Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

Chris Vince Excerpts

Tuesday 28th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I apologise to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the fact that I cannot promise as learned and long a speech as that given by my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell). [Interruption.] Even in such a heated and highly controversial debate, I have managed to gain cross-party consensus. My day has not been wasted.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak. I am perhaps not so pleased that I am speaking in this particular debate, but the opportunity to speak in this place and represent the people of my constituency is an honour every single day. I hope that Members from across the House will recognise that I do my best to avoid being too party political. In fact, I gave a whole speech in which the right hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart) was not able to intervene on me, because I avoided being party political; I appreciate that the challenge is on again. I do my best to avoid being too party political, except when it comes to education policy, but I declare an interest there.

I have actively engaged in this matter, and have contributed when the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister has attended this House to speak on the subject of the Humble Address, as he has done a number of times. I see he is not here; he has slipped out while I am giving my speech. I have represented to him my genuine concerns about the vetting process, and I would ask him to refer to that in his winding-up speech, if he were here. I have expressed my genuine concern about the impact of Peter Mandelson’s appointment on the victims of Jeffrey Epstein.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to put on record my deepest respect for the Speaker’s Office, and for you personally. As you will be aware, I find you just a little bit terrifying. [Hon. Members: “Quite right.”] More cross-party agreement. I absolutely respect Mr Speaker’s decision to allow this debate. I will admit that I was reluctant to speak in it, not because I lack faith in the Prime Minister—that faith remains firm—and not, to mention an issue raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West (Mr Barros-Curtis), because I genuinely worry about my security and that of my family, although I have to put on record that I do; Members from across the House who have supported me in that matter will know what I am talking about.

On a lighter note, I was reluctant to speak in this debate because I could not work out how I was going to make reference to Harlow in it. [Hon. Members: “But you have.”] Twice. Then I realised that that was the point; I come to this place to talk about my constituents. Take my constituent, friend and former work colleague Jamie, who works six days a week, and has nothing left with which to enjoy himself or treat his family, including his two-year-old son. I want to be talking about how this Government help people like Jamie. [Interruption.] Sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker—again, terrified. I want to be talking about how we in this House can make a difference to Jamie and tackle the cost of living crisis.

I want to gently respond to those on both sides of the House who have implied that those who do not agree with them are somehow selling their soul. I respectfully disagree. As Members know, I was a teacher before I came to this place, and I came to this place because I was angry with the former Member for Surrey Heath. I frankly disagreed with some of the decisions he made about education, but what really struck me when I came here was that Opposition Members are not the horrible, terrible, horned beasts that I was led to believe they were—some of them, maybe. [Hon. Members: “Horny?”] Did I say that? I meant horned. I feel like I am going to have to make a point of order and apologise in a minute.

Opposition Members genuinely believe in what they are voting for. I saw that the other day during the debate on the Pension Schemes Bill, in the discussion about mitigation. I disagreed with what Opposition Members said, but I respected their right to disagree, and I think it is important that in any debate—including this one—we can agree to disagree.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

I realise that the hon. Member is struggling to read his own handwriting, but does he have anything at all to say about the Prime Minister’s conduct in appointing Peter Mandelson?

[Chris Vince]

I thank the hon. Member for his contribution, I think. I am sorry that he is offended by my handwriting, but there are probably more important things to discuss.

[Simon Hoare]

A moment ago, while the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister had popped out of the Chamber, the hon. Gentleman was saying something rather nice and complimentary about him. I just wanted to give him the opportunity to repeat it, now that he is back.

[Chris Vince]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for a far better intervention. The comment I made about the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister while he had popped out was that, as he is aware, I have contributed many times when he has spoken about the Humble Address, and have asked him a number of questions about the vetting process, as well as the impact that this ongoing issue obviously has—

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

Trade envoy to Harlow, right there.

[Chris Vince]

Trade envoy to Harlow, did you say?

I asked the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister about the impact that this ongoing issue has on the victims of Jeffrey Epstein. I think it is really important that we recognise that, and I ask him to comment on it in his wind-up.

The point that I wish to make, and I hope it is taken on its merits, is that I absolutely appreciate that the Labour Members who have spoken in support of the motion did so because they believe that it is right. However, do not assume that those of us who are not speaking in support of the motion believe the same. The majority of Members, whatever political party they represent, vote in the Lobby for what they genuinely believe is the right thing to do, for whatever reason. I reject the concept that that is not the case. Opposition Members should trust me when I say that it would be far easier for me to join them in the Lobby this afternoon, but I do not believe that is the right thing to do.