Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(2 days, 20 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words and pass on my sympathies in relation to his grandparents. Any family in this country who has lived through the journey of dementia and experienced the social care system will know that we should not accept the status quo. The failure of this House to fix social care through the decades does not reflect well on any party. We will fix it. We will create a national care service. In laying out the path to that national care service, I can give him my word as the Labour and Co-operative MP for Makerfield that co-operative principles will be at the heart of the new national care service.
Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)
I thank you, Mr Speaker, and the Prime Minister for the words about Sir David Amess. We on this side of the House miss him dearly, as do his family. He was a fellow Essex MP and a very good friend to me and to so many across this House, and I know that he is still very much loved by his constituents in Southend.
The Prime Minister has had a busy few weeks: tying himself in knots explaining why national security should not come at the expense of social security, and bumbling into a row—still ongoing—about Manchester City. I do not think that his carefully worded answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew) will suffice—it does not sound like that one is going away. He also spent the last 48 hours trying to unsay that Russia influenced the 2016 referendum when we all heard him say it. Does he ever get tired of putting his foot in his mouth?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend puts her points very powerfully. High streets across the country, including in Southall, have for too long been a symbol of the decline of our towns, and I am determined to do something about it. Immediately, I cut business rates for pubs, clubs and music venues by 20%, working with the Chancellor when I came into office. We are bringing forward a high streets strategy later this year. We have announced a £210 million package for councils to reopen empty buildings. I will look at the specifics on the police hub. This issue should be one that unites this House and one where we can work together.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
Thank you, Mr Speaker—[Hon. Members: “More!] They will be getting more. Mr Speaker, can I join you, the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in praising the late Sir David Amess and sending our condolences to his family? He was a man who was respected across this House and who had friends across this House.
When the Prime Minister announced cross-party talks on social care over the summer, I was delighted and immediately accepted because getting this right really matters. He said then that to build a lasting solution on funding care, we were going to have to listen to each other and find common ground. He said that when he tried before, back in 2009, his mistake had been leaving it too close to an election. Does he still think that now? If we are to find the common ground well before the next election, will he tell us when the next round of cross-party talks will be?
The Prime Minister
Can I start just by recognising, with the charges that have been laid against the individual responsible for the murder of Ann Widdecombe, and indeed for also making threats against the hon. Member, that it has been a hard time for him and his family? There is a lot we disagree on, but I defend his right to say it, and I will work hard to secure his safety and that of every Member of this House. We will involve all sides in the Lovegrove review that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has established.
On the issues related to Iran, obviously we have seen the issues at RAF Fairford recently. They have been dealt with in the right way and with the utmost seriousness by the police and security services. The key point is that, of course, we do need to get boat crossings down. I hope the hon. Member would recognise that they are coming down and removals are up. There is much more to be done, but there is clearly progress in the right direction.
Mr Speaker
I do not think we are going to get through the list. We really are going to have to try to speed up some of the answers.
Natasha Irons (Croydon East) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
I will indeed, and I remember the meeting very well. I speak as someone whose family has been affected by breast cancer. I look forward to meeting the group again, perhaps with the hon. Gentleman and with other colleagues on all sides of the House.
Peter Dowd (Bootle) (Lab)
In recent weeks, the Argentine Government have increased their economic aggression towards the Falkland Islands. Given that, will the Prime Minister update the House on the actions that the Government are taking in response to that belligerence?
International Update
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(4 days, 20 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister (Andy Burnham)
With permission, I wish to make a statement on the United Nations General Assembly and related international events that have occurred since the House last met.
Before I do so, let me first welcome my hon. Friend the new Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Sagal Abdi-Wali) to her place. What a journey, from child refugee to Parliament, and what a country—that this story of hope could happen here. I know my hon. Friend will enhance this House in so many ways, and I look forward to working with her.
I took a clear message to the United Nations: after a decade of turbulence, Britain is back and can be relied upon as a consistent and stable partner in an uncertain world, always upholding the shared values set out in the UN charter, rejecting aggression wherever we see it, and always steadfast in our support for Ukraine, as I assured President Zelensky at our meeting in New York.
In the three weeks since that meeting, Russian strikes have intensified even further, with more attacks on civilians: on apartment blocks housing innocent families; on buses carrying innocent children. When I spoke to President Zelensky on Saturday, he described the step change from Russia, including daylight attacks intended to break the will of Ukraine and ours. I can tell you, Mr Speaker, that that will never happen. In recent days, we have announced new funding to help Ukraine get through its fifth winter under Russian bombardment and a new sanctions package so that over 90% of Russia’s oil-producing capacity is now covered by UK sanctions.
The quickest way to get diesel back on to world markets without rewarding the aggressor is an energy ceasefire, with both sides stopping their attacks. I raised this with President Trump in New York. It is what Ukraine wants to see, so I welcome President Trump’s announcement yesterday of a reciprocal energy ceasefire. President Zelensky has assured me that Ukraine would immediately implement it when a start date is confirmed, and I will be discussing this further with him in the coming days.
NATO is a defensive alliance. We do not seek confrontation, but our resolve to defend our allies and ourselves is absolute, and I was clear in all of my meetings, including with the NATO Secretary-General in Oxfordshire, that we will meet our NATO commitments in full.
We know that Russia is conducting a campaign of hybrid attacks and sabotage across Europe. In Berlin last week, Chancellor Merz and I agreed a new partnership to tackle these hybrid threats. We must be clear-eyed about attempts to destabilise our democracies. It is why, in my speech to the UN General Assembly, I confirmed our commitment to establish a new centre for information defence, as recommended by the Foreign Affairs Select Committee. More broadly, this is a moment to deepen collaboration with our partners, which is why in Berlin I indicated Britain’s openness to Germany joining the global combat air programme alongside Italy and Japan.
In my meeting with President Trump, we discussed the situation in the middle east. I confirmed Britain’s decision to send air defence and a Voyager aircraft to Saudi Arabia to provide air-to-air refuelling support. I can confirm today that it has already completed 14 operational missions. This support is needed to protect civilians. I condemn the appalling attacks on the King Khalid International airport. We will continue to stand with Saudi Arabia against the Houthis.
Since UNGA, we have been in close contact with the US about protective security at our shared bases. I thank our police and military personnel for their swift response to the incidents at RAF Fairford and RAF Molesworth. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will update the House on the incident at RAF Fairford, but I can confirm our assessment that it is highly likely to have been co-ordinated in Iran, almost certainly directed by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. We will not tolerate these threats on our soil. We will crack down on Iran’s use of criminal networks, using our full range of powers to target them and their funding streams, and we will bring further sanctions to restrict the capacity of Iran and the IRGC to do us harm.
In my meeting with the President, I also raised the Falkland Islands and the clear and declared will of the islanders to remain British. I emphasised that point in my speech to the General Assembly and that we will also always do whatever it takes to uphold their will.
In New York, I also had a positive meeting with the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, about the forthcoming UK-EU summit. I can confirm to the House today that it will take place in Brussels on 20 November. This summit presents an opportunity to make progress on two crucial issues: boosting UK growth and controlling illegal immigration. On the table is a trade deal on food and drink products, a deal on emissions trading, progress towards linking our energy systems, a new youth experience scheme, and deeper co-operation on immigration.
This summit presents an opportunity to make progress on two crucial issues: boosting UK growth and controlling illegal immigration. On the table is a trade deal on food and drink products, a deal on emissions trading, progress towards linking our energy systems, a new youth experience scheme and deeper co-operation on immigration. The summit will also be an opportunity to raise our concerns about “Made in Europe”, and it is clear to me that there is an opportunity to make progress in all of these areas. Together, these deals will add the equivalent of over £10 billion per year to the UK economy by 2040, with the potential to add significantly more. We should not turn our backs on this opportunity, and I hope Members from all sides of this House will get behind the Government’s efforts to land a positive outcome. It is a chance to cut costs and bureaucracy for sectors like farming.
At present, entire truckloads of plants or fresh produce can be destroyed because of a single missing stamp or a minor paperwork delay. Fresh meat and fish spoil while waiting in trucks, and tonnes of exports have to be written off. Our largest food export, Scottish salmon, faces a 100% rate of document checks at the border, costing us around £100 million in lost exports. British burgers and other fresh meat products cannot be sold in the EU. Seed potatoes from Scotland and shellfish from Wales are banned. This is having a real impact on businesses, and the agreement on the table could reverse some of that damage. For farmers and food producers, it would lift a burden that can reach £1,400 on a single shipment. For our small businesses, it would mean no more export health certificates, which can cost up to £200 each time. For households, it would ease the pressure on prices in the supermarket. It could help lower energy costs for households and businesses alike.
In Northern Ireland, the proposed energy deal could cut wholesale energy costs by 20%. On immigration, we could link up our law enforcement efforts once again, sharing more data and criminal records of foreign nationals, as well as ensuring faster electronic evidence from the phones of those behind the gangs. It is in Britain’s interests to secure a deal along these lines, and I will work hard over the next five weeks to achieve that. I believe that our chances of doing so will be enhanced by being open to a discussion about our relationship with the EU in the longer term. If we are serious about promoting growth, controlling immigration, upholding our values and security, it is a conversation that we must have. Sticking with the status quo is not good enough for Britain. Worse, it would be a major dereliction of duty to turn away. We need to take a calm, clear-eyed, rational look at the world as it is today, to consider what is best for our country.
Our immediate priority is securing a successful outcome at the summit, and I believe we should then set up a serious dialogue about the different options for our relationship in the long term. At every stage, the British public will be the boss, and I am clear that public opinion currently supports a pragmatic approach, like the one I am suggesting, but if we go into this further phase, we will proceed with care and complete transparency. This is the leadership we need to draw a line under a decade of drift and division, and to take the country forward.
Beyond Europe, a confident Britain is ready to play our part on the global stage as we take up the presidency of the G20 in 2027. I confirmed in New York that we will place artificial intelligence centre stage in our presidency, to capture the incredible opportunities it presents while guarding against the risks. Leading voices like the president of Microsoft are saying Britain is the world leader on AI safety, so we are well placed to take on this role, and to work towards agreeing a single set of global principles and standards on AI, in our G20 presidency year.
The message to the world is clear: Britain is back. On so many fronts, we are playing our part and looking confidently to the future. We are leading again, so our country can hope again. I commend this statement to the House.
The Prime Minister
I can indeed give those assurances to my right hon. Friend, the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee. I thank her for the work that she has done in making that recommendation. She is right to say that the wrong approach was taken in the past. The Intelligence and Security Committee report in 2020 said that the last Government failed to seek evidence of any potential interference in our democratic processes. We will not make the same mistakes in the next decade as were made in the last. The new national centre for information defence is about putting Britain in a strong place to face the challenges in a difficult world, and that is what we will do.
Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
Will the Prime Minister forgive me if I put some words in his mouth? Does he think this is a reasonable statement: “Look, I have been elected by my MPs to serve a full term of government. I am going to get on with bread-and-butter issues, such as the care system, pensions and asylum. Of course, we like a good, close relationship with our partners on security in Europe, but”—this is the Prime Minister speaking—“I say this to the people: I am very wary about reopening the whole Brexit wars. There were years of harrowing negotiations and an even worse deal. I give an absolute commitment that I will not seek to join the EU unless there is a general election first and I offer the British people a full referendum”?
The Prime Minister
May I say to the Father of the House that I stand by every single one of those words? I am not reopening the referendum; I respect the referendum result, as I just said a moment ago. What I will do is take a pragmatic approach when I can boost growth in the British economy and when I can increase co-operation to get a grip on boat crossings across the channel. I will do those things where I believe they can be in the country’s best interests. The deal that I have inherited coming into office represents an opportunity to secure progress on both those things. The case I am putting to the House this afternoon is that it is a dereliction of duty for any Member to turn away from that possibility, when we can support the food industry, we can support farmers, and we can get Britain growing more strongly again. Our responsibility in this House is to serve this country’s best interests, and that is what I will do.
Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement and in particular his efforts to assist our allies, to forge closer ties and to help de-escalate the situation in the middle east. It is clear that President Trump’s efforts to lift sanctions on Russian diesel and then buy it are a real kick in the teeth for our Ukrainian friends and will allow Vladimir Putin to further fuel his deadly war machine. Nations such as India, which was slapped with tariffs for buying Russian fuel, will no doubt decry that move and be left bemused by these haphazard, hypocritical policies that prevent our long-term strategic aims from being achieved.
However, there have also been reports that United States officials have been contacting European counterparts to stop Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries, and are also limiting the supply of weapons and intelligence. Has the Prime Minister had any such discussions with our US or European allies about why we need to continue to support our Ukrainian friends?
The Prime Minister
I will always support our Ukrainian friends, and I can say to my hon. Friend that I called President Zelensky on Saturday afternoon precisely because I recognised that he was in the middle of a very difficult 24 hours. I can also say to the House that the Chancellor of the Exchequer spoke to the United States Treasury Secretary at around the same time, and talked about the importance of an energy ceasefire. It was good to see that proposal emerge from the President yesterday. It is the best possible outcome in the circumstances that we are in: it will get fuel flowing into the market as well as protecting Ukraine throughout the winter ahead of us, and we will continue to make the case for it.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
Following the loss of his father, Roy, may I start by offering the Prime Minister’s family my deepest sympathies? I am sure that we were all moved by his words about his dad, and his determination to fix social care and tackle the devastating impact of dementia on sufferers and their families. I hope that we can work across this House to make that happen.
Let me now turn to the Prime Minister’s words about Europe. His predecessors turned a blind eye to the disastrous consequences of the Conservatives’ Brexit deal, so it was welcome to hear him recognise that damage today. We on these Liberal Democrat Benches have consistently argued that their Brexit deal has made us all poorer, weaker and less safe, so I am glad that the Prime Minister has arrived at the same conclusion, but now it is time to do something about it.
The test of the Prime Minister’s ambition is straightforward, if he wants growth and if he wants to cut the cost of living. Will he drop Labour’s red lines now, and open negotiations on joining the single market and a customs union? It would be a real dereliction of duty to refuse now to fix a deal that we know is not working. Every day, every week, every month of delay means more unnecessary costs for British businesses, more pointless red tape, more pain for British families. Being outside negotiations on AI safety, “Made in Europe” regulations and migration agreements does this country real harm. Fixing our relationship with Europe is more important now than ever, especially at a time when President Trump is waging a trade war with Canada while signing a new trade deal with Putin. Never before have we seen a US President so hostile to the UK and our allies, and so friendly to our adversaries. We cannot afford to fudge or dodge on this issue, and especially on Ukraine, so will the Minister bring together a coalition of the willing behind a joint statement condemning Trump’s diesel deal with Russia and calling on him to cancel it?
Let me finally refer to the Prime Minister’s comments about Russian interference in the Brexit referendum. That took courage, after the Conservatives had spent so long suppressing the evidence. Will the Prime Minister now present it to the House in full, alongside any evidence of interference in other UK votes, so that we can understand the threat and make it a national security priority to protect our democracy from attacks such as that?
Mr Speaker
Order. I just remind Members to please address the Chair, so we do not get into attacks on each other.
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is right to raise the loss of immigration control that has come with the inability to access data across the European Union. It is something that the people who promoted this idea need to take on board and be held to account for, because the reality is that we are in a weaker position when it comes to controlling immigration than we were just over 10 years ago. It is really important, as we go into this next phase, that those on all sides of the House support the British position in this negotiation. Is any Member of this House truly saying to me this afternoon that they do not want to have access again to that European immigration information? If they are saying that, they need to be honest about it.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mark Ferguson
It would not be a first outing at the Dispatch Box without a contribution from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), so I welcome his question. We will, of course, consider that in the response to the EIC.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
The Ethics and Integrity Commission’s report rightly argues that our transparency rules are stuck in the past. Influence is being exerted in ways that just did not exist a few years ago. There are Members of this House earning more than their salary as an MP for posts on X—a platform that actively incentivises divisive content. Indeed, the Register of Members’ Financial Interests shows that the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) has declared earnings of over £108,000 since his election to this place. Does the Minister agree that our current laws on what constitutes lobbying are too narrow, and that when an MP is financially rewarded by an algorithm for their political output, it crosses the line into financial influence? Will he update lobbying and ethics rules to tackle that loophole?
Mark Ferguson
We will, of course, consider that as part of the response to the EIC. I take very seriously, as I am sure Members across the House do, the issues of outside earnings by Members, and particularly potential undue influence. With regard to X, I share the hon. Lady’s concerns; personally, I do not use it.
Mr Speaker
I presume the hon. Lady let the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) know that she was going to mention him.
Mr Falconer
My hon. Friend is right to highlight the shared challenges that we face with the European Union, including the very rapid developments in artificial intelligence. I am proud to sit next to my right hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Kanishka Narayan), the first AI Minister to attend Cabinet—here, and indeed anywhere—and I know that he will be answering some questions during this session. This is clearly a matter of real interest and concern, as my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah) says, and we are working at pace to address it.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)
I welcome the Minister to his post. I very much look forward to him updating the House on his negotiating mandate and his conversations with the European trade commissioner. Earlier this summer, the Prime Minister said that it would be wrong to rerun divisive arguments about rejoining the EU, but, soon after, the Minister refused to rule out rejoin being an option in the next Labour manifesto. Will he tell the House: will Labour rule out rejoin featuring in its next manifesto? [Interruption.]
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Alex Davies-Jones
I am happy to reiterate that commitment at the Dispatch Box today. I pay tribute to the Killed Women campaign, which has fought long and hard to secure this change. We will introduce a new 25-year starting point for domestic murders applying to anyone who murders their current or former intimate partner, and we will bring forward the change as soon as parliamentary time allows.
Alex Davies-Jones
Deportations of those who commit crimes in this country are up significantly under this Government—we are taking that direct action. I would say to the hon. Lady that anyone who commits crimes against women and girls should expect the full force of the law, and they will face it. We are seeking to educate everyone on what is acceptable in our country, because those are our British values.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
Last month, BBC news reported on a woman who discovered only by fluke that the man she was in a relationship with was a registered sex offender, after he was summoned to court over an assault charge under a different name. While the law allows police to block a sex offender’s request to change their name, it does not require them to. Women, campaigners and safeguarding groups all say that this is not good enough. Will the Minister work with Home Office colleagues to close this loophole, so that sex offenders are prevented by default from changing their name and police are required to individually approve each request?
Bridget Phillipson
As my hon. Friend the Minister set out earlier, this Government published our draft Conversion Practices Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny in June, and we will shortly confirm the members of the Joint Committee. It is an incredibly important piece of legislation and a safeguard for LGBT people. I look forward to working with all Members of this House on this important legislation to ensure that a ban is effective in targeting these abusive and harmful practices that have no place in modern Britain.
Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)
Following last night’s vote on puberty blockers, will the right hon. Lady set out exactly what her red lines are when it comes to experimenting on children, and at what age she thinks children are able to make life-changing decisions about their gender?
Bridget Phillipson
My hon. Friend raises an extremely important point ahead of World Suicide Prevention Day. One life lost to suicide is one life too many, and all of us across this House have a responsibility to make sure people know that there is always support available, there is always someone to talk to, and there is always help there. My hon. Friend has raised the issue of neurodiversity and autism, and I would be happy to discuss that further with her as we bring forward an updated suicide prevention plan.
Mr Speaker
I welcome the President and the Secretary General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, who are in the Gallery today.
Lillian Jones
May I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s comments about 9/11, and about our brave police officer who lost his life?
My home town of Kilmarnock was once the industrial powerhouse of Ayrshire, but after decades of decline and deindustrialisation, it has never fully recovered. I welcome the Prime Minister’s determination to revive our high streets and his focus on doing so, and I extend a warm invitation to him to visit the town at any time.
Hope has been rekindled in Kilmarnock thanks to the Government’s £20 million Pride in Place investment. We are seeing the creation of the first Kilmarnock town centre masterplan for over 50 years, led by the community, setting an achievable vision for a successful future, and we want to build on that momentum. Will the Prime Minister champion a new partnership between Kilmarnock, my home town, Manchester and—
The Prime Minister
It does my heart good to hear my hon. Friend talk about rising hope in Kilmarnock and the masterplan for the town, backed by the Government with the Pride in Place funding—and yes, I can assure her that No. 10 North is as much at the service of her constituency as it is at the service of any constituency in the House. We will turn what is happening in Kilmarnock into real momentum for the town.
Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)
After last week’s session, the country was thrown into confusion over whether the Prime Minister was or was not going to fund 3% for defence by 2030. After today he will have another five weeks off PMQs, but there are some serious threats to national security that cannot wait. His Chancellor resigned as Defence Secretary because the Labour Government would not increase defence spending to 3% by 2030. Does the Prime Minister think that he was right to quit?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Lady mentions leadership. Let me tell her and the whole House where Britain is showing leadership. There have been Conservative politicians at this Dispatch Box—Labour politicians, too—for decades who have talked about the importance of the two-state solution between Israel and Palestine. Words from any politician about a two-state solution will be only words if they are not backed with action. Leadership is about taking action where there is injustice, where we need to correct unfairness: people being driven out of their homes, losing their homes, being intimidated in their daily lives. I credit the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), who yesterday applauded the action that this Government are taking.
In this difficult and dangerous world, Britain has to stand for something. Britain has to show leadership. Britain has to stand for fairness against injustice. [Interruption.] Where people are being bullied out of their homes and intimidated, we will always stand with the underdog and take what action we can to support them. That is leadership on the world stage; Britain being true to what it has always been about. That is what the British people expect of us and that is what this Government will do.
Mr Speaker
Mr Bacon, I do not need advice from you. I am not responsible for the answers. The Prime Minister answers the questions. Do not look to me, please.
Sarah Hall (Warrington South) (Lab/Co-op)
The Prime Minister
I am a more regular visitor to my hon. Friend’s constituency than she might realise, constantly nipping in and out for various reasons, so I know Warrington well. I believe it is a success story, actually; something of a jewel in the north-west crown. It is a growing town—almost a city, given how successful it has been in recent times—but it does need new infrastructure. I would like to see a remodelled Warrington Bank Quay, with high-quality east-west, north-south connectivity running through it. When it comes to leisure—Mr Speaker, you know this as much as anyone in the House and perhaps more than anyone—this is a Prime Minister who will back grassroots sport to the hilt. I assure my hon. Friend that I am happy to talk to her about the leisure centre she mentioned.
Mr Speaker
And watching Warrington Wolves, I hope. I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s opening remarks, not least about the 25th anniversary of the horrific terror attacks of 9/11. I welcome the Government finally banning imports from illegal Israeli settlements, something Keir Starmer should have done a long time ago. On Back British Farming Day, can I also celebrate British farmers? I hope the Prime Minister will do more than that and end the family farm tax.
Last week I asked about North Devon’s maternity unit, which is still closed. This week I have to raise Musgrove Park hospital, where the Prime Minister’s Labour colleague Baroness Amos found the “most challenging” maternity estate in the whole country. She described “leaking roofs”, a ceiling propped up by poles and room temperatures that put newborn babies at risk. No mother should have to give birth in such circumstances. Does the Prime Minister agree that Musgrove Park cannot wait until 2033 for work to start on a new maternity unit? Will he offer a meeting to local MPs, so we can move it forward? And will he make fixing the maternity scandal across our country a top priority of his Government?
The Prime Minister
On this issue, I will agree to the hon. Gentleman’s request for a meeting. As announcements this week have shown, I believe that political reform always benefits from the highest degree of consensus, so I give him that assurance here and now.
Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)
Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)
Despite long and historic disagreements between successive UK Governments and Israel, it has remained a steadfast ally in counter-terrorist efforts to keep our people safe in this country. We are now embarked, it seems, on a full diplomatic dispute with Israel and tit-for-tat expulsions of diplomats. What advice was the Foreign Office giving Ministers on this matter, and what advice were the security services giving about our national security interest before this decision was taken?
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
I hope that when we return after the conference recess, we will be able to speed up questions and answers, in order to get more Members in.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Kinnock
I think it is fair to say that Plaid Cymru Ministers are still finding their feet. I am hugely proud of what our new Labour Prime Minister has achieved for Wales in his first six weeks—it really shows what a leader can do when they roll up their sleeves, listen to our people and communities, and deliver on their priorities. The Prime Minister’s visit to Wales and his commitment to reindustrialising our communities comes after a summer of announcements that will benefit communities across Wales—real action delivering for people right here and now.
Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)
I welcome the right hon. Gentleman to his place and wish him and his team well in this important role. As a former Health Minister working on the NHS in England for the past two years, he will know the challenge of tackling hospital waiting times in the face of rising corridor care. As I think we have heard from the Secretary of State, the time for devolving and forgetting has long since passed, and all nations in our precious Union need fair treatment. Will the Secretary of State do more than simply watch from the sidelines—like his predecessor, sadly—and instead take action for the people of Wales, who have been waiting far too long for proper care under devolution?
Stephen Kinnock
Just to be clear, this is not about staying out of the issue; it is about respecting the devolution settlement, but being prepared to work constructively where we can in partnership with the Welsh Government. The hon. Lady will be aware that health is devolved and, as such, Welsh Government Ministers have powers under the Inquiries Act 2005 to initiate statutory inquiries into devolved areas. Given the clear lines of responsibility and accountability between the Welsh Government and the devolved health service in Wales, I do not feel it would be appropriate for the UK Government to intervene in this matter.
David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)
I welcome the new Secretary of State to his place. Many of my constituents are reliant on cross-border healthcare, particularly in Hereford hospital. Indeed, many of them will end up stuck in Hereford hospital because we do not have enough community hospital beds in Powys. Powys teaching health board acknowledges that it needs 400 beds, but we only have 148, and it is considering cutting that number further. Can he please outline what are his priorities for fixing cross-border healthcare issues?
Stephen Kinnock
I absolutely agree with the sentiment of the hon. Member’s question. Let us look at what the Welsh Labour Government delivered: breakfast clubs offering free, healthy breakfasts for children in primary schools; baby bundles; more than 50 million meals served since the introduction of universal primary free school meals; an expanded childcare offer; free prescriptions; and hospital parking to help with family finances. That is the difference a Labour Government make.
Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)
In the past 100 days, we have all witnessed the Plaid Welsh Government in Cardiff Bay having failed to publish costings and properly explain how their flagship childcare policy will work. Perhaps Plaid just wants higher taxes and higher hand-outs, like the welfare party that is Labour sitting across from us. Does the Secretary of State agree that hard-working families deserve to know whether those plans will mean higher taxes? What discussions have occurred with the Welsh Government to ensure that those election commitments are properly delivered for struggling families?
The Prime Minister
May I start by paying tribute to my right hon. Friend for everything she has done to stand up for her constituents, but more so for Wales, particularly in her role as Secretary of State for Wales? I understand the point she is making: big cities outside London, particularly a capital city, face extra pressure that is not faced by other police forces. We are reviewing the funding formula as part of a wider programme of police reform. I would be happy to engage with her on that very issue as part of the review. We have ensured that forces, including South Wales police, are receiving a boost in their funding, but I understand the position of cities that are, if you like, the focal point that many people travel towards and the extra pressure that that results in. I know that from my previous job, and that is why I will pay very close attention to what she is saying.
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend and pay tribute to his campaign on this issue. I was talking about getting an innovation-led economy going in all parts of the country, and that applies to research, including into life sciences. I strongly believe that we must address all barriers to high-quality research in the life sciences. I am happy to look at my hon. Friend’s amendments, and I will ask a Health Minister to meet him to discuss them. Of course, any changes must be evidence-based and proportionate and must maintain our safeguards.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
The Prime Minister said yesterday that Brexit ushered in
“a decade of low growth and stalled regeneration.”—[Official Report, 1 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 27.]
He is right. Our economy is stuck in this mess thanks to the Conservatives—and the leader of Reform UK—and their terrible Brexit deal. Unless we grow the economy, there is no way that we can end the cost of living crisis or cut the cost of borrowing for the Government. The answer is staring the Prime Minister in the face: join the single market, get a new deal with Europe, and cut costs for families, businesses and Government. It is the bold step our country desperately needs. Will the Prime Minister take it?
The Prime Minister
We certainly will do that. I am in no doubt over the importance of good transport connectivity to young people’s life chances, and I will ask No. 10 North to make contact with my hon. Friend so that we can get that scheme back on track. More broadly, we do need to change the way we support young people, and I have already announced a change to education so that we have a technical path for young people from 14—so that we give young people a path towards good T-levels, BTECs, work placements and degree apprenticeships and we support them with travel costs, which is something that I did in Greater Manchester. Bringing back hope very much starts with our young people—give them a clear path from school towards a good job. That is something that the current education system that was put in place by Michael Gove has sadly failed to do.
Mr Speaker
May I say to the Prime Minister that I admire his answering questions in detail, but my problem is I am not going to get through the list, and then we will both be in trouble with Back Benchers?
The Prime Minister
It is about getting a balance, isn’t it? Yes, we need to protect green belt where we can, but we also need to build the homes that people need, and it is about striking a balance. In Greater Manchester, I always took a brownfield-first approach, and that is what I will do. I have asked the Chancellor to work with my Cabinet colleagues to release more public land so that we can build more homes on brownfield land, but I understand the concerns that the hon. Member is raising. I will ask the Housing Minister to meet him, to see if we can further build some common cause, but there is a balance to be struck. I say to Conservative Members that it is important that they do not turn their face away from building the new homes this country needs.
Kim Leadbeater (Spen Valley) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
That is exactly what I mean when I talk about supporting an industrial transition so that we can reindustrialise Scotland and other parts of the country. It must be done in a pragmatic way so that we can make the transition work rather than being too ideological about it, as other parties are, so I will work with the hon. Gentleman. I intend to visit Scotland soon to look in detail at the issues in the Aberdeen community, because I know that people have struggled with the impact of transition. Let us see what we can do to build common cause, and let us also look at Grangemouth, which could be the home of sustainable aviation fuel. I am interested in making progress on all those issues, and I will work with the hon. Gentleman on that.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
I congratulate the Prime Minister on his first Prime Minister’s questions; this is my first Prime Minister’s question too.
I want to declare an interest: I chair the all-party parliamentary group on sexual and reproductive health in the UK. The campaign for lifelong sex education that I launched with Cindy Gallop has received a tremendous response and support from many, including professionals in occupational health, medicine, nursing, public health and academia, the National Education Union and the police. I have discovered that the shame, guilt and embarrassment around talking about sex—and body parts like penis and vagina—are even leading to late diagnoses of health conditions including illnesses such as cancer for many people in my South Derbyshire constituency and across the country. I have discussed that with the Eve Appeal and with my constituent Louise Clarke, a GP who specialises in cancer of the vulva; they are really great for my campaign. As September is Gynaecological Cancer Awareness Month, and as the summer of sex comes to a close, will the Prime Minister agree to meet me to talk about the campaign?
Rewiring the State
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The First Secretary of State (Louise Haigh)
With your permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the work of the newly formed Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the change it will bring.
On the steps of Downing Street six weeks ago, the Prime Minister set out the priorities that will guide this Government. He was clear that 40 years of overly centralised decision making and over-privatisation have stripped power and resources away from communities in every nation and region of this country; that public control over the things that matter so much to people’s lives has been systematically eroded and become a barrier to businesses wanting to start and grow; and that a broken economic and political model has cost good jobs and opportunities in many parts of the country, while delivering sky-high prices in exchange for poorer customer services.
The Prime Minister was clear that this Government will be the circuit breaker that our country needs: a Government who will take power from Westminster and Whitehall, and put it in the hands of the communities who are best placed to use it; who will rewire Britain, so that our politics and our economy work for every person and every place. On a bedrock of fiscal discipline, we will build a pro-business culture and an innovation-led economy that delivers good growth in every postcode.
We have wasted no time in delivering on that commitment. In the newly formed Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, we are rewiring the machinery of government so that the Prime Minister has the resources and levers he needs to deliver on his priorities. By stripping out many of the bureaucratic functions of the office, we have created a stronger, more focused Department that is capable of driving forward the Prime Minister’s agenda. This Government recognise that for far too long there has been a disconnect between the Cabinet Office and No. 10, and it is that lack of joined-up thinking that has hampered the ability of successive Prime Ministers to drive forward their own agendas across Government.
We have had a dichotomy at the heart of Government: the most centralised state in the G20, with one of the most underpowered centres. In the newly established OPMC, we are ensuring that the Prime Minister has the support and resources he needs to deliver the change that the public are impatient to see. From that office, we will drive forward work across Government to put the essentials, such as water, transport, energy and housing, under greater public control, in order to regenerate our communities, breathe new life into our high streets and give people more room to breathe through action on the cost of living.
That work of change has begun. Working closely with the Prime Minister and the Cabinet Secretary, we have begun the work of shifting power and resources away from Whitehall. Through our devolution blueprint and the establishment of No. 10 North, we have created a new engine of regional economic growth that will empower places that have been overlooked by Westminster for too long. We are granting new powers to strategic authorities to take more control over the future of their regions: a greater share of locally generated revenues, beginning with business rates; and more control over housing, public transport and infrastructure. For the first time, local leaders will have the power and resources they need to invest in the things that matter most to their communities.
This Government are filling in the map to bring an end to the system of two-tier devolution, so that by the end of 2028 we are able to extend to all parts of England the same offer that the rest have enjoyed for many years. This is how we can empower communities, drive local economic growth, create new jobs and deliver maximum benefit to the people who live there. This is devolution by design and devolution by default, and by working across Government we will build a new economic model that begins to put life’s essentials back under stronger public control and make them affordable for people again.
Working with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster Central (Sally Jameson)—and building on the strong foundations laid down by my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bristol North West (Darren Jones), whom I thank for his work—we are delivering a once-in-a-generation rebalancing of power in this country. This is what a rewired state looks like: one that is relentlessly focused on delivering for the people of this country, with empowered communities and good growth in every postcode. These are the tests against which our decisions will be measured and the metrics by which our actions will be judged.
Last month, the Chancellor and I announced reforms to public procurement that will cut red tape and unleash a new wave of British job creation. Too often, small and medium-sized businesses have struggled to navigate complicated procurement processes that seem to prioritise everything. When we prioritise everything, we prioritise nothing, so we are making the process simpler and doing things differently. From next year, businesses seeking to win a share of £90 billion in central Government contracts will be left in no doubt about what we want from them: creating good jobs and giving young people the skills they need for the future. These new rules will ensure that the £90 billion spent each year through Government contracts supports British jobs, skills and people in every postcode.
We are going further in our reforms to public procurement to ensure that taxpayers’ money is delivering more for our communities. For the first time since 2020, we are removing the defence exemption from social value. That means billions of pounds of defence contracts will soon give weighting to jobs and skills for young people across Britain. This is how we back businesses in every part of the country. In my ministerial colleagues, Parliamentary Secretaries to the Cabinet Office my hon. Friends the Members for Gateshead Central and Whickham (Mark Ferguson) and for Chipping Barnet (Dan Tomlinson), businesses looking to build and grow here in Britain—creating those good jobs and driving that good growth—will have strong advocates in this Government.
The work of my Department in strengthening our national resilience and co-ordinating the Government’s response to emergencies remains central. Over the summer, we saw communities across the country impacted by unprecedented wildfires precipitated by one of the hottest and driest summers on record—a reminder of the very real and present threats to the UK posed by climate change. During the third week of August, four major incidents were declared across south Wales, Hampshire, Cambridgeshire and the west midlands. By 13 August, fire and rescue services were tackling 47 wildfire incidents, and 79 separate requests for additional equipment and resources were made by fire and rescue services. In south Wales alone, more than 200 military personnel were deployed to tackle 14 separate incidents.
Such was the extent of support provided across the country that almost every service was impacted or involved in the response, and some of the most stretched services faced the prospect of having to deprioritise certain call-outs due to the pressures on the system. The day before the national alert was issued, close to 12,000 999 calls were recorded in a single day, which is six times the average call volume. Many services were stretched to breaking point, but continued to work around the clock to protect lives, communities and properties. I am sure everyone in the House will join me in thanking our emergency services and military personnel, who put themselves in harm’s way to keep us safe.
On 14 August, when the Government received direct requests from fire and rescue services for urgent Government intervention, we took decisive action. A national emergency alert was issued to provide the public with clear guidance on the steps they should take to avoid inadvertently contributing to an already dangerous situation. It should come as no surprise that the British public did their bit. Within 48 hours, there was a 42% decrease in the number of 999 calls, falling from 12,000 to 5,200, and by Monday morning the number of live wildfire incidents had fallen from 47 to 27. This gave our fire and rescue services the breathing space they needed to tackle existing fires and keep us all safe.
Over the coming weeks, I will continue to work closely with Cabinet colleagues to ensure the Government’s response meets the scale of the challenges we face. I will also be working closely with my right hon. Friend the Minister for Security in ensuring that this Government take a long-term and strategic approach to the country’s preparedness. The Government will continue to work closely with our frontline services and local resilience forums to mitigate the risks posed by extreme weather and drought, including a £100 million increase in funding for the fire services and a £65 million boost in support of our farmers.
In the interests of brevity, I will touch briefly on the work that is happening elsewhere in my Department. I have been delighted to welcome my right hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Kanishka Narayan) not only to his role as the Minister for Artificial Intelligence, but to join us around the Cabinet table. The Prime Minister has been clear that he sees harnessing the potential of artificial intelligence as a central part of our country’s future, and the elevation of this role reflects the ambition this Government have to make Britain a world leader in these advanced technologies.
I am also pleased to welcome the Minister for Intergovernmental Relations and European Relations to his role. My right hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer) has wasted no time in the vital work of building stronger ties with our closest neighbours and allies. I was very grateful to him for interrupting his honeymoon to come home and be appointed to the post.
My Department is also bringing forward a programme to modernise the operation of the state. We are taking public control of the way Government work—cutting out the unnecessary processes and needless reviews that slow decision making and stifle innovation. At the heart of this agenda will be the restoration of Ministers’ responsibility and agency to deliver the change they promise, with increased accountability to Parliament and the public for the direction they set and the decisions they take. We will bring forward new methods of public deliberation in policy development and do away with box-ticking consultation with the usual suspects. Fewer decisions will be delegated to unelected bodies, and the way decisions are made will be scrutinised in Parliament, not in the courts, ending the warm bath of constructive ambiguity that politics has been too happy to soak in for far too long.
I am aware—I am deeply honoured—that I am the first woman to hold the role of First Secretary of State since the late, great Barbara Castle. I am confident that if I can channel even a fraction of the energy and determination that she brought to this role, collectively we can change our country for the better. For too long, too many places have been written out of our national story; their contribution ignored and their potential overlooked. People feel like the system just does not work for them. That is why in 2024 they voted for change. This Government are on a mission to ensure we can deliver on the Prime Minister’s and the public’s priorities. This is a collective endeavour, and together we will deliver the lasting change that people deserve. I commend this statement to the House.
Louise Haigh
My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and my constituency shares that exact same problem: in the east, there are fewer sixth-form options than in the wealthier west of the constituency. That is huge issue for educational inequality for our constituents, and I will take it away and look at it with the Education Secretary. My hon. Friend will also note that we have committed to devolution of 16-to-19 funding as well.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
I thank the First Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement, and warmly welcome her to her place. The Liberal Democrats strongly agree that the political system is overly centralised. We believe that the best decisions are taken closest to the people they affect, but renewing communities must also mean giving councils the powers and resources that they need to revitalise our high streets, support independent businesses and improve local public services. After years of severe financial pressure, devolution cannot simply mean transferring responsibilities from Whitehall without the funding necessary to deliver them.
The First Secretary mentioned national resilience. That is about whether the lights stay on, whether the shelves stay stocked, and whether a family in Hazel Grove can get through a week or more of serious destruction without losing their livelihood. The covid inquiry was blunt: it found that we were ill prepared for an emergency, never mind a pandemic. Those failures cost lives, and people deserve to know that lessons have been acted on, rather than filed away.
There is certainly progress to welcome. We have the resilience action plan, the UK Resilience Academy, and Exercise Pegasus, which was the largest pandemic exercise this country has ever run. Those are steps that my party has long called for, but announcements are not preparedness. I would welcome hearing from the First Secretary what plans she has to improve public awareness and understanding of what the whole of society needs to do to be ready. We are in an increasingly uncertain world, so will the Government think again on digital sovereignty, so that the critical systems that our constituents rely on are not dependent on suppliers that this country cannot control?
I strongly agree with the First Secretary that this country has a broken political system. Later this afternoon, we will debate the Representation of the People Bill, which is meant to fix that. It takes some steps in the right direction, but fails to rise to the moment. Does she agree that there is still so much more to do, starting with halting the scourge of big money that is poisoning our democracy by capping political donations and bringing in a fairer voting system? We need to fix our politics so that we can get on with fixing the country. I have heard her talk previously in this House about moving fast and fixing things. I urge her to crack on.
Direction of Government
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Speaker
We now come to the statement from the Prime Minister. There has been a lot of speculation over the recess, and I just say that this is in accordance with the rules of government. The ministerial code is clear. For those who have asked why I have not commented, it is because it is within the rules, which I do not make. It is this House that abides by them.
The Prime Minister
What I bring back to the House after 10 years away is a clear diagnosis of what has gone wrong. Let me lay it out clearly, particularly for the right hon. Gentleman, since he asked.
From the 1980s, this country took a series of wrong turns. Political power was centralised, economic power privatised and the country deindustrialised. Austerity followed, hollowing out councils and depriving them of the agency to act to reverse any of it, and then Brexit compounded the damage, ushering in a decade of low growth and stalled regeneration. [Interruption.] Change begins with honesty, and I am not hearing much of it this afternoon. Unless we are blunt about what went wrong, we will not turn things around. Far from “taking back control”, the combination of those policies took control out of the hands of communities up and down Britain.
For 40 years, too many places have been drifting. Too many British high streets tell the story of this decline. People yearn to see them restored to what they once were, as the Communities Secretary and I heard on our visit to Ilkeston in the summer, but they see no hope if we continue on the same path with a failed economic model, which does not trickle down much to places like theirs and instead allows wealth to be extracted and siphoned out. Britain’s water industry stands as a leaking monument to that approach—a country run in the private rather than public interest. That is now abundantly clear to voters of all parties, including the Conservative party.
The Government I lead will be relentless in giving people and places what they were promised 10 years ago: ownership and control. From that control over their destiny comes change and growth. I say this with confidence. [Interruption.] I do, and let me explain why. It is backed by a decade of personal experience of turning around one of the UK’s former industrial heartlands and turning it into the fastest growing city region in the country, bucking the low-growth trend. It has given me a clear theory of growth and I will apply it to all parts of the UK, learning from what has been achieved in Greater Manchester. For a long time the country did not have ambitions for its regions outside of London. It even talked of the “managed decline” of Liverpool. It took the devolution of power out of this place to allow our big city regions the ability to set new ambitions for themselves. Now, I want every single place across our regions and nations to be able to do the same, creating the conditions for good growth in every postcode.
In that spirit, I was glad to meet the Liberal Democrat leader of Cornwall council, with my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham), on my recent visit. I know, like many rural economies across the UK, that Cornwall lacks a basic level of infrastructure, which in turn harms growth and holds back living standards and life chances, and I heard the cross-party call for a devolution deal. I understand concerns in this House about the potential emergence of a two-tier England—those with devolved power and those without—and I will not ignore them. So, I have asked No. 10 North to begin work with Cornwall council and its six MPs on a devolution deal with or without an elected mayor.
I today extend the same offer to all parts of England without devolved power. The First Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh) will today write to every Member of this House setting out how they can engage No. 10 North in the service of the places they represent. I extended the same offer to the First Ministers of Scotland and Wales, and the First and Deputy First Ministers of Northern Ireland when I met them over the summer. As they rightly pointed out, their situations are different, but there is interest in what a local model of devolution could look like in each of the home nations, and we will discuss that with them at a special meeting of the National Economic Council next month.
This Government will oversee the biggest redistribution of power this country has seen. In July, we published a statement on the next stage of English devolution. It will include powers long requested by mayors, such as: post-16 technical education; employment support; and fiscal devolution, starting with the ability to set an overnight visitor levy to commence towards the end of the financial year 2027-28. The driving force behind it all will be No. 10 North. It will oversee the rewiring of the British state, the rebuilding of resilience in our communities and the reindustrialisation of our regions. The creation of No. 10 North was one of the first acts of this Administration and I believe that in time it will be seen as one of its most significant. It is a clear answer to the question with which this country has long wrestled: who, in government, drives growth? My theory of growth requires it to be driven with the full authority of the very centre of Government, in close partnership with HM Treasury.
No. 10 North has been set up with that full focus; the single front door on which regions can knock to get quicker, joined-up decisions from Whitehall, and through which power and resources will be passed to them. Resources will include human resources. This is because a state that has grown too large at the national level now needs to redirect civil service capacity regionally and locally, repairing the damage of austerity and making the service of place the state’s first priority. We can already see what is possible. I am glad No. 10 North was able to stand behind Mayor Richard Parker when he took urgent action in August to prevent the collapse of bus services across the west midlands, and I congratulate Mayor Steve Rotheram who this weekend, after four decades of deregulation, will see the first buses return to public control in the Liverpool city region. Taking back control of essential services such as transport is an enabler of a more productive economy, because it allows local areas to grab hold of the levers of power for themselves.
But driving growth demands we go further. It is taking far too long for businesses to get grid connections and they are being quoted prohibitively expensive sums of money if they try to bring those dates forward, as I heard on my visit to a farm near Truro. Household energy bills are the highest in Europe, and the cost of energy is impacting business and inward investment. Too many areas have seen water supplies disrupted this summer due to a lack of reservoir capacity. Our tourism industry is damaged by too many sewage spills. [Interruption.] “Why?” the Opposition say. It is a question they should ask themselves. This summer has shown us very clearly that water companies are failing to rise to the climate challenge. It cannot go on. Later in the year, our 10-year plan for Britain will set out plans for stronger public control over these essentials, making them work for people and places again.
Alongside that, we will empower all areas to expand the public housing stock, building on the first allocations from the social and affordable homes programme announced by the Communities Secretary last week. Bringing forward the biggest council home building programme since the post-war period is the Labour way to get the welfare bill down, as is reforming our education system, so that it balances academic and technical, and offers a path in life for all young people. Michael Gove calls this “bringing back stupid”, when in fact, for too many young people written off by his reforms, it is bringing back hope. Allowing mayors to shape technical pathways and provide work placements for young people, building back into colleges and schools from the needs of the regional economy, is the way to support more young people into work. So is prioritising more accessible, community-based mental health services, as we announced in the summer.
That will be a major part of our response to the forthcoming Milburn report, which will follow its publication in the autumn. For it to work, a more intentional approach to the reindustrialisation of Britain is required. We will support all parts of the country to take more public control over investment strategy, learning from the Greater Manchester model of a consolidated good growth fund drawn from their own funds, prudent loan borrowing and fragmented budgets held by Government bodies. We will back local industrial strategies—a policy of the Theresa May Government I am happy to revive—by identifying priority sectors and developing the triple-helix approach to economic development by entwining business, academia and Government behind the plan. This is the way we will build a pro-business culture and an innovation-led economy in all parts of the UK, finally capturing the long-term benefits of the invention that is in the DNA of our nation, backing our start-ups and scale-ups to stay in the UK where they were founded.
When I stood outside Downing Street six weeks ago, I said that Britain needs a circuit breaker after a decade of turbulence, negativity, point scoring and divisive politics. This is what I have outlined today: a clear, coherent and credible approach to growth that can unlock a feeling of positivity and possibility in every postcode in Britain. Our job here is to make it real by taking a place-first rather than a party-first approach. It starts with reasserting basic standards for Britain—that this is a country where no one sleeps rough and no community is blighted by an illegal waste tip—and, from there, working together to build a new sense of optimism around the country. We can make this next decade better than the last. We can lift the prospects of all our people and places. We can put more power into every postcode. We can let Britain believe again. We can bring back hope. I commend this statement to the House.
Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the Prime Minister to his office and to the Dispatch Box—[Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. People should not leave when a Member is on their feet; it is discourteous.
Dame Meg Hillier
I and my fellow Committee Chairs look forward to welcoming the Prime Minister to the Liaison Committee very soon so that we can drill into his agenda in more detail.
I was pleased by the announcements over the summer on housing, which in London is really holding people back. One of the many challenges is releasing public land that was previously used for education or health, for example, for building on. Will he undertake to put a rocket under the release of that land where appropriate to best deliver housing?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend. I look forward to my first appearance before the Liaison Committee. On the question of public land, she raises a really important issue. We have got to look at how we build as many council and social homes as we can to bring down the housing benefit and temporary accommodation bill, which is ruinous in London for London councils. We must find ways of doing that within the public purse. Public land is one way in which we can achieve that. I will be looking at a programme for the release of public land to build council and social homes, and I look forward to working with her on that.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement and I welcome him to his place. I associate myself with the condolences that he has sent to the family and friends of the police officers killed on the A66 and with his comments on the disaster on the Nepal-China border.
I wished each of the Prime Minister’s predecessors well, but given how that went for them perhaps he would prefer that I did not bother this time. I sincerely hope that he can turn things around, and quickly, because we all know how fed up people are. We hear it all the time. Every year, it gets harder to make ends meet, waiting lists seem to go up, more and more things seem broken, and the populists and extremists are eager to keep things that way so they can profit from it.
Everything the Prime Minister has described in his statement would be possible only if we fundamentally change the way we do politics in our country. Growing the economy, cutting the cost of living, fixing our public services, restoring people’s trust: those are things that every new Prime Minister has talked about. Yet they failed because they stuck to a broken political system; a system that makes it impossible to really change things for the better. The reason so much is broken in our country and can never be fixed is partly that our political system concentrates too much power in the wrong hands —in Westminster, in Whitehall and in big multinational companies. I think the Prime Minister gets some of that, judging by what he has been saying.
There are so many more problems in our political system: too much power in the hands of social media barons who interfere in our politics and crypto billionaires who use donations to buy influence; and too little power in the hands of our people. Britain’s political system too often rewards corruption and leaves everyone else feeling powerless. Our great country is being held back, and it will only be free to thrive again if we put real power in people’s hands.
We have been campaigning on that for decades and the Prime Minister has written about it. His decision over the summer to finally start cross-party talks on social care—talks I have been desperate to start for years and which Conservative and Labour Prime Ministers promised but failed to deliver—is a welcome step in the right direction. There is, however, a lot more work to do, and more fundamental change is needed to make our politics work for the people we serve. Will the Prime Minister start that work today? Listening to the calls of over 170 Members on the Opposition Benches and on his own, will he launch a national commission to change politics so that we can fix our country?
The Prime Minister
I thank my right hon. Friend and agree with her very strongly that we need to restore trust, particularly when it comes to foreign donations that seek to influence our politics. I am pleased she recognises the amendments that have been brought forward to the Representation of the People Act, which will be debated in this House later this week. I mentioned the defending democracy taskforce, which has been set up in the Cabinet Office. It needs to continue to look at these issues, and this will not be the last chance. We can come back to these issues in this Parliament, such is their importance.
Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
May I congratulate the Prime Minister on what he said about Ukraine and on how he conducted himself there? Our enemies should know that this House is completely and utterly united in standing behind the Ukrainian people. That was the most powerful part of his statement, precisely because we are working together, so may I encourage him in that direction? We all know that we are under mortal threat, that we must increase the defence budget and that the decisions to pare back the bloated welfare bill are extremely difficult, so why does he not take up the offer of the Leader of the Opposition to deal with this, to meet our international commitments, to reduce dependency, to ensure that we are living within our means, to work together and to do this now? “Action this day.”
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I think that is the first and, sadly, probably the last time I will be compared to Jude Bellingham. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that. On the question of red cards, I cannot tell him how much incoming I had a week ago Monday, after President Trump intervened on the USA red card, asking me to get the England red card adjusted. Just for the record, Mr Speaker, I did not attempt that.
For my successor, and for the England team, I will not give advice; I will simply give my wholehearted support. Just for the record, Mr Speaker, I do not care what the score is tonight, as long as we win.
Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I take this opportunity to thank the Prime Minister for his many years—
Matt Turmaine (Watford) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for his question and his hard work. He reminds us that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. Antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred are a poison. We ripped antisemitism out of the Labour party, and I have worked as Prime Minister to root it out of our country. Just this week, we invested a record £250 million to protect our Jewish communities, and we are using the new powers we have introduced to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, going after those who incite violence on our streets. Everyone deserves to live with security, dignity and freedom. That is a fight that I and every Labour Government and those across this House will never give up on.
Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)
Can I start by thanking the Prime Minister for the way that he responded to the murder of Ann Widdecombe last week? This is the first opportunity I have had on the Floor of the House to commemorate her life. A lot has been said about how she died. I want to focus on celebrating the life she lived.
Ann was a woman of high principle and profound beliefs, with a wicked sense of humour—a wonderful combination of being a serious person who did not take herself too seriously. She changed her faith from Anglican to Catholic and from the Conservative party to the Brexit party, but she always remained part of the Conservative family. You might not always have agreed with her, but Ann Widdecombe was a woman who said what she meant and meant what she said. Hers was an honesty that made our politics better. Her wit and forthrightness sat alongside a deep humanity and decency.
Ann had wonderful turns of phrase. She said:
“We need less political correctness and more political courage.”
She said:
“If we deny our culture, become nothing and everything, that weakens us.”
She also said:
“It is a truth universally unacknowledged at Westminster that there is life after politics.”
With that in mind, I turn to this Prime Minister’s final questions. Mr Speaker, I wanted to make sure that I got the tone right today, so I looked back at the Prime Minister’s final questions to Boris Johnson. Luckily for the Prime Minister, I plan to be much gentler than he was that day.
Week after week, the Prime Minister and I have clashed at these Dispatch Boxes and rarely agreed on anything, but there is one thing that I admired. When President Zelensky was attacked in the White House, the Prime Minister showed leadership and invited him to Downing Street. That was the right thing to do. Ukraine is on the frontline in the battle for freedom, so does the Prime Minister agree that cross-party support for their cause must endure?
The Prime Minister
We did pull the levers. We pulled the levers to stabilise the economy, and we have done that. We pulled the levers to strengthen our public services and NHS waiting lists are coming down at the fastest rate for 17 years. We have pulled a big lever on child poverty, and this Government are doing more on child poverty than any Government ever, including previous Labour Governments. We have put the biggest investment into defence and security, and our international standing has been restored.
We also pulled the lever on the individual cases that matter, including those of individuals such as Carla—she is in the Gallery—who is one of the parents who came to see me about online harm and what that can do to our young children. That is why we banned social media for under-16s. Daniel, who is also here with his son, has spoken to me many times about the struggles that he has had with the cost of living and the need for a safe and secure home for every family and every child to grow up in. They are the people who matter more to me than anything else, because it is their lives that I think about when we make decisions in this Government.
Mrs Badenoch
The Prime Minister may not think so now, but it is a tribute to him that not a single sitting Labour MP could beat him. Not the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner) who could not count her taxes, not the right hon. Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh) who could not count how many phones she had lost—“lost, lost, lost”—and definitely not the right hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting) who could not count to 81.
This is my last exchange with the right hon. and learned Gentleman. I know how much his wife and children mean to him, and that they are in the Gallery. As everyone here knows, our families make a huge sacrifice for our choice to enter public life. I hope that he will allow me to draw our time together to a close by thanking them for the love and support they have given him throughout his time in office.
The Prime Minister
Yes I do, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s campaigning on this issue. Yesterday I was with John and Penny Clough, who I first met nearly 16 years ago. They lost their daughter to domestic violence of the most extreme sort in appalling circumstances, and in many ways my journey campaigning on violence against women and girls started with them 16 years ago this year. I pay tribute to them and everybody else who campaigns on this. That is why we set the mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. Whatever role I do next, I will continue to campaign for that for as long as I have breath in my body.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I associate myself with so many of the Prime Minister’s comments today, but particularly with his remarks about Ann Widdecombe. She devoted her life to public service and her murder was truly horrifying. I support his campaign for a memorial to her in this Chamber. I also thank the Leader of the Opposition for her tribute to Ann, and for reminding the whole House and the whole country that we need to remember her for the way she lived her life. I have to make a confession: I have always been slightly jealous of Ann for appearing on “Strictly Come Dancing”. [Hon. Members: “There’s still time!”]
Can I join the whole nation, and hopefully every nation, in wishing England well against Argentina tonight after their superb win against Norway? It is the last job of the Prime Minister to make sure that we win the world cup.
Can I also pick up on a remark from the Leader of the Opposition about the by-election we are about to see in Clacton? I have to tell her that I cannot back joke figures with ridiculous policies, which is why I am supporting Count Binface. [Laughter.]
As the Prime Minister finds himself with more time on his hands, can I recommend the new “Toy Story” film? For those who do not know the films, the main character used to be in law enforcement, but was mainly known for being a little wooden, and was replaced by a shiny new action figure from far away who thinks he can fly—and the name Andy is on everyone’s lips. Maybe the Prime Minister should give that a miss, but does he share my fear that when it comes to Britain’s national debt, the plan of the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) is “to infinity and beyond”?
Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
I know that the college in my hon. Friend’s constituency has made a bid to the post-16 and construction skills capacity fund to expand its provision. I have set a target of two thirds of young people either to go to university or to a gold standard apprenticeship, because I think that we need to rebalance. We rightly applaud and put on a pedestal those who go to university, but we need to do the same for those who are apprentices as well and have a bit of rebalancing.
Mr Speaker
Order. Please can we speed up questions? There are some people who I really want to get in and that will help everyone.
David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)
Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)
The Prime Minister will not need reminding about Arsenal’s success in the premier league last season and my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) will not want reminding that Everton, unfortunately for him, came 13th, but what neither of them might know is that the UK finished 20th in the corruption perceptions index, well within the relegation zone. At the Prime Minister’s request, last week the Ethics and Integrity Commission produced a comprehensive set of recommendations to tighten up rules around lobbying. In light of recent stories around the leader of Reform UK, does the Prime Minister agree—
The Prime Minister
I pay tribute to the commission and its work. The work of strengthening our democracy will, and must, continue.
The Prime Minister
It is very important that we have all the resources we need to provide the energy we need, and to bring the price of energy down, and that is what we are doing.
Carolyn Harris (Neath and Swansea East) (Lab)
I can do this. Can I thank my right hon. and learned, and very dear, Friend for everything he has given to our party and our country? There were few who believed we could make the changes needed to bring in a Labour Government after the general election of 2019, when he became leader. Today, though, because of his service and his leadership, children are growing up in a fairer Britain. We stand tall on the world stage, and every day, we have seen his decency and his courage shine through. My family and I thank him and his wonderful family for their cherished friendship, and I am certain that everyone will join me in wishing him and his family the very, very best for their next chapter.
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for her question, her support and her friendship for me, Vic and the kids. Whatever the challenge, she has always been there for us, particularly Vic and the kids, and I really thank her for that.
This will be my last answer from this Dispatch Box. Every Prime Minister knows when they take up the torch that the day will come when they have to pass it on. That day has come for me. This is the end of my political journey. In six years, we went from historic defeat in 2019 to historic victory in 2024, and after two years in government, I leave the country in better shape than I found it in. I am proud of everything that we have achieved.
Can I just take time to say to you, Mr Speaker, and to all those who work for the House and in our constituency offices, thank you for all your hard work? To our civil service, thank you, also, for all your hard work. To my political team—many of them here today—who came on this journey with me, thank you so much for everything you have done, and for being prepared to walk through fire for me. To my colleagues on the Labour Benches, I am proud of all we have achieved together, and proud of each and every one of you. To my successor and each of you, I will give my full support. To all colleagues across the House, I wish you good health and happiness. To all those in the Gallery whose lives have been changed or improved by this Labour Government, and all those across the country who struggle to be seen or heard, you are the reason I came into politics. To my wife and children, I love you. Goodbye. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker
Order. Can I just say, as the curtain has fallen and this House quite rightly cheers out the Prime Minister—[Applause.] I am sorry that we are still clapping. We do not do clapping in the House; we cheer, or hold our Order Papers up. That is the farewell that we should always give to a Prime Minister.
Historical Forced Adoption
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)
This morning in Downing Street, I met some of the mothers and adult adoptees harmed by historical adoption practices in England. They are here with us in the Gallery today, and I had the chance to talk with them privately. They are the most remarkable women, and I know the whole House will want to join me in paying tribute to the extraordinary courage with which they have shared their harrowing testimonies and fought for the truth time and again. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]
I have to confess that, as I said to those mothers this morning, I found it hard to read the testimonies and to hear their stories—I found it particularly hard as a dad—but how much harder it must have been for them to go through that, to set out their testimonies and to tell their stories over and over again. As they said to me this morning, this is something which is so intensely private having to be public. The courage and resilience they have shown, and others alongside them, is absolutely incredible, and I want to mark that.
What happened to them, and to tens of thousands of mothers, children and families, should never have happened. It is a stain on our history. Mothers—many young, vulnerable and without support—were coerced, bullied or misled into feeling they had no choice but to have their children taken from them. What a thing to do.
These were not isolated or accidental acts. They were practices embedded within systems across local authorities, across voluntary and faith-based institutions, and in health and social care services, including parts of what is now the NHS. They were all institutions that operated with power over people’s lives, yet they did so without compassion, without consent and without dignity or proper safeguards.
These practices were particularly prevalent between 1949 and 1976, but also extended beyond those years. In some cases, women, including those placed in mother and baby homes and other institutional settings, were cut off from their families, relationships, education and employment, and subjected to harsh and isolating conditions. Some experienced treatment that amounted to exploitation and abuse.
Many were made to feel ashamed—that came through very, very powerfully in the discussions I had this morning —silenced, and unworthy of care or dignity. Children grew up believing that they were unwanted. Young mothers were told that they were immoral and that their babies were better off without them. As they told me this morning, that lasts a lifetime and has a huge impact.
Ann Lloyd Keen, who is in the Gallery and is of course formerly of this House, described to the Education Committee how she was stitched without anaesthetic, and was told:
“You will remember the pain, because you’ve been a bad girl.”
Many of those harmed in this way feel a gut-wrenching sense of shame. Ann and others have said that that has stayed with them. She says that she still feels it today. I know that this apology will not be able to lift it completely—it will help a little, I hope, but it will not lift it completely.
I say this to Ann, to everyone with us in the Gallery, and to all those impacted and affected, wherever they are in the country—there are many thousands of them, including some who still, to this day, have not been able to speak about what happened to them. I hope this statement and apology perhaps gives some of them the confidence to speak about what happened to them, because it will help in a small way. The shame is not yours. The shame was never yours. The shame is ours. I say that on behalf of the whole country and I say it to every single person impacted. We are deeply and profoundly sorry.
To the mothers who were told they were unfit, who were prevented from caring for the children they desperately wanted to help and to keep and who have carried this loss for decades. To those who were not given the information they needed to provide informed consent, who faced pressure or coercion and who experienced practices that were unethical.
To the sons and daughters, the children who are now adults, who through pressure and coercion within these systems were taken from their families and denied their identity, their history and sometimes their safety. To those who grew up believing they were unwanted, some of whom were even told directly that they were second class.
To those who have carried a burden of loss, confusion and stigma, or who experienced neglect and abuse without the protection or oversight that should have been their right. To those who have experienced lifelong uncertainty, loss or questions about identity and belonging, or whose mental and physical health, relationships and sense of self across their lives has been affected.
To the fathers who were denied a voice, excluded from decisions, or separated from their children. To the siblings, grandparents, partners, extended families, and future generations who have lived with the consequences of these practices. To those who experienced harm from these practices, even while being brought up in loving homes, by their adoptive parents.
To those who were adopted across borders or cultures, who lost connections to their heritage, and racial and personal identity. And to those from ethnic minority backgrounds who experienced racism or were treated differently within those systems, and who as a group were less likely to be adopted or to grow up in stable family homes.
I am struck by the words of Debbie Iromlou, who I met this morning. She says she was
“raised with racist views towards her own biological family.”
Mr Speaker, how do you even begin to comprehend that? To each and every one of those affected, we say a deep and heartfelt sorry.
Let me be clear and unequivocal: those harms were compounded by the actions and failures of the state. Governments funded, enabled and relied on systems that were not consistently or effectively overseen. The state did not prevent harm from continuing. The state bears responsibility for the systems it funded and legitimised, which enabled those practices to occur. The state did not do enough to protect mothers, children and families from harm. And for that systemic failing, I am truly sorry.
Many of those affected have suffered a further injustice. They have had to fight for the basic human right to know their own story. As Sally Ells puts it:
“We are treated as if the information about our own lives, does not belong to us”.
Debbie Iromlou was told her birth mother’s life would be in danger if she tried to search for her. Barriers were put in place at every twist and turn. Records have in some cases been lost, altered, or not made fully accessible to those seeking answers, and the whole process is painfully slow—traumatic and dehumanising all over again.
We say sorry and we mean it, but sorry is not enough. This must also be the start of real change: working with those affected and their families to improve access to records, and to provide the care and support that people need. So today I can tell the House that we will fund the development of a national online resource, creating a single access point to locate records wherever they might be held across the country. We will consult on requiring existing records to be retained for 100 years, so they remain available across the lifetime of those affected.
Today, the Education Secretary is writing to local authorities, regional adoption agencies and voluntary adoption agencies, setting out the expectation that requests for records should be responded to swiftly and with compassion and consistency. We will expand access to funded intermediary services, with a particular focus on pre-1976 cases, where access to support is currently most limited. We will establish national virtual peer-led support groups for mothers and adopted adults, to improve access to ongoing, trauma-informed support across the country.
We will work with NHS England to ensure those affected are taken seriously when they seek help. That includes new support for clinicians to better understand the impact of forced adoption and respond appropriately in their care. NHS England will also explore how those who wish to do so can have their experience of forced adoption appropriately recorded in their health record.
Finally, to further recognise those affected and ensure we learn the lessons of the past, we will commission a testimonials project to capture the stories of those with experience of historical forced adoption practices. Through all of this and more, we will continue to meet regularly with those with lived experience. We will be guided by them to get this support right and learn from our past to ensure that nothing like this can ever happen again in this country.
Finally, this national apology reflects and builds on the approaches taken by Scotland and Wales, whose devolved Governments have also issued apologies for these practices, which we fully endorse. I welcome the process under way in Northern Ireland to establish a statutory public inquiry into mother and baby institutions, Magdalene laundries and workhouses. I also thank the Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Education Committee for all they have done to shine a light on this injustice.
Most of all, I want to thank those who have campaigned for so long to have the truth recognised, including those who are no longer with us to hear the apology they fought for. It should never have happened, and they should not have had to fight so hard for this day to come. Today, finally, I say on behalf of the state and the nation as a whole: we see you, we hear you, and we are truly sorry.
I commend this statement to the House.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Kanishka Narayan
Do we want tougher accountability? Absolutely. That is why the codes published mean stronger review mechanisms, a direct line to law enforcement and a clear crisis playbook required of risky platforms. Do we want it to be faster? Absolutely. That is exactly why we have asked Ofcom to expedite those codes in particular. On whether we take a risk-based or uniform approach, it is right that we focus our resources, in law enforcement and regulatory action, on those that are the greatest risk. We will continue to review that.
Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)
It is almost exactly a year since my Select Committee published its report on “Social media, misinformation and harmful algorithms” in the wake of the Southport riots. It was truly distressing and disturbing to see misinformation playing such a role in the Belfast riots, and my thoughts are with all those affected. Will the Minister confirm what conversations he has had with Ofcom about misinformation being included in its crisis response protocol, as recommended by my Committee?
Liz Kendall
I saw the documentary and absolutely agree how concerning it is. I bet that many men, even some in this Chamber, will have been fed this vile stuff just because they are a man. We are looking at a whole range of measures. We are also looking at the issues of advertising and money, which are relevant to the hon. Gentleman’s question as they are driving a lot of this. The Minister for Digital Government and Data, my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray), who is a joint Minister in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, is chairing a taskforce looking specifically at that matter, but I always like to see further recommendations, so the hon. Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) should send them in.
Liz Kendall
Of course I have talked to my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield, because I am focusing on doing my job, which is to do the right thing for children and families in this country. I hope the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer) gets a good rest over the summer holidays too, and maybe works up some slightly more challenging questions.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
This might be the last time we face this ministerial team, but I hope that they will stay, because I know they have done a lot of hard work on online safety. With that in mind, I have recently spoken to students in Harpenden and Berkhamsted, who passionately shared their fears and hopes around AI chatbots. With the Labour leadership transition putting any major announcements on hold, what guarantees can the Secretary of State give that, alongside the support of the right hon. Member for Makerfield—the Prime Minister in waiting—there will be an announcement in July about AI online safety, and vital protections will not be sidelined?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Kanishka Narayan)
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that critical question for Britain’s creative sector. Just yesterday, on British IP Day, I met with the Alliance for Intellectual Property, including artists, authors, publishers, journalists and media organisations, to talk about how our work on digital replicas and transparency will be critical to supporting the creative sector. I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend and the APPG.
Julia Lopez (Hornchurch and Upminster) (Con)
Professor Brian Cox is among the eminent scientists warning about the impact of Government cuts to research on advanced physics and astronomy—a move that he calls “inexplicable”. Meanwhile, the Government are spending millions on projects examining climate coloniality, decolonising justice and transforming LGBTIQ+ asylum policies. Are those the Secretary of State’s research priorities too? If not, has she made that crystal clear to UK Research and Innovation?
Liz Kendall
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point—we know children will try to get around the ban, and will succeed. Our measures are as much about resetting the cultural and social norms for future generations, but we will have more highly effective age verification measures to make this work. We are looking at the issue of VPNs in particular, and I will come back to the House with more on that issue very soon.
Mr Speaker
Before we come to Prime Minister’s questions, I extend a warm welcome to the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Trinidad and Tobago and his delegation, who are in the Gallery today.
Dr Pinkerton
I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s condolences and his birthday good wishes to the NHS.
Everyone in my constituency of Surrey Heath wants a new Frimley Park hospital, but the chosen site—the last remaining fragment of the ancient Frimley common—is wholly inappropriate. It is inaccessible, behind multiple schools, and environmentally devastating. Worse, over recent weeks, I have received deeply troubling evidence that the preferred relocation site was known and being openly discussed by local political figures in 2023, before the official site selection process had even begun. The entirely reasonable conclusion is that this project has been compromised from the outset and the site predetermined. I think the Prime Minister would agree that this is no way to begin a multibillion-pound public procurement process, so will he please step in, commission an urgent independent review—
The Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman’s NHS trust has identified its preferred site for the new Frimley Park hospital, and detailed technical work can now start. Let us be frank about this hospital. The Tories promised 40 new hospitals with no funding and no delivery plan, and we have had to fix that. Thanks to Labour investment, the hon. Gentleman’s hospital is at the front of the queue. It will be one of the first in the country to be rebuilt, but his approach has been, on the one hand, to demand a new hospital, and then to oppose actually building it. He has urged his constituents to oppose it because, to quote him,
“if this hospital goes ahead, there will be no golf course.”
Labour is building new hospitals, and the hon. Gentleman is standing up for golf courses. I cannot think of anything more Lib Dem.
The Prime Minister
I am proud that this Government are delivering the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation. That is backed by £39 billion, and it means we are unleashing the biggest surge in council house building in more than 30 years. That includes a thousand new social and affordable homes in Luton and Bedfordshire. Our Social Housing Bill will reform right to buy to deliver even more social houses. That is a Labour Government delivering the homes that we need.
Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)
Can I associate myself and those on the Opposition Benches with the Prime Minister’s comments about Venezuela, and also about the Lib Dems? [Laughter.] But seriously, the Chief of the Defence Staff made it known that the armed forces needed a minimum of £28 billion more to defend the country. Can the Prime Minister tell us why he thinks half that amount is enough?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this case; he has been a committed campaigner on this issue. I have seen the details of that particular case, and he is right not to repeat them in this Chamber—they are horrifying. The lack of dignity and compassion is unacceptable, and I simply cannot imagine the pain that Cody, Liam and Zoe experienced and are still experiencing. The status quo here is not working for families, and people deserve to know that their loved ones are treated with dignity and compassion. We are going to consider this issue closely, and I thank him for raising it. I do want stronger standards and oversight. I think that is absolutely needed, particularly in the light of appalling cases like this.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
Can I not associate myself with the Prime Minister’s comments about my party, but can I associate myself with all his remarks about the earthquake and humanitarian catastrophe in Venezuela? May I commend the Scottish team and the Scottish fans for the joy they brought to the world cup? They did the whole of Scotland proud. May I wish England well against DR Congo later today? But with Reece James and Jarell Quansah in doubt, I know the Prime Minister is not the only one struggling for a solid defence plan. [Laughter.]
The wars in Ukraine and Iran show us how seriously we must take the threat of missiles and drones hitting our country. Our national security requires the best possible missile defence system, including Royal Navy destroyers, but the funding in the Prime Minister’s plan for this falls dangerously short. Yet he has rejected our proposals for defence bonds, which were used in the past to rearm our country. So why has the Prime Minister chosen to leave our country so vulnerable to missile attack?
Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
I thought the next few weeks were about to get quite interesting, Mr Speaker. We all wish England the best of luck this evening. Every time those players step on to the pitch, they represent the talent, ambition and diversity of this country. We are proud to be supporting the next generation, investing £400 million in grassroots facilities and over £1 billion in school sports. And if Thomas Tuchel needs any advice on penalties, he should ask David Seaman, who slotted one past him just a few weeks ago.