Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd December 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that. I was in his constituency just the other week, and we could see the impact that this measure would have on children in Peterborough where, as he said, 9,000 children are living in poverty. In his constituency, 5,500 children are living in poverty. We are lifting them out of poverty, and that is the right thing to do.

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

It wasn’t last year.

[The Prime Minister]

The Conservative party shamefully dragged hundreds of thousands of children into poverty, and they will pay that price for the rest of their lives. Conservative Members should be ashamed of themselves.

Ministerial Code

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Monday 24th November 2025 Commons Chamber

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

We just want the transparency that was promised to be delivered. The Minister has been given an impossible task as a junior Minister, but the House surely deserves to know how much cash was transferred to the Prime Minister by someone who has been given a £130,000-a-year part-time sinecure. [Interruption.] If the Minister will not answer today because he is being told not to do so by the chair of the Labour party, the right hon. Member for Redcar (Anna Turley), will he undertake to come back and give the House an answer? We are entitled, on behalf of the whole country, to be given an honest answer by the Government, who are supposedly committed to transparency.

[Josh Simons]

As I said, after the Prime Minister wrote to the independent adviser on ministerial interests, he expressed his sincere regret for what was an unfortunate error.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Wednesday 29th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jo Stevens]

Plaid Cymru’s disastrous plans for independence will cost Wales £21.5 billion every year— over £11,000 for every working-age person in Wales or over £7,000 for every adult and child in Wales, every single year. The people of Wales deserve to know what public services Plaid Cymru will cut or what taxes it would raise to pay for its divisive, separatist plans?

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

It is not just farmers but lots of other family businesses who are terrified for their future. Under the business property relief, a company worth £20 million would have to pay £4 million in tax, yet that responsibility falls not on the business but the person who inherits it, so they will have to extract another £4 million to pay that tax, crippling family businesses, crippling investment and hurting growth in Wales. That is true, is it not?

[Jo Stevens]

It is certainly not. The right hon. Gentleman will have heard of tax planning, and so will the people he has been talking about. Investment is up in Wales and we have had record inward investment in Wales, with a 23% increase on the previous financial year and a 30% increase in jobs created. The UK was the fastest growing economy in the G7 in the first half of this year. Businesses are growing, developing and creating jobs under this Government.

Alleged Spying Case: Home Office Involvement

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Monday 20th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

For the sake of clarity, “extremely disappointed” is the phraseology that we have used. We seem to have moved on from the original question about the Home Office, and the hon. Member will understand that I am not responsible for the actions of the Attorney General or the Solicitor General. Colleagues in the other place and in government will have heard the hon. Gentleman’s question, and I would be happy to discuss it with him further.

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

I think the reason we are gathered here today—although I cannot see into your mind, Mr Speaker—is because of the story in The Sunday Times. That is why the shadow Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp), asked this: when did the Home Secretary hear that the case might collapse? That was question No.1. Are we not owed an answer to that question? Did the Home Secretary, as The Sunday Times said, then make representations as to the evidence being as “strong as possible”? Did she or didn’t she?

We are here because of that piece, Mr Speaker; I assume, although I cannot know your mind, that that is why you agreed to this urgent question. This Minister refuses, disgracefully, at that Dispatch Box to answer the question about the role of the Home Office in this spy scandal. Will the Minister now answer, not with his obfuscation and not with his flannel? Will he answer the question directly?

[Dan Jarvis]

We are here because of activities that happened under the previous Government. That is why we are here—I repeat the point I made earlier about Conservative Members showing a bit of humility—and I gave a response to the shadow Home Secretary.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dan Jarvis]

The hon. Gentleman has asked quite a technical question. I am not entirely clear which meeting he is referring to, but I am very happy to write to him with the details.

[Graham Stuart]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

The points of order will come after the urgent questions and the statement. Can it wait?

[Graham Stuart]

indicated assent.

Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Thursday 16th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris Ward]

As I have said many times, the Government wanted the prosecution to proceed and allowed every opportunity for evidence to be provided for it and for the CPS to gather that. The Prime Minister has already stated when he was informed that the trial was in that process. He also made it clear yesterday, in response to the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat), that it is not his position to interfere. The case was then dropped by the CPS independently.

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

The CPS has independence from Ministers; civil servants do not. The whole point of our constitution is that civil servants can never be thrown under the bus because Ministers are responsible. They own everything the civil servants do. There is no carve-out because someone has this high title of being a National Security Adviser. They are a civil servant. It was not once; it happened repeatedly in an iterative process by which the CPS asked for and said there is a gap. What is it? Will the Minister please stop trying to make out that we have a different constitution from the one we have, in which he suggests that somehow Ministers are not responsible for the behaviour of their civil servants when that is the foundation of accountability within our parliamentary system?

[Chris Ward]

I will refer back to what I have said already: it is not the place of Ministers, under this or previous Governments, to be vetting or interfering in evidence on that matter.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I am sure the right hon. Member would not want to give up his seat quite so quickly.

[Graham Stuart]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. You have taken a close interest in this issue, Mr Speaker—the fact that it goes to the heart of this Parliament on the protection of Members of Parliament and the secrets that we sometimes hold. I am sure that you will share my concern that someone on their very first outing has been sent out on this issue and that the Prime Minister used yesterday’s Prime Minister’s questions and has not faced proper scrutiny in this House in a statement. May I gently ask whether you would seek to have him make a statement to the House?

[Mr Speaker]

It is not even a point of order, and you know that—we are keeping the debate going. I do congratulate the Minister and feel sorry that this is his first outing, but I have to say, if you take the pay check, you also take the pain that goes with it.

UK-EU Summit

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I agree. I would remind the House that we have agreements in place with a number of other countries, some of which were actually negotiated by the Conservatives. I find it hard to believe that anybody in this House genuinely wants to make it harder for our young people to work, study and travel in Europe.

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

We need 15 billion barrels of oil and gas between now and 2050; we are currently expected to produce just 4 billion. New licences would support tens of thousands of jobs in this country and tens of billions in tax revenue. Will the Prime Minister assure the House that the agreement on alignment on climate policies will not stand in the way of common-sense restoration of new licences in the North sea, so that we can produce the oil and gas we must consume in this country?

[The Prime Minister]

We have been clear about honouring new licences, and there is nothing in this deal that cuts across what we have said previously on that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Wednesday 5th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ian Murray]

It seems to me that SNP Members decided when they came back to the House in July to defend the Conservative Government’s economic record. We inherited a £22 billion black hole, and when the Chancellor came to the Dispatch Box for the Budget, she had to fill that black hole and end austerity. It is what we promised, and it delivered £4.9 billion to the Scottish budget, which the hon. Gentleman’s party is intent on spending. This is the key point: SNP Members in this House have objected to every single measure in that Budget, but they are very happy to spend the money.

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

If the Secretary of State wants to help economic growth in Scotland, I suggest he looks at oil and gas. Ending the licensing of domestic production, which will not make the slightest difference to how much we consume, will lead to the loss of tens of thousands of jobs—35,000 jobs—and billions of pounds in tax revenue, and we will then import oil and gas with higher embedded emissions. The Secretary of State knows that that is crazy. He cannot say so publicly at the Dispatch Box, but can he use his good offices to persuade his fellow Cabinet members that this is not a sensible course for Scotland?

[Ian Murray]

This Government back the oil and gas industry in Scotland. We have consistently said that oil and gas will be with us for decades to come, but that sits beside our national mission to get to clean power by 2030. It is a mission we should all be backing not just for the jobs of the future, but to bring down people’s bills.

Ukraine

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Monday 3rd March 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, of course. That is a really important issue, and it should not be overlooked as we discuss the very many issues here. It is a moral outrage, and I think I speak for the whole House in saying that.

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

I, too, congratulate the Prime Minister on his composure and leadership, but, as his hon. Friend the hon. Member for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg) said, we have to ensure that we have the resources in place to tackle this. The whole of western Europe is in the same difficult financial and demographic position. Will he look again at finding the means to deliver on our promises? His leadership and rhetoric have been fantastic, but going forward we will need the hard power to back them up.

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Member is right. That is why the conversation over the weekend has been about the specific issue of a security guarantee in Ukraine, but also, importantly, the wider issue of how Europe steps up more generally in its own defence spending, capability and co-ordination. That is an important part of the discussion. We should not just focus on the question of the security guarantees; they are part of the argument, but they are not the whole argument.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ian Murray]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on being the new mission champion for clean energy. He is absolutely right. While the SNP makes promises it breaks, this Labour Government are determined to deliver for Scotland. Maybe that is why SNP MPs in this House voted against GB Energy. We are delivering for Scotland. We promised GB Energy; that has been delivered. We promised to end austerity; that has been delivered. We promised to make work pay; that has been delivered. While the SNP only delivers managed decline for Scotland, we are getting on with improving the economy.

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

There are no clear plans for Great British Energy, but there are very clear plans to end new licences for oil and gas in the North sea. Gary Smith of the GMB has said that stopping new licences is “the employment equivalent of a Grangemouth refinery closing nearly every week from 2025 to 2030.” When will the Secretary of State stand up for Scotland, oppose the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, protect jobs and ensure that we do not have more imports with higher emissions?

[Ian Murray]

GB Energy is there, with the national wealth fund, to deliver that just transition in clean power by 2030. Oil and gas in the North sea will be here for decades to come, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman to work with us to deliver that just transition, rather than scaremongering the workers of the north-east.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Stuart Excerpts

Thursday 5th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Georgia Gould]

I wholeheartedly agree with that. I heard too often from those on the frontline that they are fed up with policy being made in a closed room in Whitehall, and not with those who have real experience of the frontline. The Budget announced the introduction of a public sector reform and innovation fund to support us to test and learn with places around the UK. We are learning from the best evidence across the public sector. On Monday, I met representatives from all the What Work centres across Government, to understand the evidence of what works and how we can scale that to deliver for communities around the country.

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

We all remember that the Secretary of State for Health and Social Centre undertook that there would be no additional money going into the NHS without securing reform. That, like so many other broken promises, was dropped, and £22 billion or £25 billion—whatever it is—of funding was announced. Then afterwards he repeated the pledge that there would be no extra money without reform. Well, the cat is out of the bag. Will the Minister give the undertaking today, on behalf of the Government, that never again will we see vast increases in public expenditure without reform of public services, because we need an improvement in productivity, not just additional spending?

--- Later in debate ---

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question and for the time she spent with me last week setting out the opportunities of procurement and the needs of her community in Darlington. We have heard from the whole House today how important it is to back small and medium- sized enterprises that have roots in communities, and we are determined that the new national policy procurement statement will do that.

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

I am delighted to give Christmas greetings to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and I am sure that most of us in the House feel a great deal of respect for him.

As the Prime Minister knew he was appointing a convicted fraudster to the Cabinet, was it not incumbent on him to tell the propriety and ethics team? If I can slip a second question in, Mr Speaker, will the right hon. Gentleman, who is committed to and leads in the Government on transparency and openness, all of which have been promised, undertake—notwithstanding the fact that he has not looked at these declarations—to find out and let the House know whether she declared it to the House?

[Pat McFadden]

As I said to the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart) a few moments ago, all Secretaries of State give their declaration to the propriety and ethics team upon appointment. The matter was concluded last Friday with the Transport Secretary’s resignation. She has been replaced by a new Secretary of State, and she set out her reasons for resigning in her resignation letter. If the right hon. Member has not had a copy, I am quite happy to make it available to him.