Debate on the Address
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(5 days, 13 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Richard Tice
The hon. Gentleman clearly has not looked at the data, because it shows that we have secured some 1,450 new councillors. I think the Labour party has lost well over 1,000 councillors, to the benefit of our great country.
Liz Saville Roberts
The hon. Gentleman talks about the successes of Reform in England; does he recognise that it is possibly because of Reform’s bombast and predilection for foreign money that Plaid Cymru is now in government in Wales, and Reform is not?
Richard Tice
I congratulate Plaid Cymru on its success, but I note the success of Reform as the second-largest party in Wales. We are proud to be the largest Unionist party across Scotland and Wales.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lefarydd. I listened with interest to the speech made by the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr Brash), and heartily agreed with very much of what he said. Of course, we know that something momentous happened in Wales last week, although there was no mention of Wales from either of the Front Benchers. It is as though Wales, and possibly many other places in the UK, do not matter that much to this place, but of course I am a Member for Plaid Cymru, so it is my job to talk about Wales.
Across the campaign that ended last week, people responded strongly to our message of hope and fairness, and of putting their nation of Wales and their communities first. Plaid Cymru has won at least two representatives in every one of the Senedd’s constituencies. That is unheard of; it is momentous. We came first in 11 out of the 16 constituencies in Wales—all across Wales. The message that we only reached out to certain people has gone. Our party is now active and representing everywhere in Wales. I am proud to say that 60% of our group in the Senedd are women.
This historic result represents a decisive break from the past. It gives a Plaid Cymru-led Welsh Government a clear mandate to act on urgent priorities, including reducing child poverty, cutting NHS waiting times and unlocking our economy’s latent potential. Our Cabinet was announced at 4 o’clock this afternoon. We will now need to work to deliver the progressive and stable government that Wales craves. In doing so, our priority is to form a Government who reflect the seriousness and ambition that Wales—our nation—expects and deserves. The groundbreaking result was a rejection of the stale status quo of the Labour Welsh Government and the divisive politics of Reform. It also demonstrated the Welsh public’s expectation that the UK Government end their neglect of Welsh communities. People are crying out for change, not for more of the same.
My party’s manifesto and the plan for the first 100 days of government set out the areas where we will be pressing Westminster to deliver fairness for Wales, and we look to the King’s Speech for inspiration. We need to see steps taken to devolve the Crown Estate, justice and rail, and to deliver fair funding that reflects Wales’s needs. We need parity with Scotland. In a United Kingdom that puts equality first, there is no reason for devolution to be so unbalanced between the different nations of the United Kingdom. These powers are not constitutional fripperies; they are the means to realise better lives and better communities. They are the building bricks to lift people out of poverty and desperation.
Wales needs control over our natural resources so that our communities directly benefit from their wealth, ending the scandal of high energy prices in an energy-rich country like ours. Wales needs full control over our justice system, in line with Scotland—why is that such an extraordinary thing to ask for?—so that we no longer hold the infamous status of having the highest imprisonment rate in western Europe. Instead, we would be able effectively to promote rehabilitation, and thriving communities would follow.
We need to see the end of the great Welsh train robbery that is HS2 and other English rail projects. Doing so will deliver billions in funding to our crumbling, inadequate transport network so that people can travel quickly and affordably across our nation. Wales needs to see the scrapping of the Barnett formula, and its replacement with something that reflects the reality of our population’s needs. Despite the mountains of evidence and popular support, the UK Government have stubbornly refused to engage with these issues. That has been the reality of the partnership at both ends of the M4. That, in part, is why we have had these results in Wales.
After last week’s election result, it is no longer possible to ignore Wales’s voices and people’s demands for fair treatment. In his speech on Monday, the Prime Minister did not even acknowledge Wales once, and the King’s Speech today has again failed to provide the answers that we know the people of Wales need and want. There was no acknowledgement of the structural inequality that means that the powers begrudged to Wales since the birth of devolution have so far only allowed us to manage poverty, but never ever to build our way out of poverty. In the over-centralised, chaotic Government of Westminster, that is something that we need now to address.
None of the chaos we are seeing now serves the people of Wales—or many people in many communities across the United Kingdom—and that is now in particular focus. We can now see how that chaos ill serves the people of Wales. Whoever the Prime Minister is going forward, he or she must respect the mandate that the new Welsh Government have to deliver new powers and fair funding for Wales. My party will therefore be tabling an amendment to the King’s Speech calling for a new Wales Bill, so that Wales can gain the tools we need and the means to thrive. I hope that the Prime Minister will finally have seen the error of his ways from after he warned his Government—I think in March—against over-deference to the devolved Governments. Over-deference? Where is the respect to our communities and to democracy?
Those are the changes we need to see. Sadly, I do not see them in the King’s Speech as it stands, but there is potential. I urge the Government to think seriously about the need for a new Wales Bill.
Ruth Jones (Newport West and Islwyn) (Lab)
It is a pleasure—well, it is always interesting to follow the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer), and I thank him for his speech, although I am not sure that I learned anything from it. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West (Naz Shah) for her poignant and clear proposal of the Humble Address, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) for his witty seconding of it. I wish him well in his future marathons.
I welcome the firm focus in the King’s Speech on the day-to-day security of British families. It puts the cost of living front and centre of the Government’s priorities. This Labour Government have already increased the minimum wage, boosted pensions, and ensured that wages are rising faster than prices for the first time in over a decade, and the removal of the two-child cap will benefit more than 2,000 families in my constituency. Now we are moving further and faster to deliver the change that our country needs, bearing down on the costs facing ordinary families.
There is no clearer expression of the cost of living squeeze than people’s energy bills, which doubled under the last Government. The latest energy crisis highlights the danger of Britain’s continued reliance on volatile fossil fuel markets, which would only be exacerbated under the Conservatives and Reform. Genuine energy independence cannot be achieved through continued exposure to volatile global fossil fuel markets. The fastest way to improve energy security, while meeting the UK’s climate and nature obligations and bringing down bills, is through the expansion of renewable energy and the roll-out of energy efficiency and electrification measures. I urge my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero to go further and faster, looking not just at solar and wind—onshore and offshore—but at tidal, including wave energy and lagoons.
The need for change is pressing. A third of all households across Wales live in fuel poverty, amounting to approximately 9,000 households in Newport and 12,000 in Caerphilly county borough, and that can only be tackled by bringing down bills for good. I am disappointed to see that the Welsh Government in the Senedd have tied themselves in knots over decarbonising Wales’s energy supplies, because Plaid Cymru’s policy of undergrounding cables at all costs will mean cancelled projects and higher household bills. They need to rethink that as a matter of urgency. The Bill proposed in the King’s Speech shows that Labour is clear that the UK’s future is in clean, cheap power. The energy independence Bill is a decisive step towards energy security, warmer homes and reforming our broken energy market.
Liz Saville Roberts
Does the hon. Lady recognise that the communities in which energy infrastructure is placed, be it large or small, must start seeing real advantages from that energy? In parts of Wales, we pay the highest standing charges in the United Kingdom, yet we have historically exported energy and still do so. That has to change in order to make a difference to people’s lives, and in order that people welcome having the infrastructure that we need in Wales and possibly in the rest of the United Kingdom too.
Ruth Jones
I do not disagree with the right hon. Lady, because we absolutely need to make sure that our prices are fair. That means looking across Wales as a whole, but also benefiting from the renewables that we know Wales has in abundance. The energy independence Bill is a decisive step, as I said.
Another major scourge of bill payers that is firmly in the sights of this Government is our failing water companies, including Welsh Water, and I welcome the urgent steps being taken by the Government to reform our broken water system through a new water Bill. In March, Ofwat published its finding that Welsh Water breached its legal obligations in operating its waste water treatment works and network. Ofwat found that Welsh Water failed to operate, maintain and upgrade its waste water assets adequately to ensure that they could cope with the flows of sewage and waste water. We know that Welsh Water discharged raw sewage into rivers, lakes and seas for over 968,000 hours in 2024. Water pollution in Wales has reached emergency levels, so I welcome the water Bill. I look forward to seeing water bosses being held to account, and to the clean-up of our rivers and waterways.
I welcome further action by this Government to back British Steel. Whereas the Tories left our steel sector unsupported, Labour is taking action. That includes nationalising British Steel and protecting domestic production from international dumping and uncompetitive subsidies. UK Steel has said that the Government’s steel strategy is the most significant intervention to support UK steel competitiveness in over a decade. The Government’s new target for at least half of steel used in Britain to be made here is a major boost for Welsh steel, with Welsh manufacturing expected to account for half of future steelmaking. We must not forget about Port Talbot and Llanwern in south Wales, and I pay tribute to my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Newport East (Jessica Morden), for the sterling work that she has done to promote and protect our steel at Llanwern.
The Conservatives’ botched Brexit deal has been disproportionately damaging to the Welsh economy, because Wales remains a significant manufacturing economy, with 60% of our exports going to the European Union—that is 10% higher than the UK average. Although negotiations on the EU trade Bill are ongoing, I urge the Government to commit to securing a carve-out on animal welfare, like that secured by Switzerland in a similar deal. The UK is proudly a nation of animal lovers and a world leader in animal welfare standards, and we were the first country in the world to ban fur farming. A future trade deal, involving dynamic alignment in key sectors, must not risk watering down UK commitments to ban the sale of foie gras or end the import of fur.
I gently say to those on the Government Front Bench that there is a lack of legislation on animal welfare in this King’s Speech. I said that we are a nation of animal lovers, and the Government could have some easy wins. We are committed to the animal welfare strategy, and we could use it to ban the use of snare traps, bring forward a close season for hares, and bring into effect the Animals (Low-Welfare Activities Abroad) Act 2023. These are small pieces of legislation, but they could make a huge difference to wild, domestic and farmed animals, both here and abroad.
I will move on to small businesses. The Federation of Small Businesses has estimated that 50% to 54% of SMEs regularly experience late payments, which cost the average SME £22,000 a year. On average, businesses spend 86 hours a year chasing invoices. This is a massive problem for businesses in my constituency of Newport West and Islwyn, and I am pleased that we are taking action to stop it happening.
Looking ahead to Great British Railways, this Labour Government’s new railways Bill will transform the railway network in Wales as we deliver our £14 billion plan to improve Wales’s railways. Front and centre of that is the £90 million investment in five new stations between the Severn tunnel and Cardiff, including new stations at Newport West in my constituency and Cardiff Parkway next door. These new stations will support over 12,000 new jobs across Monmouthshire, Newport and Cardiff. South Wales is also set to benefit from an additional £40 million investment to upgrade two sets of rail tracks, which will improve service reliability and capacity for additional services. Labour’s railways Bill will also give the Welsh Government a new statutory role, to ensure that Wales-wide strategies feed into cross-border plans by Great British Railways. This will be a key pillar of the constructive and professional relationship between the two Governments as they work together for the benefit of people in Wales.
I turn now to the Timms review. I would welcome the Government’s continued ambition to support more young and disabled people into work by reforming the welfare system, but the changes must be based on compassion and provide effective support mechanisms for people to move into work, building on the already introduced right to try. I agree with His Majesty that we must have a system that is fair and fit for the future.
Finally, I turn to the conflict between Israel and Palestine. I welcome this Government’s continued commitment to supporting a two-state solution. We urgently need to work with partners to ensure a viable Palestinian state, alongside a secure Israel. In supporting peace efforts in the middle east, I press Ministers to call on Israel to end its continued bombing in Lebanon, which has seen over a million civilians displaced from their homes.
Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response Update
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Darren Jones
I answered that question in my opening statement. All final documents relevant to the ISC process are being handed over today.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Today’s statement is interesting, but we need to remember how we got here in the first place: the Prime Minister is facing allegations that he misled the House about the process by which an individual was appointed who had well-documented associations with a convicted paedophile and human trafficker. The Chief Secretary said yesterday that the Committee of Privileges is reserved for the most serious allegations. Does he recognise how that belittles what has been suffered by the victims and survivors?
Darren Jones
I am not quite clear what the question was in relation to the Humble Address. In relation to the Committee of Privileges motion before the House tomorrow, I refer to my previous answer.
Oral Answers to Questions
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(3 weeks, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jo Stevens
I am really surprised that the hon. Member has raised the expansion of the Senedd, because the accepted rationale of those who support the expansion is that it was necessary to improve scrutiny of the Welsh Government. What a terrible indictment that is of the inadequate performance of her party, whose job it has been, as the Opposition in the Senedd for the past 27 years, to carry out that scrutiny.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Families in Wales under Labour are struggling, with inflation in bills, wages flatlining and childcare costs higher than anywhere else in the UK. Plaid Cymru’s universal childcare offer would be a game changer. With full roll-out, that universal offer will be worth more than £30,000 a child, and it has been independently assessed as affordable and deliverable. Does the Secretary of State recognise how Labour’s chronic lack of ambition is keeping families in Wales in poverty?
Jo Stevens
Plaid’s manifesto, and specifically the childcare policy to which the right hon. Lady refers, exposes the fact that Plaid is not on the side of working people in Wales and is not serious about tackling the cost of living. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has been clear that Plaid would have to make spending cuts or raise taxes to pay for its unfunded manifesto pledges. When families are dealing with the cost of living, Plaid will be hiking taxes and slashing spending on child poverty, which will make families worse off. Families in Wales deserve better than a manifesto of economic fiction.
Liz Saville Roberts
The Secretary of State’s tight-lipped quibbling is just an excuse—a shadow of an apology for what her party has failed to do, having been in power for the past 27 years. It is no surprise to anybody that voters are ready for a change. Last night’s YouGov poll shows that Plaid Cymru and Reform UK are neck and neck in Wales, with Labour trailing far behind. Will she accept that a vote for Labour on 7 May risks handing power to Reform UK, which will wreck our NHS? Will she recognise that only Plaid Cymru can stop that?
Peter Mandelson: Government Appointment
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Alex Ballinger
Sir Olly Robbins will have an opportunity to account for himself, but he gave a very good account of himself at the Committee this morning, and it is not for me to make that judgment.
I can think of several good reasons why the FCDO and the MOD might need to use that discretion in the future. I am also really concerned that details about Peter Mandelson’s vetting were leaked to the press in September. Even considering Peter Mandelson’s misconduct, the integrity of that process is really important, and Sir Olly also raised concerns about that issue.
I hope that the reviews announced by the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister the other day will look at the leaks to the press, because it is unacceptable that such vital personal information about the vetting process has been released in that way. Most importantly, Sir Olly’s evidence rubbishes some of the accusations that Members made in the House and, indeed, in the media yesterday that questioned the Prime Minister’s honesty about the situation, because he categorically ruled out any suggestion that the Prime Minister knew anything about it, for good reason. The Members who made those accusations and were rightly thrown out of the House should correct the record and apologise.
Mr Speaker
Order. It is important that the hon. Member winds up, because I said seven minutes, and he has now taken 10 minutes.
Liz Saville Roberts
Does the hon. Member realise that to people outside, this argument—these fine details of process—morphs into a defence of ignorance and then into a defence of incompetency? That is actually doing the Prime Minister as much harm as all these arguments about his honesty.
Alex Ballinger
We have heard real concerns about the process, and I am glad that the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister has announced reviews into that process, because we really need to make sure we get it right in the future.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Yesterday the Prime Minister apologised to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein, but where was that sense of responsibility when he made the decision to appoint Peter Mandelson? Where was that sense of responsibility when he actively chose to ignore information that was already in the public domain?
This morning, the Energy Secretary said,
“Prime Ministers make errors. Prime Ministers are fallible. Prime Ministers are human”,
but I am struggling to understand how the gravity of the misjudgment in this political appointment can be explained away by simple human error. This was not a split-second judgment or a decision made of urgent necessity under pressure in the heat of the moment; instead, it was a deliberate, considered political appointment made in full knowledge of the political priorities involved. Morgan McSweeney even swore it through.
What is more, Government Members were given lines to take yesterday, prompting them to quote a victim of Epstein in defence of the Prime Minister. The suffering of Epstein’s victims was of no consequence to the Government when Mandelson was appointed; they weighed it in the scales and found which side they wanted to come down on.
In truth, it is thanks to the bravery of victims such as Virginia Giuffre that Epstein’s crimes are even in the public domain. Her sister-in-law, Amanda Roberts, said this of Mandelson’s sacking last year:
“Our governments have allowed these people to hold their status and their title without shame…It’s unfair we continuously pull these skeletons out, that survivors have to continuously point the finger for us to do the right thing.”
These were women and children who were trafficked and abused by a network of men who acted with the confidence that they were untouchable—too powerful to be challenged and too protected ever to be brought down. It truly raises the uncomfortable question of whether Peter Mandelson’s familiarity with that world was treated as a skillset rather than a red flag. Was he chosen precisely because he was comfortable rubbing shoulders with the sort of men who shared private jets with Epstein, rather than in spite of it? How can the Prime Minister now express sympathy for the victims of crimes committed by a man whose closest associate he chose to elevate? How can he claim to share their pain when he made the very decision that caused them such distress?
Just this morning, Sir Olly Robbins told the Foreign Affairs Committee that Downing Street asked the Foreign Office to find a senior diplomatic role for the Prime Minister’s then communications chief, Matt Doyle, even though Doyle had campaigned for a friend charged with possessing indecent images of children. This is the Government who promised to turn the page on Tory sleaze and restore trust and integrity to British politics; instead, the Prime Minister pressured the civil service not once but twice to appoint friends of known sex offenders to senior diplomatic roles.
In closing, the facts were known, the associations were known and the public record was clear. This was a public decision. It was a wrong decision of such magnitude that the only conclusion will be to end the Starmer Administration, and that will happen when the Labour party decides to do so, because it is the Labour party’s responsibility.
Security Vetting
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
Yes, I do agree with that. That is why this information could and should have been shared with me at the first opportunity—and that was before Peter Mandelson took up his post as ambassador.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
The Prime Minister is hiding behind a thicket of legalese and procedure, but he has a track record of appointing Labour’s most favoured sons and daughters to plum Government jobs and into the House of Lords. In Wales, we know all about Labour’s crony culture—who could forget UK Labour’s favourite First Minister, Vaughan Gething, who was propped up by No. 10 in spite of dodgy donations and is now tipped for a peerage? On the timing, how will the Prime Minister explain to his party his role in bringing down Labour’s century of dominance in Wales in the forthcoming elections?
The Prime Minister
I am addressing the question about the process in relation to Peter Mandelson. I have set that out in some detail to the House and answered a number of questions.
Hatzola Ambulance Attack
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dan Jarvis
I completely understand that many members of the Jewish community are living their lives under the threat of the kind of activities that we saw this morning, but I hope that nobody here thinks that that is remotely acceptable. That is why we all have a responsibility to redouble our efforts and ensure that not only are we seeking to provide that reassurance, but more practically, we are putting in place the right laws and powers and ensuring that we have the right resource to take on that threat.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
My thoughts are with the Jewish community in north London. There is something particularly abhorrent about the destruction of ambulances, and actions motivated by extreme hatred must be condemned. No one anywhere should be made to feel at risk because of their race or religion. How are risks to the wider Jewish community, particularly those communities that are perhaps scattered or individual families or even individuals, being assessed at present—this is of course relevant to Wales—because so many people feel at risk?
Dan Jarvis
I completely agree with the right hon. Member. It is beyond abhorrent that anyone would seek to target ambulances providing an extremely important and valuable public service in the way that we have seen this morning. She is also right to make the wider point about ensuring that no community is left behind. While the attack this morning has taken place in London, as I mentioned in my earlier remarks, we saw a terrible terrorist attack take place in Greater Manchester last October. Wherever we have Jewish communities in our country, we need to ensure that the police and the range of other organisations provide the support that is obviously now required.
Points of Order
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker
I hope that satisfies the hon. Member, otherwise he can obviously pursue this further.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Has the Speaker received any notice of a statement from the Government following the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins) to the Prime Minister this morning regarding the contents of a memo from the Prime Minister to Cabinet members advising them to disregard opposition from devolved Governments to direct interventions by Westminster Ministers. Can you advise me how the long-standing Sewel convention, which enshrines the protocol that Westminster Governments do not intervene in devolved matters in Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland, has been respected in this matter, and can you direct me to which bin this has been filed by the Government?
Madam Deputy Speaker
I thank the right hon. Member for giving notice of her point of order. I have received no such indication from the Government—
Oral Answers to Questions
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I thank the hon. Lady for raising that issue. I know there are strong views, and I acknowledge her personal connection, which shows how serious the issues are. It is a matter of conscience. It is for Parliament to decide the passage of the legislation and any changes. Scrutiny is a matter for the other place. We have a responsibility to make sure any legislation is workable, effective and enforceable.
Mr Speaker
Is it about PMQs? The right hon. Lady did not ask a question, so is it relevant? Points of order come after statements and UQs—[Interruption.] I will make that decision. We now come to the urgent question.
China: Foreign Interference Arrests
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
It is a source of concern that two of the three men were arrested in Wales, and that they have close associations with the Labour party. Given that the Senedd goes to the polls in just over two months—in the shadow, of course, of the Nathan Gill scandal—what support will be given to the Electoral Commission to ensure that there are sufficient resources to safeguard those elections against the growing threat of foreign interference?
Dan Jarvis
The right hon. Member is right to raise the importance of the work done by the Electoral Commission. It is a key member of the defending democracy taskforce, and we work closely to ensure that it has the powers it needs to do the difficult job asked of it. She will obviously understand that the Rycroft review and the Representation of the People Bill will not provide legislative change in advance of elections that are taking place in May. That is precisely why we are working closely with the devolved institutions, and we will be having further contact with them over the coming weeks, to ensure that the important elections that are taking place around the country in May do so in a fair and free environment. That is what we all want to see.
Middle East
Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
No one here is an apologist for the cruel Iranian regime, but the escalation initiated by the US Administration and the Israeli Government is illegal, and I am certain that the Prime Minister knows this. Hundreds of thousands of UK citizens are directly affected and at risk, and they include people from Dwyfor Meirionnydd. While there must be questions anon about a vote in this House as we fear that these defensive actions will slide into offensive ones, but we do not know how we will track that process. None the less, the question for today that people want us to ask is this: when will people be coming home, especially from Doha and Dubai?
The Prime Minister
I know that the right hon. Lady’s constituents, and all our constituents, will be very concerned, particularly since there are 300,000 British nationals in the region. We want to make sure that the answer to her question is that we will get them home as quickly and as safely as we can, and we are working with our regional allies on this as we speak.