To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.

Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Government Actuary's Department: Freedom of Information
Friday 13th February 2026

Asked by: Alex Burghart (Conservative - Brentwood and Ongar)

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the answer of 8 January 2026 to Question 101383 on Government Actuary's Department: Freedom of Information, what is the evidential basis for the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry's statement that the £34,702 million figure by the Government Actuary's Department was incorrect.

Answered by Luke Pollard - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)

It is incorrect to present the nominal costs as the true amount, and to ignore the effects of inflation and the changing value of money on the real costs of a deal that lasts 99 years.

The figures published by the Government Actuary's Department clearly show that they had also calculated a net present value of £3.4 billion, by using the OBR forecast inflation rate along with the Social Time Discount Rate set out in the Green Book. The Government gave a detailed breakdown of this methodology in the explanatory memorandum we published alongside the Treaty in May 2025.

This is standard practice for any long-term Government deal. It ensures the figures are realistic, comparable, and not artificially inflated by adding up future payments without considering the time value of money.

These figures also have been verified and confirmed by the Office for Statistics Regulation and Office for Budget Responsibility.

Scheduled Event - Thursday 12th February - Add to calendar
View Source
Commons - Urgent question - Main Chamber
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister to make a statement on the Government’s response to the humble Address agreed on 4 February 2026, including on progress made, timescales for compliance and the Government’s approach to any material it proposes to withhold or delay
MP: Alex Burghart
Speech in Commons Chamber - Thu 12 Feb 2026
Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion

"Special advisers in your Department are...."
Alex Burghart - View Speech

View all Alex Burghart (Con - Brentwood and Ongar) contributions to the debate on: Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion
Speech in Commons Chamber - Thu 12 Feb 2026
Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion

"(Urgent Question): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister to make a statement on the Government’s response to the Humble Address agreed by this House on 4 February 2026, including on progress made, timescales for compliance and the Government’s approach to any material it proposes to withhold or …..."
Alex Burghart - View Speech

View all Alex Burghart (Con - Brentwood and Ongar) contributions to the debate on: Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion
Speech in Commons Chamber - Thu 12 Feb 2026
Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion

"Thank you very much, Mr Speaker— I could not have put it better myself...."
Alex Burghart - View Speech

View all Alex Burghart (Con - Brentwood and Ongar) contributions to the debate on: Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion
Speech in Commons Chamber - Thu 12 Feb 2026
Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion

"Thank you for granting this urgent question, without which hon. Members would not have had a chance to question Ministers before recess. Obviously, the House will rise for recess having received very little in the way of information, so it is very important that we hear from the Minister today …..."
Alex Burghart - View Speech

View all Alex Burghart (Con - Brentwood and Ongar) contributions to the debate on: Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion
Division Vote (Commons)
11 Feb 2026 - Climate Change - View Vote Context
Alex Burghart (Con) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 92 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 362 Noes - 107
Speech in Commons Chamber - Wed 11 Feb 2026
Oral Answers to Questions

"Over the past 10 days we have seen a number of revelations about the procurement of services and goods and the provision of sensitive information during Peter Mandelson’s time as a Government Minister and as an ambassador in Washington. Given that Mandelson was, for two years, Secretary of State for …..."
Alex Burghart - View Speech

View all Alex Burghart (Con - Brentwood and Ongar) contributions to the debate on: Oral Answers to Questions
Speech in Commons Chamber - Wed 11 Feb 2026
Oral Answers to Questions

"I am very grateful to the Minister for that direct response. Will he also commit to return to this House before Easter to update Members on the work that his Department has done and what it has found?..."
Alex Burghart - View Speech

View all Alex Burghart (Con - Brentwood and Ongar) contributions to the debate on: Oral Answers to Questions
Division Vote (Commons)
11 Feb 2026 - Local Government Finance - View Vote Context
Alex Burghart (Con) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 85 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 279 Noes - 90