(1 day, 6 hours ago)
Commons Chamber
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
May I send congratulations to Cardiff City on the team’s promotion at the weekend?
The Government are putting Wales at the heart of our clean energy mission. Just this month, Great British Energy Nuclear signed a contract with Rolls-Royce to deliver the UK’s first small modular reactors at Wylfa, creating 3,000 jobs in north Wales and thousands more across the supply chain. That is on top of the £64 million Government investment to transform the port of Port Talbot into the first floating offshore wind port in the Celtic sea.
Peter Swallow
The war in Iran has put in stark relief the importance of clean energy to the UK. From Bracknell to Bangor, we have all seen the effects on our bills. Will the Secretary of State update the House on the role that clean energy is playing in Wales and its importance to the future of Wales?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right: achieving energy independence is crucial for Wales and we will be better off because of it, with more jobs created and bills brought down. That is why we have made the investments at Port Talbot and Wylfa that I mentioned. The Greens oppose the investment at Wylfa and would scrap the 3,000 jobs it will bring, and Plaid Cymru is silent on it because party members cannot agree among themselves whether they support it. Labour is the only party working to achieve energy independence, create thousands of jobs and bring down bills.
Alex Easton (North Down) (Ind)
Does the Secretary of State agree that while we commend Wales for its impressive clean energy oversupply, we should focus on the lessons that offers for upgrading infrastructure across Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom?
Clearly, we need to continue our drive to invest more in energy infrastructure. We will deliver that energy independence only through the building of infrastructure. That is why we have made the announcements on grid, infrastructure and planning over the past few weeks.
David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)
Since coming to power, time and again this Government have failed to stand up for Welsh interests. Nowhere has that been more obvious than in mid-Wales, where Oliver Millican and his company Bute Energy would like to build a series of energy parks that encircle our military training bases, impede our farmers’ access to their land and do great damage to our local tourist industry. Will the Secretary of State take the opportunity to tell Oliver and Bute Energy that they are not welcome in Wales, because we are fed up of being exploited?
The simple fact is that those who oppose the building of renewable energy infrastructure risk blocking investment and job creation, while at the same time making their constituents’ bills more expensive. Upgrading and expanding the electricity network is not optional; is a national imperative and we cannot afford to delay—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman asked me a question, so he might want to listen to the answer.
We are delivering the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the cold war, investing £270 billion over this Parliament. Our £50 million defence growth deal in Wales puts us front and centre to lead the way in 21st century autonomous defence technology. Alongside supporting our thriving defence sector, that will deliver thousands of skilled, well-paid jobs and help keep our country safe.
The Minister will be aware of the excellent potential of the defence sector in Wales. However, she will also be aware that the United Kingdom, under this Government, is woefully unprepared and uniquely vulnerable to global and geopolitical threats. What steps is she taking to ensure that her Department works with the Ministry of Defence in prioritising British firms in Wales over foreign suppliers so that we strengthen British capabilities and skilled Welsh jobs, rather than offshoring our security and our jobs to strategic competitors or, even worse, to our enemies?
To be quite frank, the hypocrisy is astounding. It is—
Order. Obviously we cannot use the word “hypocrisy” against the hon. Member—he would never dream of it.
I am incredulous that the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) questions this Government’s commitment, given that the former leader of Reform in Wales, Nathan Gill, is serving 10 years in prison for accepting Russian bribes. I am sure that Gill will be cheering on his close friends in Reform from the comfort of his prison cell as we approach the Senedd elections. Meanwhile, this Labour Government are getting on with continuing to act in the national interest.
The Welsh Affairs Committee has a great interest in the future of the defence manufacturing industry in Wales, because the defence sector is such a major driver of Wales’s manufacturing economy and provides many well-paid jobs, including at General Dynamics in Oakdale in my constituency. The sector is also central to maintaining the UK’s national security, so will the Minister indicate how the Government plan to help to grow this vital sector in Wales?
I thank my hon. Friend for the important work that her Committee does. Our Wales defence growth deal will drive innovation and create thousands of high-skilled jobs right across Wales. While the Opposition parties hollowed out and dismantled our armed forced for 14 years, play with Putin or plot to leave NATO, this Government are taking action and investing in defence, ensuring that Wales is leading the way on future defence technology.
John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I do not know whether to stand at the Dispatch Box or on it.
For want of a horseshoe nail, the kingdom was lost. The defence of our country today rests on modern nail-makers—the small and medium-sized enterprises supplying small but vital parts for frigates and fighter jets and for our fighting men and women. The endless delay in this Labour Government’s defence investment plan means that companies have no certainty about orders, and good jobs hang in the balance, from Pembrokeshire to Prestatyn. What pressure is the Secretary of State bringing to bear on Cabinet colleagues in the Ministry of Defence and the Treasury to keep Welsh jobs, and indeed this United Kingdom, from being lost?
Again, the cheek of the Conservatives! They had 14 years in power, and what did they do? They hollowed out our armed forces and defences and failed to develop any proper plan for our defence industry. This Government are taking action, delivering the biggest sustained increase in spending since the cold war. We are working at pace to finalise our defence investment plan, ensuring that it is robust and supports the development of current and future capabilities. As opposed to the Conservatives in their 14 years in power, we are investing in our defence.
Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)
We know that the conflict in the middle east is placing pressure on the cost of living and household bills, including for those in rural communities. That is why this Government are providing £3.8 million to the Welsh Government to support households in Wales that use heating oil.
Steve Witherden
This month, the UK Labour Government formally lifted the two-child limit, benefiting nearly 70,000 children in Wales and 2,270 children in my constituency. I am enormously proud that Labour is lifting hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty, while the other parties in Wales promise spending cuts and tax rises on working families. Will the Secretary of State update the House on what this policy means for the future of Wales?
My hon. Friend is proud, as am I, of the steps that both our UK and Welsh Labour Governments have taken and are taking to support children and families with the cost of living. We have scrapped the two-child limit, provided 50 million free school meals since 2022, created 100,000 apprenticeships, and devolved £20 million to the Welsh Government to help more young people into work. Contrast Labour’s record with Plaid’s admission that it will cut child poverty budgets and plans to hike taxes on working families. Labour is the only party that is on the side of Welsh families.
In just two weeks’ time, the people of Wales will have an opportunity to elect a Government who genuinely care about child poverty in Wales—Plaid Cymru. In Scotland, the Scottish Government’s child payment has helped protect 407,000 children from UK poverty, and Plaid Cymru will do the same if it prevails on 7 May. Does the Secretary of State agree that Labour’s fag-end Administration in Wales has come to an end and Plaid Cymru’s time has come, and not a moment too soon for the people of Wales?
I do not think the hon. Gentleman can have been listening when I mentioned, in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden), that Plaid has admitted that it will cut the budget for child poverty. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has been clear that Plaid would have to make spending cuts or raise taxes to pay for its unfunded manifesto pledges, and at some point before 7 May its leader is going to have come clean on what Plaid is going to do.
With almost 170,000 workers in Wales benefiting from Labour’s successive increases to the national minimum wage and the living wage, families across the country—including many of my constituents—will now be better off. Despite resistance from Opposition parties, this Government have shown their commitment to tackling the cost of living crisis and supporting working people. Could the Secretary of State update the House on how those changes and the Employment Rights Act 2025 will benefit people in my constituency and across Wales?
We promised that we would be a Government for working people, and that is exactly what we have done. Our industrial strategy is set to support tens of thousands of new jobs across Wales. We have provided more employment support to help people get into work, increased the national minimum wage and the living wage, and strengthened rights and protections at work, making work pay, and making it more secure and fairer through our Employment Rights Act. New jobs have been created, alongside better jobs and higher wages, all because of this Labour Government.
Free school meals for children, our universal credit uplift, and up to £575 more on the state pension thanks to protecting the triple lock are all great examples of how Labour Governments at both ends of the M4 are helping with the cost of living. Can the Secretary of State update the House on the steps that the Government are taking to ensure that in future nobody gets trapped in a cycle of poverty, whether in my constituency of Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare or across the country?
Whether it is young people, families or pensioners, this Labour Government are determined to tackle the cost of living, both for my hon. Friend’s constituents and for all our constituents. We inherited a broken welfare system from the Conservatives that has failed people and trapped them in a cycle of poverty. We will not allow that to continue, which is why we are helping people into work through new employment programmes and increasing universal credit for those who need support. As my hon. Friend mentioned, 700,000 pensioners are being helped through the state pension rise. We are absolutely laser-focused on tackling the cost of living.
Labour has done much to address child poverty, for example, but the issues with the price of heating oil, fuel and red diesel are the same in Wales as they are in Northern Ireland, and indeed across this great United Kingdom. The price of red diesel has increased for rural farmers and for the fishing sector, as has the price of diesel for heavy goods vehicles, so what is the Minister doing to help those three sectors and to ensure that the economy can survive? If the Government do that in Wales, they will have to do it in Northern Ireland as well.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for acknowledging the work that this Government have done on the cost of living. Red diesel continues to benefit from an 80% tax discount, which is saving farmers almost £300 million a year. We have already brought in a 5p fuel duty cut, which will last from this month until September. We have raised industry concerns about red diesel prices, and the Under-Secretary of State for Wales, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff North (Anna McMorrin), has also met farming unions to discuss red diesel. We have looked at price transparency with the Competition and Markets Authority, and we are keeping everything under careful review.
Let us have some reality: it is Labour’s cost of living crisis that is hitting families across Wales. It is vital that both Governments do all it takes to ease those pressures, yet the Welsh Labour Government still choose to spend over £100 million on more politicians and tens of millions on a default 20 mph speed limit. They have set up vanity embassies abroad and spent millions on tree planting in Uganda. Those are not the priorities of struggling families. Will the Secretary of State finally condemn the wasteful spending of taxpayers’ money and admit that these schemes do not address the cost of living crisis in Wales?
I am really surprised that the hon. Member has raised the expansion of the Senedd, because the accepted rationale of those who support the expansion is that it was necessary to improve scrutiny of the Welsh Government. What a terrible indictment that is of the inadequate performance of her party, whose job it has been, as the Opposition in the Senedd for the past 27 years, to carry out that scrutiny.
Families in Wales under Labour are struggling, with inflation in bills, wages flatlining and childcare costs higher than anywhere else in the UK. Plaid Cymru’s universal childcare offer would be a game changer. With full roll-out, that universal offer will be worth more than £30,000 a child, and it has been independently assessed as affordable and deliverable. Does the Secretary of State recognise how Labour’s chronic lack of ambition is keeping families in Wales in poverty?
Plaid’s manifesto, and specifically the childcare policy to which the right hon. Lady refers, exposes the fact that Plaid is not on the side of working people in Wales and is not serious about tackling the cost of living. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has been clear that Plaid would have to make spending cuts or raise taxes to pay for its unfunded manifesto pledges. When families are dealing with the cost of living, Plaid will be hiking taxes and slashing spending on child poverty, which will make families worse off. Families in Wales deserve better than a manifesto of economic fiction.
The Secretary of State’s tight-lipped quibbling is just an excuse—a shadow of an apology for what her party has failed to do, having been in power for the past 27 years. It is no surprise to anybody that voters are ready for a change. Last night’s YouGov poll shows that Plaid Cymru and Reform UK are neck and neck in Wales, with Labour trailing far behind. Will she accept that a vote for Labour on 7 May risks handing power to Reform UK, which will wreck our NHS? Will she recognise that only Plaid Cymru can stop that?
Creating high-quality jobs across Wales is a priority for this Government. Wales is now punching above its weight in attracting investment, with 65 new foreign direct investment projects creating nearly 2,500 jobs in 2024-25. That includes more than 500 jobs in north Wales from Eren Holding, Knauf Insulation and Kellogg’s, alongside hundreds more in south Wales driven by Vishay’s £250 million semiconductor cluster investment.
One of the issues that set Labour apart from other parties is the sheer number of new jobs we are creating in priority areas such as tech, defence and our green industries in constituencies such as mine, Enfield North, as well as across Wales and the rest of the UK. Can the Secretary of State update the House on the new jobs being created in Wales and the opportunities that will provide for every family?
I thank my hon. Friend for recognising the scale of the opportunities and new jobs that this Government are creating in Wales and across the UK. Whether it is 3,000 jobs in new nuclear, 5,000 jobs in floating offshore wind, 8,000 jobs in our two AI growth zones, 12,000 jobs with our historic £14 billion commitment for Welsh rail, or 25,000 jobs in our freeports and investment zones, we are delivering generational change for people in Wales.
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
In Wales, the south-west and across the UK, nearly 1 million young people are not in education, employment or training. Labour’s jobs tax, failed welfare reforms and damaging energy policies will worsen that crisis. Does the Minister recognise that when the Labour Government’s first response to any crisis is to tax business, businesses stop hiring, and it is young people in Wales who suffer most?
The hon. Lady might like to know that unemployment in Wales is lower than the UK average and has fallen since this time last year. Youth unemployment is also lower than the UK average, which shows that our plan to boost the Welsh economy is working. We are creating jobs and helping people into them right across Wales.
The bedrock of our country’s defence rests on our crucial membership of NATO. The defence industry in Wales employs more than 15,000 people in well-paid and important roles. Yet the separatist Plaid, along with the Greens, opposes full membership of this deterrent, while Reform bizarrely claims all sorts of things like blaming NATO for provoking the war in Ukraine. Will the Secretary of State stand up for NATO, for more Welsh defence jobs and for the thousands in Welsh communities who rely on growing employment in this crucial sector?
That is exactly what we are doing. I refer the hon. Lady to the earlier answers to defence questions.
Mr Alex Barros-Curtis (Cardiff West) (Lab)
The Prime Minister has announced a generational funding commitment to Welsh rail, and a pipeline of projects valued at £14 billion. This long-term plan will transform connectivity across Wales, and we will deliver it at pace, building on the strong start of at least £445 million of investment secured at the spending review.
Mr Barros-Curtis
The UK Labour Government’s generational commitment to a £14 billion pipeline of rail projects in every part of Wales is a clear demonstration of what can be achieved when two Labour Governments work together. The investment from the spending review has resulted in upgrades at Cardiff West junction, which is set to double city line services, benefiting stations in my constituency. Incredibly, Plaid has promised to tear up this much-needed plan and start again. Will the Minister update the House on the impact of Labour’s rail investment in Wales on my constituents and the people of Wales?
I thank my hon. Friend for pointing that out. The UK and Welsh Labour Governments’ £14 billion plan for rail unlocks and delivers the transport network that Wales needs and deserves, bringing 12,000 jobs, boosting our economy and making journeys faster and more frequent. The plan contains 43 projects for every corner of Wales, including Burns stations in the south-east, electrification to Holyhead, the Swansea metro and the Marches line. While opposition parties want to put those plans on hold, the reality is that our two Labour Governments are working together to deliver transformational change for the people of Wales.
Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)
Labour’s Senedd manifesto makes no mention of the billions of High Speed 2 funding owed to Wales. Welsh Labour has given up on the argument, as the Secretary of State did after she took office. Her words were, “HS2 no longer exists.” Will the Minister please explain why Wales is not having fair funding for rail?
I do not know if the hon. Member heard my answer just now: I talked about a £14 billion commitment across Wales. I am sure that she does not agree with her party’s plan to rip up that £14 billion commitment to rail, robbing Wales and our communities of a generation of rail investment, connecting communities and delivering jobs right across Wales.
Catherine Fookes (Monmouthshire) (Lab)
This Government are creating tens of thousands of high-quality jobs across Wales. From offshore wind in the Celtic sea and nuclear power at Wylfa, to AI growth zones, freeports, investment zones, rail enhancements, a defence growth deal and the steel strategy, our vision for economic growth in Wales is unashamedly ambitious and already delivering results.
Catherine Fookes
I was pleased to see the Secretary of State and the First Minister launch the local growth fund in Wales this week, to boost jobs and investment in local economies. That is on top of the local Wales placemaking grant funding and the UK Government’s Pride in Place funding, which will give £1.5 million to my constituency and improve six Monmouthshire towns. Will the Secretary of State update the House on how our two Labour Governments are working together to invest in our Welsh communities?
My hon. Friend is right to say that this Labour Government’s more than half-a-billion-pound local growth fund will fuel economic growth in every corner of Wales. It will support people to start and grow their businesses, it will help people to secure new skills and jobs, it will revitalise Welsh communities, and it is a great example of what can be achieved with two Labour Governments working together.
One way to support growth in Wales, and indeed in Shropshire, is to support the Wrexham, Shropshire & Midland Railway’s open access application to the Office of Rail and Road. Will the Secretary of State make a commitment, similar to that of the Transport Secretary, that the Government will not get in the way of this application and will allow growth in Shropshire, Wales and the border market towns?
I have to apologise to the right hon. Member. I did not hear the first part of his question, but I am very happy to chat to him afterwards. If he writes to me, I will give him a full answer.
Before we come to Prime Minister’s questions, may I extend a warm welcome to the Speaker of the Latvian Parliament and her delegation, who are with us in the Gallery today?
Queen Elizabeth II devoted her life to public service. As we mark the 100th anniversary of her birth, I am delighted that her extraordinary reign will be marked by a permanent memorial.
In recent days we have seen a series of despicable antisemitic arson attacks. With additional funding to deploy specialist officers, a fundamental reset of how we counter extremism and action to tackle the poison of antisemitism in our schools, our colleges and the NHS, we will do everything in our power to keep British Jews safe, and I am sure the whole House will join me in standing with our Jewish community. There is no place in British life for antisemitism.
Today my thoughts are also with the family of Stephen Lawrence, murdered in a racist attack 33 years ago today. We honour his legacy in the fight against racism and in providing opportunity for every young person.
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.
Can the Prime Minister deny that Downing Street considered appointing Matthew Doyle to a diplomatic position?
Matthew Doyle worked for many years in public service for me as Prime Minister and other Ministers. When people leave roles in any organisation, there are often conversations about other roles that they want to apply for, but nothing came of this.
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this. Of course, it was 33 years ago today that that awful murder took place. I am proud to have worked alongside Baroness Lawrence for many years. She is an incredibly courageous and inspiring campaigner, notwithstanding all the injustices that have been thrown at her in the last 33 years. We do celebrate St George’s day. We fly our flag, and we celebrate this country’s values of service, generosity and respect. They are English values, which is why I love this country so much. There are those who seek to divide us, who tell us that people are not welcome and try to rip our communities apart. We will never let them. We stand together united and against any challenges that we may face.
Does the Prime Minister stand by his statement at the Dispatch Box on 10 September last year that
“full due process was followed”—[Official Report, 10 September 2025; Vol. 772, c. 859]
in the appointment of Peter Mandelson as our ambassador to Washington?
Yes, I do. Let me make it clear at the outset that the appointment itself was a mistake. It was my mistake. I have apologised to the victims for it, and I do so again. What I set out to the House on Monday is that Foreign Office officials granted security clearance to Mandelson against the recommendation of UK Security Vetting. Yesterday, Sir Olly Robbins was asked if he shared that decision with me, No. 10 or any other Ministers. He gave a clear answer: no. That puts to bed all the allegations levelled at me by those opposite in relation to dishonesty. I believe—[Interruption.] Last week, they were all saying that it must have been shared with me; Sir Olly was very clear yesterday it was not. I believe not sharing it was a serious error of judgment. That information should have been shared with me and other Ministers, and if it had been, Mandelson would not have been committed to post.
It has not put to bed anything. On 11 November 2024—long before any vetting had happened—the Prime Minister received advice from Simon Case, the then Cabinet Secretary. The advice said the appointment would require
“the necessary security clearances…before confirming”
the Prime Minister’s choice. This advice was ignored, so how can the Prime Minister still believe that confirming Mandelson before the security clearances was following “full due process”?
This was looked into by Sir Chris Wormald. I asked him to review the appointment process, including the vetting. He confirmed—his words—“appropriate processes were followed”. The Leader of the Opposition has put great weight on the order of events. I remind her what Sir Chris said last November in evidence to the House. He said that
“when we are making appointments from outside the civil service…the normal thing is for…security clearance to happen after appointment but before the person signs a contract and takes up post.”
That is what happened in this case. Sir Olly Robbins himself also gave evidence, and he said that
“as is normally the case with external appointments”
in his Department,
“the appointment was made subject to obtaining security clearance.”
On top of that, Sir Olly Robbins has made it clear that the fact that developed vetting was after the announcement made, in his words, no material difference to the conclusion that was reached. I add this: what Sir Olly Robbins wrote to the Committee yesterday was this:
“When the Prime Minister informed the House that the proper process had been followed in respect of”
national security vetting,
“he was correct.”
It is very interesting that the Prime Minister mentions Chris Wormald. He is relying on advice given to him after Mandelson was sacked by a Cabinet Secretary the Prime Minister then sacked. That is not relevant. I am talking about the advice he was given before the appointment. He keeps mentioning Sir Olly Robbins. Sir Olly Robbins told us that the Prime Minister even sought clearance from His Majesty the King before the vetting. He had already got agreement from the US Administration—the Chair of the Select Committee said that. Mandelson was a done deal. Yesterday, Sir Olly Robbins said that the
“focus was on getting Mandelson out to Washington quickly.”
He said the Prime Minister’s team showed a “dismissive attitude” to vetting, and they even argued Peter Mandelson did not need any vetting at all. This clearly was not proper process. Why was due process not followed?
Let me deal with this directly, particularly this question of pressure in relation to the decision to appoint Peter Mandelson and to put him in place. Sir Olly Robbins could not have been clearer in his evidence yesterday. He said that
“I didn’t feel under…pressure personally in terms of my judgment”—
his words. He went on to say:
“I…have complete confidence that…recommendations to me and the discussion we had and the decision we made were rigorously independent of”
any “pressure.” On top of that, he was asked if any “conversations…led” him
“to believe that…Mandelson needed to take up this role regardless of”
the vetting outcome. He said:
“I can say with certainty that it was never put to me that way.”
No pressure existed whatsoever in relation to this case. What is unacceptable is that the recommendation of UKSV was not given to me before Mandelson took up his post.
We all heard what Sir Olly Robbins said yesterday. The fact of the matter is that the Prime Minister spent a lot of time telling us just how furious he was to learn that Mandelson failed the vetting—the same Prime Minister who was trying to get him to Washington without any vetting at all. It’s just unbelievable. The reason the Cabinet Secretary advised the Prime Minister to carry out full vetting before the appointment—this is common sense, Mr Speaker—was to protect our national security. The due diligence document said that Mandelson remained on the board of the Kremlin-linked defence company Sistema long after Putin’s first invasion of Ukraine in 2014. The Prime Minister told us on Monday that he had read that due diligence report. Why did the Prime Minister want to make a man with links to the Kremlin our ambassador in Washington?
Let me deal with the first allegation the right hon. Lady put in that question. It was always the case that there would be developed vetting in this case. That was the understood process. That was carried out. It was reviewed by Sir Chris Wormald, and he said it was the appropriate process. Sir Olly was absolutely clear that nobody put pressure on him to make this appointment, whatever the sequence of developed vetting. In relation to what was in the due process, any issues of national security are dealt with in the developed vetting process. I knew that. Peter Mandelson received clearance through that process.
The problem, as I said to the House, was that I was unaware that UKSV recommended against clearance. That is information that should have been brought to my attention. It recommended, with red flags, that there should not be clearance and that it was high concern. That information should have been made available to me at the time and subsequently. The fact that it was not was a very serious error of judgment.
I do not know what planet the Prime Minister is on. Appointing someone with known links to the Kremlin is not full due process. If anybody had brought that sort of name to me when I was a Secretary of State, I would have said, “No way.” The Prime Minister thought someone with Kremlin links was still probably okay—“Let’s do some vetting.” Why does this matter? He keeps leaning on Sir Olly Robbins, a man he sacked—he keeps leaning on him. Sir Olly Robbins said yesterday that Peter Mandelson was given access to highly classified briefings even before he had received clearance. That was a clear national security risk. How can the Prime Minister still maintain that full due process was followed?
As a Member of the House of Lords and Privy Counsellor, and in accordance with guidance, documentation could have been provided to him and was provided to him. STRAP material comes after developed vetting, but because he was a Privy Counsellor he could have access to other material before developed vetting.
This is a joke. The Prime Minister says a Member of the House of Lords. Does he mean people like Matthew Doyle? [Interruption.] I am amazed at the level of chuntering from Labour MPs. The Prime Minister promised them probity. What he has given them is cronyism and an old boys’ club, where Matthew Doyle is being proposed as an ambassador. It is ridiculous.
We all heard Sir Olly Robbins’ testimony yesterday. The head of the Foreign Office was sacked for the Prime Minister’s own failings. His Back Benchers know that is not fair. Even his most loyal Cabinet members will not defend it. The Prime Minister did not follow the process the then Cabinet Secretary set out in November 2024. He knows he did not follow due process, yet he told the House he had.
Mr Speaker, I cannot accuse the Prime Minister of deliberately misleading the House, but everyone can see what has happened here. This was not due process. Everyone knows the price of misleading the House. Will the Prime Minister finally take responsibility and go?
Let us be absolutely clear. Before Mandelson took up his post, UKSV recommended with red flags that clearance should be denied, and there was high concern. That that was not brought to my attention, or to the attention of the Foreign Secretary at the time or subsequently, is a very serious error of judgment, and anyone in my position would have lost confidence in the former permanent secretary. The Leader of the Opposition claimed on Friday that Mandelson could not have been cleared against security advice, but she was wrong about that. She said that Ministers must have been told, but she was wrong about that. She claimed there was deliberate dishonesty, but she was wrong about that—wrong, wrong, wrong. She rushed to judgment, as she always does, just like with the Iran war. I was elected by the British people because the Opposition let the country down for 14 long years. [Interruption.] Whatever she says—whatever noise they make—nothing is going to distract me from delivering for our country.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
The Opposition should hang their heads in shame at the state they left our NHS in. I am proud that this Labour Government are fixing our NHS across the country, with waiting lists at their lowest in three years, the best A&E waiting times in five years, the fastest ambulance response times in half a decade, and cancer patients getting diagnosed in the shortest time on record. Lots done, more to do. That is why we are delivering neighbourhood health centres in every community to speed up care. We did that because we invested. What did the Opposition do? They broke the NHS, and then opposed the investment that we put in.
I associate myself and my party with the comments of the Prime Minister on our wonderful late Queen. I agree with him on the need to confront antisemitism wherever it is in our society, and on remembering Stephen Lawrence and his family.
I am sure many of us in this House were shocked by the revelations from Olly Robbins yesterday. He said that No. 10 told him to find a plum job for Matthew Doyle, another Labour crony who is friends with a convicted sex offender. The Prime Minister was asked on Monday whether No. 10 had proposed any political appointments other than Mandelson. Perhaps the past few hours have jogged his memory. Will he confirm today whether he knew that his office was lobbying for a diplomatic job for Matthew Doyle, and whether they were doing it on his authority?
As I said earlier, Matthew Doyle worked for many years in public service, both for me as Prime Minister and for other Ministers. When people leave roles in any organisation, there are very often conversations about other roles they may want to apply for. In this case, nothing came of it.
The House and the public watching will note that the Prime Minister failed to answer my questions.
The chaos in this Government must not stop us focusing on the cost of living crisis hitting our country. President Trump’s idiotic war with Iran has already pushed up inflation in our country to 3.3%, and the Prime Minister knows there is far worse to come for the British people from here on in. They need help now. Will the Prime Minister follow other countries and use the Treasury’s extra revenue from higher fuel prices to cut rail and bus fares, and slash prices at the pump by 12p a litre?
Everybody can see that the conflict is causing serious economic damage in this country and countries around the world. The right hon. Member’s claim of a windfall for the Government is politically misleading and economically illiterate.
We inherited a housing crisis in London, including record numbers of children living in temporary accommodation, because the Conservatives failed to build the homes that we need. We are building those homes, and I am looking forward to next week, when Labour will deliver more security for tenants, through our Renters’ Rights Act 2025. I commend Hackney council, my hon. Friend’s council, on getting on with building affordable homes. What a stark contrast to the Green party, which has opposed 42,000 new homes across the capital and counting.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Fenton-Glynn, I am glad you have found your feet, because I could hear you shouting earlier. We will not be doing that next week. I call Dr Ellie Chowns.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
The Prime Minister appointed Mandelson in a desperate and doomed attempt to pander to Donald Trump, despite knowing about Mandelson’s friendship with the paedophile Epstein, and his links to foreign states. The Prime Minister resisted vetting, and then took a “dismissive” and extraordinarily incurious attitude to it, compromising national security, and now he has thrown a civil servant under the bus to save his own skin. All this from a Prime Minister who pledged to restore trust and integrity in Government, but who has repeatedly betrayed the trust of voters and let the country down. Does the Prime Minister not recognise that the best thing that he can do to restore trust and integrity is to take true responsibility and resign?
Let me correct what the hon. Lady said. There was no dismissive attitude to developed vetting. I knew that the post was subject to developed vetting, and it was subject to developed vetting. What did not happen was me being told of the UKSV recommendation. That was a serious error of judgment. Had I been told, the appointment would not have gone ahead.
Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)
Scotland deserves safer streets and more visible policing. In England and Wales, Labour has put 3,000 more neighbourhood police officers on our streets, delivering a named police officer for every neighbourhood. The SNP Government have already had two decades and record funding to invest in public services. If they knew how to do it, they would have done it by now, but they have not.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
Let me say that Jonathan Powell is doing an excellent job for this Government. He is respected across the world, and is playing a significant part in dealing with the huge challenges that we face.
Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal) (Lab)
Clearly, the middle east conflict is placing real pressure on farmers; that is why it is important that we de-escalate. Today, the UK is hosting military planners, as work continues with France and other countries to help get the strait of Hormuz open, once the ceasefire holds. We have instructed the Competition and Markets Authority to look more closely at fertiliser and red diesel to ensure that farmers are getting a fair deal, and we are overhauling fertiliser regulations to diversify supply. On my hon. Friend’s particular case, we have also taken the decision to open the carbon dioxide plant on Teesside to protect supplies, because we will always act to secure our economy.
I have set out in terms what I was not told in relation to the process. It is clearly information that I should have been given. A UKSV recommendation with a double red flag should have been brought to my attention; it was a serious error of judgment that it was not. Anyone in my position would have taken exactly the decision that I took in relation to the permanent secretary.
We are tackling the injustice of leasehold and fixing building safety, as my hon. Friend rightly highlighted. I thank her for campaigning on this over many years. We are capping ground rents at £250 to cut costs for almost 4 million leasehold properties. We are investing over £5 billion to remove dangerous cladding, including over £1 billion for social housing. In Lewisham and across the country, I am determined that everyone should have a safe and secure home.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
I thank the hon. Member for his question. As he will appreciate, there is a live police investigation, and I know that the Minister for Border Security and Asylum is looking closely at the case; obviously, I can provide the hon. Member with any further information as that emerges. I reassure him that all accommodation must meet contractual standards, and the Home Office works with the police to manage all sites safely. Local authorities are consulted prior to any accommodation being procured and can object to any proposal. When there is strong evidence that a site is not suitable, it will not be proceeded with.
Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)
I am delighted to hear about the new businesses in my hon. Friend’s area. Our high streets strategy, backed by £301 million, will set out further plans to rejuvenate high streets across the country. We are putting power into the hands of local communities through our Pride in Place scheme, including £20 million for Stanley South in my hon. Friend’s constituency. That is only possible because his community has a hard-working Labour MP and a Labour Government.
Some six months ago in this House, I mentioned a little boy called Teddy Johnson. Sadly, Teddy will be forever seven, because he died last week from metachromatic leukodystrophy. MLD is a horrendous condition that stole Teddy’s ability to walk, talk and even smile. What makes this tragedy more profound is that here in the UK, we have a treatment—we have a cure—but it is only effective if the condition is identified by a simple heel prick at birth and treated immediately, because when symptoms appear, it is too late. Just a few weeks ago, the UK National Screening Committee recommended the condition remain excluded from the heel prick. We have a treatment and we have a commissioned service in the Royal Manchester children’s hospital, yet children like Teddy are still dying prematurely. Despite all that is going on in the world, I know that the Prime Minister is in politics to make a change. Prime Minister, in Teddy’s memory and in the memory of all those who have died prematurely: make the change and add MLD to the simple heel prick test.
I remember the hon. Lady raising Teddy’s case very well. I am very saddened to hear of his passing, and my thoughts—and, I am sure, those of the whole House—are with his family and his loved ones. I will do precisely as she asks: I will make sure that we look at this again in the light of the information that she has given to me in the course of this session.
Oliver Ryan (Burnley) (Lab/Co-op)
May I start by wishing my hon. Friend a happy birthday? [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”]
I will make sure that Ministers meet my hon. Friend to hear more detail about his particular proposal. We are committed to delivering 1.5 million homes this Parliament. We are prioritising the development of brownfield sites, ensuring that the default answer to brownfield proposals is a yes. We will go further and faster now that our Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 is law, despite being opposed by every Opposition party—a coalition of blockers.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
The Prime Minister may be aware that in December, for the first time in over three decades, Defence Ministers met the families of those killed in the 1994 RAF Chinook crash on the Mull of Kintyre. The Ministry of Defence promised “ongoing dialogue” with them. Is he also aware that, despite receiving pages of new evidence presented at that meeting that show the Chinook was not airworthy, the MOD chose not to keep its word and contacted instead the Press Association, saying that no new evidence had been presented about the cause of the crash? The Prime Minister knows, because the families have written to him, as the MOD knows too, that the families are seeking not a public inquiry into the cause of the crash, but to know the reason why their loved ones were placed on board an aircraft which, according to the MOD’s own test pilots and engineers, was described as “positively dangerous”, “unairworthy” and “not to be relied on in any way whatsoever”? Will he agree to meet the families, to rebuild trust and to offer the promised dialogue that the MOD clearly finds so difficult to achieve?
I thank the hon. Lady for raising this case; I will make sure that is looked at again in the light of what she has said, and that the families get the relevant meeting.
May I start by thanking my hon. Friend for her long record of campaigning against child poverty? Child poverty stifles opportunity, it makes it harder for kids to get on in life and we in this Government will not stand by. This is a moral mission for this Government. We will make sure that no child or family is left behind, through lifting the two-child cap, expanding free school meals and free breakfast clubs, and extending free childcare. More than 6,000 children in my hon. Friend’s constituency alone will benefit from the action that we are taking. And what would the Tories and Reform do? They would plunge those children straight back into poverty. That is a disgrace.
Peter Fortune (Bromley and Biggin Hill) (Con)
Today, vigils are being held across Westminster for the 22 women who are diagnosed with lobular breast cancer every day, and I think we are privileged to say that some of those extraordinarily brave women are in the Gallery this afternoon. When I raised this issue with the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, she promised to take action and not just commit words, so will the Prime Minister today commit to the Lobular Moon Shot Project’s plan to fund lobular breast cancer?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for drawing the attention of the House to the vigils and the campaign, and I acknowledge those who are here in the Gallery today. I will make sure that this is looked at to see what further we can do, and that any relevant meetings are set up.
I know that the site is of huge significance to the people of York, and I understand that the site is under offer. Ministers are happy to work with the council and my hon. Friend to find the right deal for the site, taking into account the points she has made.
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)
Every day that the Prime Minister fails to act on or even acknowledge Pakistani grooming gangs that rape and torture vulnerable white girls, more victims continue to suffer. Instead of spending his energy forcing friends of paedophiles into top jobs, why not use that energy to stop this national disgrace?
I spent many years prosecuting paedophiles who are now in prison, so I really do not need lectures from Reform about this.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
In 2022, my constituent Masi Sibanda dropped her 14-month-old son Noah off at nursery, like any other day. Tragically, it would be the last time Masi would see her son alive. A staff member at the Fairytales nursery tried to get him to sleep. When Noah resisted, she covered his face with a thick blanket and used her leg to pin him down. The pressure applied to his tiny body was so extreme that it ruptured his colon. No parent should have to endure such unimaginable loss. The sentencing has taken place. Will the PM meet Masi to discuss how we can ensure that tragedies like this never happen again?
The case my hon. Friend raises is utterly tragic, and as she went through those details, I think we all will have felt as I do: it is impossible to fathom how the family must feel in relation to this awful and tragic case. I will make sure that all the necessary meetings are set up in the way that she has asked for.