. Overwhelmingly, the children in sixth form supported a ban and the children in the younger part of the school did not. How will the Government tailor the questions for younger children and older children, so that we get a true understanding of the problem?
Liz Kendall
I would love it if the hon. Lady sent me a report or a note on that, because alongside the consultation, which is specifically designed for children and young people, many of us in this House are talking to schools. I say to everybody: do send in those views, and I promise I will read them all.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Liz Kendall)
I am very proud that this Labour Government have put the biggest investment into research and development of any Government ever, with a record £38 billion for UK Research and Innovation, including £14 billion for curiosity-led research. This week, we announced our ambitious plan to buy usable, large-scale quantum computers by the early 2030s, backed by £2 billion of funding—a world first. We are backing our world-leading quantum sector, because we are determined to do everything to back our brilliant British scientists, innovators and entrepreneurs.
Adam Thompson
I thank the Secretary of State for her answer. Despite the massive Government increases in funding generally, in a recent meeting of the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, we heard how the Science and Technology Facilities Council is currently dealing with a significant reduction in funding, particularly in particle physics, astronomy and nuclear physics. Michele Dougherty, the executive chair of the STFC, placed the blame squarely on decisions made prior to her arrival and explained her efforts to sort out the mess, but it is the scientific community, research professionals and UK science that will feel the brunt of this funding crunch. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that UK science is not damaged by STFC’s historical failings?
Liz Kendall
A lot of concerns have been raised by the physics community about this issue. The STFC’s budget is actually flat over the spending review, but, as the executive chair says, there have been overspends in its budget over the past five years or so. Those overspends have had to be met from elsewhere in UKRI’s budget, meaning other things have not been funded as a result. STFC and UKRI are looking at how to get the balance right among their different projects. They, and our Minister for Science, Innovation, Research and Nuclear, will be engaging closely with the physics community over the coming months to make sure we get this right.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
My constituent George works for the Science and Technology Facilities Council. He has highlighted to me that UK Research and Innovation is developing a model that significantly reduces spending for all areas of science under the STFC’s remit, including quantum science, particle astrophysics and theoretical physics. Given that the STFC has already warned staff of potential job losses and that it ran a voluntary exit scheme last year, can the Secretary of State reassure the research community, including my constituent in Chorleywood, by confirming that the STFC science facilities and national labs have the necessary funding and will continue commissioning excellent research for years to come?
Liz Kendall
I reassure the hon. Gentleman’s constituents in Chorleywood—a place I know well—and people right across the country that this Government have provided the biggest ever funding settlement for science. The STFC’s budget is not being cut; it is actually rising slightly, but is flat over the spending review period because of the impact of inflation. Within that context, it is right to ask the STFC and UKRI together to get those budgets under control. Experts will be helping to ensure that we prioritise the most important research. We strongly back curiosity-led research, especially in physics, which is so important for the foundation of our economy and society. However, we do need to sort this problem out.
Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)
Modern warfare is technological warfare, so UK research and innovation is critical for our defence. When the Secretary of State has spoken with the Defence Secretary about the defence investment plan, as I assume she has, which sectors has she prioritised for investment in UK companies in research and development—drones, space, cyber, chips? Could she spell out her vision of the role of UK tech in defence, if she has one?
Liz Kendall
As the former head of MI6 has repeatedly said, the single biggest thing that we could do to strengthen our defence and national security is to invest in research and development. UKRI has had the biggest funding settlement from any Government ever under this Labour Government. The Conservatives want to slash UKRI’s budget by £6 billion, which would wipe out all our funding for AI, advanced manufacturing, life sciences and much more. We are backing our defence sector, with 10% of the defence equipment budget going on backing UK businesses—the Tories would slash the funding on which they depend.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
UK Research and Innovation funding will continue to be undermined if the Government’s own procurement strategy sees billions going to companies outside the UK, such as Palantir in the US, when British tech has the solutions. Although we welcome the announcement of AI investment funding, it pales in comparison with the ongoing procurement investment. Will the Government back Liberal Democrat amendments to the Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill for a comprehensive digital sovereign strategy, backing British tech, research and innovation, which is vital for both our economy and our national security?
Liz Kendall
I am proud of this Government’s plan to back UK AI companies and our sovereign capabilities, with £500 million backing our new sovereign AI unit and £1 billion of free compute for British researchers and scientists. We are also overhauling Government procurement to ensure that we back innovative tech companies in the UK, both big and small. That is the way forward to seize the opportunities for growth and secure our sovereign capabilities.
Kirith Entwistle (Bolton North East) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Liz Kendall)
No woman or child should live in fear of having their image sexually manipulated by technology. That is why in the past six months we have made intimate image abuse and cyber-flashing priority offences under the Online Safety Act 2023; criminalised the creation of non-consensual sexual deepfakes and mandated that those images are taken down within 48 hours; introduced an offence banning AI nudification apps; and stood up to Grok and X. We know that technology moves fast and, as a Government, we have to keep up. Where we need to go further, we will.
Kirith Entwistle
Although I am proud of the steps that our Government have taken to advance online safety, we are merely playing catch-up. What more are the Government doing to ensure that we keep pace with the reality facing women and girls and how will they address emerging technologies such as AI smart glasses, which are operating without scrutiny?
Liz Kendall
One of my reflections in this job is that it took eight years for the Online Safety Act 2023 to come in, and it is still to be fully implemented. We need to move faster. MPs discuss a Finance Bill every year, and technology moves incredibly fast, so I am always prepared to take further action when it is needed.
Peter Fortune (Bromley and Biggin Hill) (Con)
I am asking this question on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch and Upminster (Julia Lopez), the shadow Secretary of State, who cannot be here today, but wants the House to know how important this issue is to her. The lobular moon shot project is a plan to fund critical research into lobular breast cancer. It is a disease often missed by screening and with no targeted treatment. A total of 463 Members of this House, including the Leader of the Opposition, support this plan. The Health Secretary says that there is no political disagreement on this, yet nothing has materially happened. His Department now says that it is for DSIT and UK Research and Innovation to comment on budget allocations and spending research priorities. I ask the Secretary of State this: is the moon shot project a research priority for her, as it is for 463 of her parliamentary colleagues?
Liz Kendall
Anything that deeply affects the lives of thousands of people is a priority for me. I am more than happy to work with the hon. Gentleman and others to reach a resolution here. My understanding is that we need to get right the quality of bids, but I would of course be happy to meet to discuss this further.
Peter Fortune
I thank the Secretary of State for that response. She should know that, on 22 April, vigils will be held across Westminster for the 22 women diagnosed with this insidious disease every day. I thank her for that commitment to work with the Health Secretary between now and then so that we can highlight this issue. Will she agree to come back to the House and update us on the comments and discussions that she has had with the Secretary of State for Health?
Liz Kendall
Yes, because I always believe in action, not just words.
Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)
Liz Kendall
This Government are determined to protect the UK’s position as a world-leading creative powerhouse and unlock the extraordinary potential of AI to grow the economy and improve British lives. Today, we published a report and impact assessment, fulfilling the commitments made in the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025. We have listened to the views on our initial consultation and confirmed that the Government no longer have a preferred option. We have also set out where we will do more work with our creative and AI sectors, including on digital replicas, labelling AI-generated content, creator control and transparency and support for our brilliant small and independent creatives. Every country is grappling with this issue and we are determined to get this right, so that both these vital sectors can continue to flourish, thrive and lead the world.
Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Kanishka Narayan)
First, may I affirm the importance of the project that the right hon. Gentleman is talking about? The Government are backing the future of nuclear fusion across the country, and this site in particular has a huge contribution to make. Construction will be on its way by the end of the decade, with research and development tests before that. At the heart of it, we will be backing the use of AI to further our clean energy goals in fusion and beyond.
Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)
Liz Kendall
Yes. We have already had more than 25,000 responses to our consultation, including 1,700 from children and young people. If my hon. Friend or any other hon. Member wants to send in the views of their constituents, including of young people, I will personally read them.
The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)
Our deepest condolences are with the families and friends of the two young people who have died following the outbreak of meningitis B in Kent. Others are seriously ill, and this will be a deeply difficult time for their loved ones. Health experts are working to identify close contacts and distribute antibiotics, and we will begin a targeted vaccination programme in the coming days. Can I take this opportunity to ask anyone who attended Club Chemistry on 5, 6 or 7 March to please come forward to receive antibiotics?
Yesterday President Zelensky addressed parliamentarians, including many Members. I had the opportunity to reaffirm to him that no matter what other international events, the UK’s support for Ukraine will not waver. I also welcomed Prime Minister Carney and NATO Secretary-General Rutte to Downing Street for further discussions on international security.
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.
Wendy Morton
May I associate myself with the comments and condolences of the Prime Minister in relation to those affected by the meningitis outbreak?
New data today shows that nearly 60% of hospices are considering cutting frontline services. In the west midlands, St Giles hospice has already reduced beds and staff due to financial pressures. With services being cut, can the Prime Minister explain why hospices are being told to wait until autumn for the new framework, and will he commit today to proper long-term, sustainable funding to secure this vital lifeline for the future?
The Prime Minister
It is important that the funding and framework are put in place. We support the work of hospices and are doing everything we can to support them.
Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
My first instinct is always to protect people from the cost of living. The immediate action we have taken in relation to those who heat their homes with oil is the £53 million that we announced this week. That is particularly important for rural communities and for Northern Ireland. De-escalation in the middle east is the quickest way to reduce the cost of living. Anyone who advocated for the UK to rush headlong into the offensive without a clear picture of what it would mean for our forces or without thinking through the economic impact for families should stand up and apologise.
Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)
The Prime Minister tried to avoid scrutiny on the Mandelson files by releasing the documents immediately after Prime Minister’s questions last week, so let me ask him now: did he personally speak to Peter Mandelson about his relationship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein before appointing him as our ambassador to Washington?
The Prime Minister
Let me start where I must. It was my mistake in making the appointment. I have apologised to the victims of Epstein, and I do so again. The Government are complying with the Humble Address in full, and we are continuing to support the police in their investigation. The matter of process was looked at by the independent adviser on ministerial standards. It is clear that the appointment process was not strong enough, and that is why I have already strengthened it. It was my mistake, and I have apologised for it. The right hon. Lady should follow suit and apologise for her gross error of judgment in calling for the UK to join the war in Iran without thinking through the consequences.
Mrs Badenoch
I know the Prime Minister does not want to talk about the documents that he tried to bury last week. He is going to try to talk about anything else, but he is not going to get away with it. I asked him a question; he did not answer.
We know that the Prime Minister was warned about the risk of appointing Peter Mandelson. This is not about the process. He knew that Mandelson stayed in Epstein’s house after Epstein had been convicted for child prostitution—he knew that. So I will ask him again: did he speak to Peter Mandelson about that before the appointment? Yes or no?
The Prime Minister
I have already made clear that Peter Mandelson was asked questions and gave untruthful replies. The Government are complying with the Humble Address. The process has been set out. The independent adviser looked at it, and he said,
“the relevant process for a political appointee was followed”.
Obviously, this is a question of my judgment, but what about the Leader of the Opposition’s judgment? She wanted to rush into a war with Iran without thinking it through. At the weekend—three weeks in—she said, “Oh, there isn’t a clear plan behind the US strikes in Iran.” That is the question she should have asked at the start. The decision to commit the UK to a war is the biggest decision a Prime Minister can take, and she was completely wrong.
Mrs Badenoch
I did not hear an answer, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister is right: it is about his judgment. He has repeatedly told us that Peter Mandelson lied to him, but he will not tell us if he actually picked up the phone and spoke to Mandelson before appointing him. That does not make any sense. The Prime Minister told us on the record that he “believed the lies” that Mandelson told him, but if he did not speak to him, how can he say that?
The Prime Minister
The process is clear, and it has been looked at by the independent adviser. The Leader of the Opposition asked me about the process and judgment on appointments, but she appointed the shadow Justice Secretary, the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy), who said last night that Muslims praying in public—including the Mayor of London, practising his faith—are not welcome. He described it as an
“act of domination…straight from the Islamist playbook.”
It is utterly appalling. If he were in my team, he would be gone. The Leader of the Opposition should denounce his comments, and she should sack him.
Mrs Badenoch
The Prime Minister wants to talk about Justice Secretaries. His Justice Secretary is abolishing jury trials; my shadow Justice Secretary is defending British values. I know who I would rather have sitting on the Front Bench next to me, and it is not the Justice Secretary.
This is important: the Prime Minister wants to talk about anything except what I am asking him. Three times I have asked him whether he spoke to Peter Mandelson; three times, he has refused to answer. We can only assume that he did not speak to Peter Mandelson. From the documents published, we know that he left the questioning about Mandelson’s relationship with a convicted paedophile to two of Mandelson’s closest friends, one of whom was also friends with a convicted paedophile. Asking those questions should have been his job. Why did he fail to do his duty?
The Prime Minister
The Leader of the Opposition’s position is that the shadow Justice Secretary is defending British values when he says Muslims praying together in Trafalgar Square are not welcome. Even Tommy Robinson—I can hardly believe that I am saying this—has said today that if the shadow Justice Secretary had made those hateful comments two years ago, the Conservative party would have kicked him out. Tommy Robinson is not some sort of moral signpost; he was pointing out how much her party has changed—it is more inclined to his views—and he is right about that. The fact that the shadow Justice Secretary is sitting on her Front Bench shows that she is too weak and has absolutely no judgment.
Mrs Badenoch
The Prime Minister wants to talk about my leadership. I am shocked. His former deputy has just fired the starting gun on the race to replace him. I will tell him one thing: she and I both agree that this weak man should be replaced by a strong woman. [Interruption.] But I am not finished, Mr Speaker—I have too much to say to him.
There is still a lot to ask about the Mandelson files. The Prime Minister knew that Mandelson had kept up a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The documents released also show that he had been warned about appointing Mandelson. He claims he was lied to. Mandelson had twice been fired for dishonesty, so why did the Prime Minister believe Peter Mandelson over the vetting documents?
The Prime Minister
The Leader of the Opposition asked about leadership. When I see religious events in Trafalgar Square—when I see Hindus celebrating Diwali, when I see Jews celebrating ChanukahLive!, when I see Christians performing the passion of Christ, or Muslims praying—that shows the great strength of our diverse city and country. I have never heard her party call out anything other than the Muslim events; it is only when Muslims are praying. The only conclusion is that the Tory party has a problem with Muslims. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. May I just say that I am not responsible for the answers? I just have to say that.
Mrs Badenoch
It is a shame that the Prime Minister is not responsible for the answers either. He wants us to believe that he is a serious leader, but he does not do the work. He outsources the decisions and when things go wrong he blames the vetting, he blames the chief of staff, he blames the Cabinet Secretary—he blames anyone but himself. This Prime Minister appointed Peter Mandelson, but did not bother to ask the questions. If he cannot be straight with the House on something as simple as this, why should we believe a word he says about anything?
The Prime Minister
The Leader of the Opposition talks about doing the work. Three weeks ago she said we should rush into war. She did not do the work; she did not think through the consequences. Committing our military to a war without thinking through the consequences is the gravest mistake for a Leader of the Opposition. She comes back a week later and says, “Oops! I got that one wrong.” She is utterly irrelevant and she has no judgment. This is the Leader of the Opposition who said that I should have empty-chaired the most important NATO summit in years, this is the Leader of the Opposition who said that Greenland is a second-order issue, and this is the Leader of the Opposition who would have jumped into a war with Iran without stopping to think.
On top of that, this week, we have the failure to condemn and sack—[Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. I repeat that I am not responsible for the answers, but this is certainly not Opposition questions.
The Prime Minister
Add to that the failure to condemn and sack the shadow Justice Secretary for the poison and division that he spreads. It is turning out to be quite a month for the Leader of the Opposition who claims that she never makes any mistakes.
Claire Hanna (Belfast South and Mid Down) (SDLP)
We have seen this play out before: a US rush to military escalation with no plan for what comes next. We have seen schoolgirls bombed in Iran, whole families killed in Lebanon, chaos in a region already scarred by repression and genocide, and economic shocks that hurt the most vulnerable at home. In Irish, there is a phrase, “Ní mhealltar an sionnach faoi dhó”—have we learned no lessons? People are asking exactly that: how many times do these horrors play out before the lessons are learned? The Prime Minister has said that the UK
“will not be drawn into the wider war.”
Will he guarantee two things: that that position will hold in the face of mounting pressure from Trump and Netanyahu, and that this House will get a vote before the UK is involved in any further conflict?
The Prime Minister
Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, my principles have been clear and unwavering. We will protect our people in the region, we will take action to defend ourselves and our allies, and we will not be drawn into the wider war. I want to see this war end as quickly as possible. The longer it continues, the bigger the impact on the cost of living. That is where we have intervened to support households with the costs of heating oil. The best way forward is a negotiated settlement, with Iran giving up any aspirations to develop a nuclear weapon.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I join the Prime Minister in offering my condolences to the family and friends of the two young people who have been killed by the meningitis bug in Kent and all those affected by this horrifying outbreak.
Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent is critical for the defence of our nation and the whole of Europe, but the current Trident missiles will reach the end of their lives in the 2040s. We have to make a choice now: lease new missiles from the United States, accepting whatever terms the President gives us, or build our own here in the United Kingdom. The Conservatives and Reform say that we have to rely on President Trump and the United States because we could not possibly do it ourselves. Does the Prime Minister agree with them?
The Prime Minister
Our independent nuclear deterrent protects us every day, and we should never forget how important it is. It is important that we renew it. We will do that in the best interests of Britain. The right hon. Member is openly advocating a plan without knowing how much it would cost and how it would work. That is not the way to deal with our independent nuclear deterrent.
Ed Davey
I am surprised by that response. The French can do it—does the Prime Minister really think Britain cannot?
Moving on, a New World investigation into GB News has found hundreds of shocking breaches of the rules of impartiality and accuracy, yet Ofcom has repeatedly refused to take action. Andrew Neil says:
“Just as Fox basically became the channel of Donald Trump, it’s clear they have turned GB News into the Reform channel”.
We cannot let GB News propaganda turn our great country into its version of Trump’s America. Either the Government rules are not fit for purpose or Ofcom is not properly enforcing them—which is it?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Member is right to raise an important question of free speech and our media. It is a matter for Ofcom, and it is important that we let it deal with it.
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend and the others who attended the UN Commission on the Status of Women event. We are committed to halving violence against women and girls wherever it takes place, whether that is online, offline or on our streets. That includes banning deepfakes and tackling non-consensual intimate images and abusive, vile content online.
Following up from last week, I was deeply concerned that Travelodge cancelled its meeting with MPs. I want it to put that right and put it right swiftly.
Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)
The Prime Minister
I thank the right hon. and learned Member for raising that, and I acknowledge the question he asked me last year. I pay tribute to him and to Kate for her campaign. It is vital that we look closely at the rare and tragic cases where things went wrong. We must not fail to do so, so that we maintain confidence in our health service—important in relation to covid, of course, but, as he rightly points out, important today as well. We are committed to looking at reforms to the vaccine damage payment scheme and engaging with those affected to ensure that it meets their needs. We expect the fourth module of the covid inquiry to report next month, which will look specifically at the issue he has raised. I can reassure him that we will look at other recommendations very closely.
Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
I welcome the Mayor of London’s crackdown. The Metropolitan police have made hundreds of arrests and recovered thousands of phones, and mobile phone theft has fallen. I agree with her that there is more to do, and we must work with the tech industry in order to do it. If we can reduce the value of stolen phones, it will help to break the business models that drive theft. We are committed to working with the industry, and are willing to consider any further necessary action to drive down that crime.
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
The Prime Minister
As the hon. Gentleman says, the Chancellor set out yesterday the huge economic opportunities of innovation and AI. We have put £5 billion behind British start-ups, and we will launch our sovereign AI unit with £500 million to help AI businesses start and grow. We are investing the £2 billion that he refers to in our quantum capabilities so that we can be the first country in the world to roll-out quantum computers at scale. Procurement must be the launchpad for start-ups, and we are determined to deliver that.
Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
That is a good example. My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. Thanks to our record investment in the NHS, we have the lowest waiting list numbers for three years, the shortest A&E waits for four years, and the fastest ambulance response times for five years. Stronger community health services, such as the local innovation centre that he mentions, are at the heart of our 10-year plan to go further. We would not have come this far already without the decisions made at the Budget, which were opposed by all Opposition parties.
David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)
The Prime Minister
We are not abolishing jury trials, as the right hon. Gentleman knows. I have worked with women and girls who have been victims of sexual violence and rape, and have waited a very, very long time for their cases to go to court. Many of them drop out because of the wait. They have described to me personally the mental anguish that they go through when their case cannot be heard for years, and when they are told of adjournments time and again. I am not prepared to look them in the eye any longer and not do something about it—we owe it to them.
This is about getting the balance right. We are not abolishing jury trials. About 3% of cases go to jury trial, as the right hon. Gentleman very well knows, while 97% do not. After these changes, it will be 2.25%. That is the difference between the policy that we are advancing and the policy as it now is. We are not abolishing jury trials, and I am not prepared to see victims of violence against women and girls repeatedly let down. That is what happened for 14 long years, and it is not good enough. I set my face against that and I am doing something about it.
Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
I am very proud of our Employment Rights Act 2025. It delivers strong rights and protections, including for all our brilliant school staff. My hon. Friend is right: Reform Members would rip up those protections. They have nothing to offer but grievance and division, and they have no judgment: just like the Leader of the Opposition, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) has said that we should do “all we can” to support the US strikes. He said:
“I make that perfectly, perfectly clear.”
It was perfectly, perfectly clear that he got it completely wrong, and perfectly, perfectly clear that he is now desperately trying to U-turn. Absolutely no judgment: not fit to be Prime Minister.
Nigel Farage (Clacton) (Reform)
The Prime Minister
Oil and gas will be part of the mix of our energy for many years to come, as I have set out many times. The hon. Member is now highlighting the consequences of the war that he said we should rush into. He wanted us to go to war. He said it was “perfectly, perfectly clear” that we should support the strikes. Then, just like the Leader of the Opposition, a week later he said, “Oh no, I got that one wrong.” You cannot make mistakes about decisions as serious as committing to war. It is a gross error.
Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
I am very happy to discuss that with my hon. Friend. We will always protect high welfare standards, and, through our food and drink deal, we are bringing down barriers for farmers selling to our largest market. Alongside our record £11.8 billion farming budget and investment in cutting-edge innovation, our farming profitability review is focused on boosting profitability. I have already acted and set up the farming and food partnership board, investing £30 million in our farmer collaboration fund.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
The Prime Minister
I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising this matter. I know how much it impacts his constituents and how deeply they feel about it. It is important, as we reset and clear up the mess that was left, that we have in our mind’s eye those who are most affected, and make sure that it is fair and that their voices are heard, and we will do so.
Oliver Ryan (Burnley) (Lab/Co-op)
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is a great champion on this issue and I will ensure that he gets a meeting with the Rail Minister to discuss the detail. The previous Government took the decision not to shortlist Burnley Manchester Road station for accessibility improvements. We are giving Lancashire combined county authority £641 million, with the freedom to invest in its priorities, including better accessibility. That is what a Labour Government represent: empowering local people to make the best decisions for their local area.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
The Prime Minister
We have set out the process and it has been put before the House—[Interruption.] I know why Opposition Members do not want to talk about the war: because they supported going into the war, without thinking through the consequences. That is a huge error of judgment. I realise that they do not want to talk about it ever again—I am not surprised. Nor do they want to talk about the shadow Justice Secretary saying that Muslims are not welcome to pray in Trafalgar Square. The Leader of the Opposition should remove him from the Front Bench, or I suspect he will be sitting up on the Reform Bench next.
Matt Bishop (Forest of Dean) (Lab)
As the Prime Minister mentioned earlier, the chief executive officer of Travelodge has today again refused to attend a meeting with Members of this House and the other place to answer serious concerns about guest safety and safeguarding. This refusal only deepens the lack of trust in the company’s commitment to protecting women and vulnerable guests. Will the Prime Minister meet me and invite the CEO of Travelodge to discuss the issue? Will he join me in urging the CEO to explain directly to all parliamentarians why she is unwilling to face scrutiny on such an important matter?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue, and he has raised it with me personally. Our thoughts are obviously with the victim. I was very concerned to hear that the CEO of Travelodge cancelled the meeting with MPs and I would urge them to reconsider. That meeting needs to go ahead with relevant MPs and with the relevant Minister, and the sooner it goes ahead the better. I hope that the CEO of Travelodge is listening to this exchange. I thank my hon. Friend for raising the issue, not just on this occasion but on repeated occasions.