John McDonnell Alert Sample


Alert Sample

View the Parallel Parliament page for John McDonnell

Information between 12th April 2026 - 22nd April 2026

Note: This sample does not contain the most recent 2 weeks of information. Up to date samples can only be viewed by Subscribers.
Click here to view Subscription options.


Division Votes
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 271 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 277 Noes - 158
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 290 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 299 Noes - 169
15 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 252 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 254 Noes - 144
15 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Labour No votes vs 247 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 256 Noes - 150
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 274 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 278 Noes - 73
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 276 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 281 Noes - 70
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 281 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 356 Noes - 90
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 241 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 301 Noes - 157
15 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 4 Labour No votes vs 245 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 139
15 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 252 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 259 Noes - 136
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 12 Labour No votes vs 237 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 247 Noes - 21
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 284 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 300 Noes - 101
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 285 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 291 Noes - 174
15 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 263 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 277 Noes - 150
15 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 262 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 271 Noes - 95
15 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 267 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 273 Noes - 159
15 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 269 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 275 Noes - 159
15 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 261 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 269 Noes - 162
14 Apr 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 295 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 307 Noes - 176
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 271 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 277 Noes - 158
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 274 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 278 Noes - 73
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 276 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 281 Noes - 70
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 281 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 356 Noes - 90
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 12 Labour No votes vs 237 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 247 Noes - 21
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 241 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 301 Noes - 157
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 284 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 300 Noes - 101
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 285 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 291 Noes - 174
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 290 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 299 Noes - 169
15 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 264 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 278 Noes - 158
15 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 262 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 276 Noes - 155
15 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 262 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 269 Noes - 103
20 Apr 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 289 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 292 Noes - 158
20 Apr 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 291 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 294 Noes - 61
20 Apr 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 291 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 293 Noes - 159
20 Apr 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 291 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 294 Noes - 156
21 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 280 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 284 Noes - 149
21 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 284 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 288 Noes - 147
21 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 283 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 287 Noes - 150
21 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 293 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 297 Noes - 147
21 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
John McDonnell voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 282 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 287 Noes - 149


Speeches
John McDonnell speeches from: Security Vetting
John McDonnell contributed 1 speech (165 words)
Monday 20th April 2026 - Commons Chamber
Cabinet Office
John McDonnell speeches from: Crime and Policing Bill
John McDonnell contributed 3 speeches (1,510 words)
Consideration of Lords amendments
Tuesday 14th April 2026 - Commons Chamber
Home Office
John McDonnell speeches from: Hidden Credit Liabilities: Role of the FCA
John McDonnell contributed 3 speeches (2,358 words)
Tuesday 14th April 2026 - Westminster Hall
HM Treasury
John McDonnell speeches from: Middle East
John McDonnell contributed 1 speech (130 words)
Monday 13th April 2026 - Commons Chamber
Cabinet Office


Written Answers
Ferries: Conditions of Employment
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Monday 20th April 2026

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, What recent assessment she has made of the employment conditions of seafarers at ferry operators who are signatories to the Voluntary Seafarers Charter; and if she will list the ferry operators who have signed the voluntary charter since July 2023 to date.

Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)

The Department has received evidence from a number of ferry operators in support of their applications for Verified Charter Status under the Seafarers’ Charter. In due course we will publicly confirm which operators have met the required standard.

Revenue and Customs: Staff
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Monday 20th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether HMRC has made a comparative assessment of the cost of alternative models based on permanent civil service staffing with external Managed Service Provider provision.

Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)

HMRC is using Managed Service Providers (MSP) as part of a balanced approach to help it manage peaks and troughs more effectively, drawing on practices already used across other Government Departments (OGDs). This will allow its permanent colleagues to focus their expertise where it’s most needed. HMRC know customers still need timely support while services continue to digitise, and the current 18‑month Proof of Value phase is providing HMRC with opportunities to learn from this approach, giving it more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers, and at good value for the taxpayer.

HMRC is working jointly with the PCS trade union on an evaluation of the MSP service. The evaluation considers service quality, customer outcomes, productivity and value for money, and will inform future decisions. No outcome is pre‑determined while the evaluation is ongoing.

HMRC’s evaluation will help them determine how they use MSPs to better serve customers. Any decision will be taken through normal business planning and Spending Review processes, taking account of evaluation findings, affordability and operational need.

This is not about replacing HMRC colleagues – no one will be made redundant as a result of this initiative and HMRC headcount is forecast to increase by the end of the Spending Review 2025 period. The current staff provided by MSPs represent additional capacity for 2025/26 and into 2026/27. HMRC faces highly variable demand throughout the year - this is about giving HMRC more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers. This complements its permanent workforce and enables it to scale capacity up and down as needed.

Due to the design of the contract, costs can only be confirmed retrospectively. Comparisons with permanent recruitment and surge staffing currently indicate MSP costs are comparable or better, based on expected outcomes. Overall the projected cost for 12 months was approximately £23m of resourcing spend.

Revenue and Customs: Staff
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Monday 20th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will set out the range of possible outcomes of HMRC’s joint evaluation with PCS of the pilot of the Managed Service Provider within the Customer Services Group.

Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)

HMRC is using Managed Service Providers (MSP) as part of a balanced approach to help it manage peaks and troughs more effectively, drawing on practices already used across other Government Departments (OGDs). This will allow its permanent colleagues to focus their expertise where it’s most needed. HMRC know customers still need timely support while services continue to digitise, and the current 18‑month Proof of Value phase is providing HMRC with opportunities to learn from this approach, giving it more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers, and at good value for the taxpayer.

HMRC is working jointly with the PCS trade union on an evaluation of the MSP service. The evaluation considers service quality, customer outcomes, productivity and value for money, and will inform future decisions. No outcome is pre‑determined while the evaluation is ongoing.

HMRC’s evaluation will help them determine how they use MSPs to better serve customers. Any decision will be taken through normal business planning and Spending Review processes, taking account of evaluation findings, affordability and operational need.

This is not about replacing HMRC colleagues – no one will be made redundant as a result of this initiative and HMRC headcount is forecast to increase by the end of the Spending Review 2025 period. The current staff provided by MSPs represent additional capacity for 2025/26 and into 2026/27. HMRC faces highly variable demand throughout the year - this is about giving HMRC more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers. This complements its permanent workforce and enables it to scale capacity up and down as needed.

Due to the design of the contract, costs can only be confirmed retrospectively. Comparisons with permanent recruitment and surge staffing currently indicate MSP costs are comparable or better, based on expected outcomes. Overall the projected cost for 12 months was approximately £23m of resourcing spend.

Revenue and Customs: Staff
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Monday 20th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether HMRC may discontinue the use of the Managed Service Provider model beyond the initial proof of value trial.

Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)

HMRC is using Managed Service Providers (MSP) as part of a balanced approach to help it manage peaks and troughs more effectively, drawing on practices already used across other Government Departments (OGDs). This will allow its permanent colleagues to focus their expertise where it’s most needed. HMRC know customers still need timely support while services continue to digitise, and the current 18‑month Proof of Value phase is providing HMRC with opportunities to learn from this approach, giving it more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers, and at good value for the taxpayer.

HMRC is working jointly with the PCS trade union on an evaluation of the MSP service. The evaluation considers service quality, customer outcomes, productivity and value for money, and will inform future decisions. No outcome is pre‑determined while the evaluation is ongoing.

HMRC’s evaluation will help them determine how they use MSPs to better serve customers. Any decision will be taken through normal business planning and Spending Review processes, taking account of evaluation findings, affordability and operational need.

This is not about replacing HMRC colleagues – no one will be made redundant as a result of this initiative and HMRC headcount is forecast to increase by the end of the Spending Review 2025 period. The current staff provided by MSPs represent additional capacity for 2025/26 and into 2026/27. HMRC faces highly variable demand throughout the year - this is about giving HMRC more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers. This complements its permanent workforce and enables it to scale capacity up and down as needed.

Due to the design of the contract, costs can only be confirmed retrospectively. Comparisons with permanent recruitment and surge staffing currently indicate MSP costs are comparable or better, based on expected outcomes. Overall the projected cost for 12 months was approximately £23m of resourcing spend.

Revenue and Customs: Staff
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Monday 20th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what criteria she will use to determine whether the Managed Service Provider model is expanded, modified, or discontinued following the joint evaluation with the PCS Trade Union.

Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)

HMRC is using Managed Service Providers (MSP) as part of a balanced approach to help it manage peaks and troughs more effectively, drawing on practices already used across other Government Departments (OGDs). This will allow its permanent colleagues to focus their expertise where it’s most needed. HMRC know customers still need timely support while services continue to digitise, and the current 18‑month Proof of Value phase is providing HMRC with opportunities to learn from this approach, giving it more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers, and at good value for the taxpayer.

HMRC is working jointly with the PCS trade union on an evaluation of the MSP service. The evaluation considers service quality, customer outcomes, productivity and value for money, and will inform future decisions. No outcome is pre‑determined while the evaluation is ongoing.

HMRC’s evaluation will help them determine how they use MSPs to better serve customers. Any decision will be taken through normal business planning and Spending Review processes, taking account of evaluation findings, affordability and operational need.

This is not about replacing HMRC colleagues – no one will be made redundant as a result of this initiative and HMRC headcount is forecast to increase by the end of the Spending Review 2025 period. The current staff provided by MSPs represent additional capacity for 2025/26 and into 2026/27. HMRC faces highly variable demand throughout the year - this is about giving HMRC more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers. This complements its permanent workforce and enables it to scale capacity up and down as needed.

Due to the design of the contract, costs can only be confirmed retrospectively. Comparisons with permanent recruitment and surge staffing currently indicate MSP costs are comparable or better, based on expected outcomes. Overall the projected cost for 12 months was approximately £23m of resourcing spend.

Revenue and Customs: Staff
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Monday 20th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment HMRC has made of the long term operational need for a Managed Service Provider within the Customer Services Group beyond the current proof of value trial.

Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)

HMRC is using Managed Service Providers (MSP) as part of a balanced approach to help it manage peaks and troughs more effectively, drawing on practices already used across other Government Departments (OGDs). This will allow its permanent colleagues to focus their expertise where it’s most needed. HMRC know customers still need timely support while services continue to digitise, and the current 18‑month Proof of Value phase is providing HMRC with opportunities to learn from this approach, giving it more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers, and at good value for the taxpayer.

HMRC is working jointly with the PCS trade union on an evaluation of the MSP service. The evaluation considers service quality, customer outcomes, productivity and value for money, and will inform future decisions. No outcome is pre‑determined while the evaluation is ongoing.

HMRC’s evaluation will help them determine how they use MSPs to better serve customers. Any decision will be taken through normal business planning and Spending Review processes, taking account of evaluation findings, affordability and operational need.

This is not about replacing HMRC colleagues – no one will be made redundant as a result of this initiative and HMRC headcount is forecast to increase by the end of the Spending Review 2025 period. The current staff provided by MSPs represent additional capacity for 2025/26 and into 2026/27. HMRC faces highly variable demand throughout the year - this is about giving HMRC more flexibility to improve the service it gives customers. This complements its permanent workforce and enables it to scale capacity up and down as needed.

Due to the design of the contract, costs can only be confirmed retrospectively. Comparisons with permanent recruitment and surge staffing currently indicate MSP costs are comparable or better, based on expected outcomes. Overall the projected cost for 12 months was approximately £23m of resourcing spend.

Flags of Convenience
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Tuesday 21st April 2026

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, What her policy is on the use of vessels registered on Flags of Convenience by contractors delivering the Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s Civil Hydrography Programme.

Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)

The MCA’s UK CHP Survey Specification details the Civil Hydrography Programme (CHP)-specific requirements for conducting hydrographic surveys undertaken on behalf of the MCA, in order to deliver UK requirements and services. The Survey Specification is used in conjunction with the relevant Hydrographic Instruction in order to fully detail the requirement of the survey(s).

All vessels employed under the current CHP contracts are UK Flagged, and on the ‘White List’, a list of countries assessed by the International Maritime Organisation as properly implementing the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) 1978 (as amended) Convention.

Ferries: Minimum Wage
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Tuesday 21st April 2026

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent estimate her Department has made of the number of seafarers in the UK’s short sea international ferry sector that are paid an hourly wage that is (a) broadly equivalent to or (b) above the National Minimum Wage.

Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)

The Department has not made any such estimate. The Seafarers' Wages Act 2023 makes payment of the equivalent of National Minimum Wage a condition of port access for operators of services calling at a UK port at least 120 times a year. The Maritime and Coastguard Agency is responsible for enforcement of this legislation and conducts in-person engagement and robust inspection activities with ports and operators to ensure compliance and provide regulatory assurance.

Whilst the Department cannot give exact figures, an impact assessment was published for the Act, which makes some assumptions about the number of seafarers on board different vessel types per journey in order to estimate costs to businesses, but it does not make any estimates of the total number of seafarers that would be paid the National Minimum Wage equivalent (see https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62e2aa8ed3bf7f75af0923d5/seafarers-wages-impact-assessment.pdf ).

Shipping: Crew
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Tuesday 21st April 2026

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, With reference to the Seafarers in the UK Shipping Industry: 2025 statistics published on 25th February 2025, what assessment she has made of the sources of growth in seafarer employment in the UK shipping industry in 2024-25.

Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)

The Department remains committed to increasing the number of UK resident seafarer ratings. Work includes implementing the recommendations from the Ratings Review, modernising training and considering the findings of the recently published SMarT Review and Seafarer Projections Report.

The increased numbers of seafarers active at sea noted in the Seafarers in the UK Shipping Industry: 2025 statistics has been driven primarily by growth among Ratings and Uncertificated Officers. Officials will continue to review where there are opportunities to grow ratings careers.

Shipping: Crew
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Tuesday 21st April 2026

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to the Seafarers in the UK Shipping Industry: 2025 statistics published on 25 February 2025, what steps she is taking to increase the number of UK resident seafarer Ratings employed in the UK shipping industry.

Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)

The Department remains committed to increasing the number of UK resident seafarer ratings. Work includes implementing the recommendations from the Ratings Review, modernising training and considering the findings of the recently published SMarT Review and Seafarer Projections Report.

The increased numbers of seafarers active at sea noted in the Seafarers in the UK Shipping Industry: 2025 statistics has been driven primarily by growth among Ratings and Uncertificated Officers. Officials will continue to review where there are opportunities to grow ratings careers.

Shipping: Minimum Wage
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Tuesday 21st April 2026

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent discussion she has had with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency on the enforcement of the National Minimum Wage (Offshore Employment) (Amendment) Order 2020 for seafarers working (a) in UK territorial waters and (b) on vessels working between an offshore oil and gas installation and a UK port.

Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)

The Department for Transport maintains regular and ongoing engagement with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) through the Regulatory Compliance Investigations Team regarding the implementation, compliance, and enforcement of legislation relating to seafarer pay. This covers the Seafarers’ Wages Act 2023, the Seafarers’ Wages Regulations 2024, and the National Minimum Wage (Offshore Employment) (Amendment) Order 2020.This engagement has featured recent updates from the MCA to the Department on its enforcement approach and compliance activity undertaken so far, which have informed departmental oversight of how the legislation is being implemented across the sector, and how operators and harbour authorities are responding to their statutory responsibilities. The Department and the MCA also engage on enforcement activity covering seafarers working in UK territorial waters and, where applicable, on vessels operating between offshore oil and gas installations and UK ports. This ensures a consistent and effective enforcement framework across the relevant statutory regimes.

The Department for Business and Trade have recently published the Fair Work Agency Enforcement Policy Statement, confirming that it is responsible for enforcement of the National Minimum Wage, including the National Minimum Wage (Offshore Employment) (Amendment) Order 2020.

Ferries: Minimum Wage
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Tuesday 21st April 2026

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent discussions she has had with (a) the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, (b) shipowner representatives and (c) port owners on compliance with the Seafarers Wages Regulations 2024 amongst operators of ro-ro ferries from UK ports.

Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)

The Department for Transport maintains regular and ongoing engagement with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) through the Regulatory Compliance Investigations Team regarding the implementation, compliance, and enforcement of legislation relating to seafarer pay. This covers the Seafarers’ Wages Act 2023, the Seafarers’ Wages Regulations 2024, and the National Minimum Wage (Offshore Employment) (Amendment) Order 2020.This engagement has featured recent updates from the MCA to the Department on its enforcement approach and compliance activity undertaken so far, which have informed departmental oversight of how the legislation is being implemented across the sector, and how operators and harbour authorities are responding to their statutory responsibilities. The Department and the MCA also engage on enforcement activity covering seafarers working in UK territorial waters and, where applicable, on vessels operating between offshore oil and gas installations and UK ports. This ensures a consistent and effective enforcement framework across the relevant statutory regimes.

The Department for Business and Trade have recently published the Fair Work Agency Enforcement Policy Statement, confirming that it is responsible for enforcement of the National Minimum Wage, including the National Minimum Wage (Offshore Employment) (Amendment) Order 2020.



Early Day Motions
Monday 13th April

Mehran Raoof

16 signatures (Most recent: 27 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
That this House is alarmed that Mehran Raoof, a 70 year old British-Iranian labour rights activist, has been arbitrarily detained in Iran and convicted on national security charges after what Amnesty and others describe as a grossly unfair trial; is aware of recent reports from Evin Prison, where Mehran is …
Monday 13th April

Palestinian Nakba commemoration march

39 signatures (Most recent: 28 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
That this House notes that every year the Palestine Coalition organises a march in London on the anniversary of the Nakba and that this year the march falls on Saturday 16 May; expresses its strong concern that the Metropolitan Police has refused the Palestine movement its preferred route for the …
Tuesday 14th April

Health and Social Care

37 signatures (Most recent: 29 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, praying that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI, 2026, No. 202), dated 2 March 2026, a copy of which was laid before this House on 3 March 2026, be annulled.


Early Day Motions Signed
Tuesday 28th April
John McDonnell signed this EDM on Tuesday 28th April 2026

International Workers’ Memorial Day 2026

29 signatures (Most recent: 28 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: Mary Kelly Foy (Labour - City of Durham)
That this House marks International Workers’ Memorial Day 2026; remembers all those who have been killed, injured or made ill as a result of their work; sends solidarity to bereaved families, injured workers and all those living with work-related illness; recognises the vital role of trade unions, health and safety …
Thursday 23rd April
John McDonnell signed this EDM as a sponsor on Monday 27th April 2026

Seafarers in the Strait of Hormuz

32 signatures (Most recent: 28 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: Ian Byrne (Labour - Liverpool West Derby)
That this House notes with deep concern reports that around 20,000 civilian seafarers are currently stranded on vessels in and around the Strait of Hormuz due to escalating regional conflict; recognises that these workers, who play a vital role in maintaining global supply chains, including the movement of food and …
Thursday 16th April
John McDonnell signed this EDM on Monday 27th April 2026

Israel’s treatment of Palestinian prisoners

44 signatures (Most recent: 28 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: Andy McDonald (Labour - Middlesbrough and Thornaby East)
That this House expresses grave concern about reports of widespread and systematic torture of Palestinians detained and imprisoned by Israel, including children; notes with alarm that, since 2023, the situation has deteriorated significantly, with evidence of intensifying abuses, including beatings, sexual violence, starvation and lethal mistreatment, leading to unprecedented numbers …
Tuesday 14th April
John McDonnell signed this EDM on Tuesday 21st April 2026

Bermuda and oil industry tax

24 signatures (Most recent: 28 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: Clive Lewis (Labour - Norwich South)
That this House notes recent research showing that the British Overseas Territory of Bermuda is a major hub for oil industry tax avoidance, and hosts the headquarters of three of the world’s top ten oil drilling contractors, four of the world’s ten biggest oil tanker companies, Shell and Chevron offices, …
Tuesday 21st April
John McDonnell signed this EDM as a sponsor on Tuesday 21st April 2026

Planned reductions to BBC staff

26 signatures (Most recent: 28 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: Rebecca Long Bailey (Labour - Salford)
That this House expresses concerns at the BBC’s plans to cut between 1,800 and 2,000 jobs, about one in 10, across various departments; notes that BBC management has also outlined spending reductions, including on travel, attending external events, and commissioning freelances, in addition to cutting posts; further notes the latest …
Monday 13th April
John McDonnell signed this EDM on Thursday 16th April 2026

Universal Credit health for under-22s

27 signatures (Most recent: 28 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: Neil Duncan-Jordan (Labour - Poole)
That this House expresses grave concern at the proposal to delay access to the Universal Credit health element for young disabled people under 22; notes the absence of evidence that reducing benefit income or tightening eligibility increases participation in employment, education or training; recognises evidence, including the Department for Work …
Thursday 26th March
John McDonnell signed this EDM as a sponsor on Monday 13th April 2026

Statutory rights for trade union future-proofing jobs representatives

12 signatures (Most recent: 22 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: Carla Denyer (Green Party - Bristol Central)
That this House recognises that the UK is entering a period of significant industrial change, driven by the need to address the climate, nature and cost of living crises; acknowledges that these changes will have repercussions for many workplaces, particularly the oil and gas sector and heavy industry; calls for …
Tuesday 17th March
John McDonnell signed this EDM on Monday 13th April 2026

Strike action by UCU at Scottish universities

14 signatures (Most recent: 13 Apr 2026)
Tabled by: Scott Arthur (Labour - Edinburgh South West)
That this House notes with concern the ongoing industrial action by University and College Union members across key Scottish universities, undertaken in response to long-standing disputes over pay, workload, job security and the erosion of working conditions; recognises that university staff have faced years of below-inflation pay settlements, increasing casualisation, …



John McDonnell mentioned

Live Transcript

Note: Cited speaker in live transcript data may not always be accurate. Check video link to confirm.

13 Apr 2026, 4:37 p.m. - House of Commons
" John McDonnell. >> John McDonnell. >> I think I actually think. >> The House is at one with the Prime Minister. With regard to the "
Rt Hon John McDonnell MP (Hayes and Harlington, Labour) - View Video - View Transcript
14 Apr 2026, 5:30 p.m. - House of Commons
"this definition stays as it is. Thank you. John McDonnell. "
Jess Asato MP (Lowestoft, Labour) - View Video - View Transcript
22 Apr 2026, 1:39 p.m. - House of Commons
" John McDonnell can I. chair of the PCCs parliamentary trade union group. The Minister just made said there was an offer from capita. It shouldn't be an "
Rt Hon John McDonnell MP (Hayes and Harlington, Labour) - View Video - View Transcript
22 Apr 2026, 2:04 p.m. - House of Commons
"issue. Point of order. John McDonnell. "
Judith Cummins MP (Bradford South, Labour) - View Video - View Transcript
20 Apr 2026, 4:14 p.m. - House of Commons
" John McDonnell. >> Can I say. >> On this side of the house, at. "
Rt Hon John McDonnell MP (Hayes and Harlington, Labour) - View Video - View Transcript


Parliamentary Debates
Crime and Policing Bill
140 speeches (28,998 words)
Consideration of Lords amendments
Tuesday 14th April 2026 - Commons Chamber
Home Office
Mentions:
1: Chris Hinchliff (Lab - North East Hertfordshire) Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) pointed out, this may place substantial political - Link to Speech
2: Sarah Jones (Lab - Croydon West) Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), who talked about his experience with the - Link to Speech
3: Apsana Begum (Lab - Poplar and Limehouse) Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), who actually was interviewed under caution - Link to Speech

Hidden Credit Liabilities: Role of the FCA
28 speeches (12,895 words)
Tuesday 14th April 2026 - Westminster Hall
HM Treasury
Mentions:
1: Jim Shannon (DUP - Strangford) Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), who is a doughty champion for his constituents, and - Link to Speech
2: Neil Duncan-Jordan (Lab - Poole) Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) for securing this debate on an issue that - Link to Speech
3: Bambos Charalambous (Lab - Southgate and Wood Green) Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) on securing this very important debate and - Link to Speech
4: Joe Morris (Lab - Hexham) Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) on securing such an important and timely - Link to Speech
5: Mark Garnier (Con - Wyre Forest) Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) on bringing this incredibly important subject up for - Link to Speech

Courts and Tribunals Bill (Fourth sitting)
166 speeches (32,665 words)
Tuesday 14th April 2026 - Public Bill Committees
Ministry of Justice
Mentions:
1: Yasmin Qureshi (Lab - Bolton South and Walkden) Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell). - Link to Speech