Nepal: UK Government Support

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Wednesday 14th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Government support for the situation in Nepal.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss the Government’s response to the recent terrible floods in Nepal. I hope that the debate will be an important opportunity to demonstrate the strong links between Britain and Nepal and to understand more about the response to those dreadful floods. I also want to ask the Minister for an update on the response and on Britain’s continuing support for the longer-term reconstruction of the affected area and the development of Nepal more broadly. I will start, however, by echoing the Prime Minister’s words on the disaster by saying that Nepal has always been there for Britain, and now Britain needs to be there for Nepal.

As everybody here will know, we have a very strong—some would say special—relationship with Nepal that goes back over 200 years. The Gurkhas served in the British Army throughout the 19th century and in world war one, world war two and numerous other conflicts since, including Malaysia, Brunei, the Falklands and Afghanistan. More recently, Gurkha soldiers were deployed to deal with the civil emergency in south Wales when they helped to tackle the very serious wildfires this summer.

I also want to acknowledge and celebrate the significant civil contribution of the British Nepalese community, most notably in my own community and others around the country where British Nepalese residents work in the NHS, our local transport system, small businesses, IT and many other walks of life. There is enormous pride in that connection in Reading and the areas across the country with significant Gurkha and Nepalese communities, and there is also a great deal of support for and concern about the situation in Nepal.

I offer my deepest condolences to all those affected by the floods, both the families who lost loved ones and those whose loved ones are still missing. It was a truly awful disaster that affected thousands and thousands of people. I understand the latest estimates are that around 1,400 people lost their lives and that 5,000 are still missing. The images are very difficult to describe. As my colleague Pratikshya Gurung, a local councillor on Reading borough council who is originally from Nepal, said to me at the time, it was so awful that people simply could not watch the news. They could not watch their television because of the horrors that were unfolding. We can all remember the images. Our hearts go out to all of those involved, both families who lost loved ones and families whose loved ones are still missing.

The floods have left grieving families, orphans and lost family members. Sadly, several families in my community in Reading, both in my constituency and in neighbouring constituencies, lost loved ones. There has also been a terrible effect on the very large British Nepalese community in Aldershot. I offer my condolences to all the communities around the country. I understand many colleagues will want to speak about their own communities or just offer their support more generally. I pay tribute to the work of other Members, including my hon. Friends the Members for Reading West and Mid Berkshire (Olivia Bailey), for Earley and Woodley (Yuan Yang), for Aldershot (Alex Baker), for Bracknell (Peter Swallow), for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) and for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) and many others. Many were not able to attend today, but they wanted to offer their support.

I also thank the Nepalese armed forces, emergency services, medical staff and many others who led the rescue operation in August and early September, and also their international colleagues, including British personnel. They serve with distinction, and many of them continue to serve in the difficult aftermath of the disaster.

I am very proud of the links between Britain and Nepal and the support offered by the British Government, charities in Britain and local communities. I look forward to the Minister updating us on that later. I pay particular tribute to the help offered by our armed services and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in the immediate aftermath. I understand from briefings I have had with Ministers that there was incredibly close working between British and Nepalese forces, and that a range of technical help, as well as financial support, was offered to deal with some very specific issues. The FCDO offered a £5 million fund for immediate support, and it increased consular assistance, bringing extra staff into the embassy in Kathmandu.

I thank the Government for that prompt response and for the continuing support Britain is offering to Nepal, as the second biggest bilateral donor to the country. I also thank Ministers for the support they have given me and other members of the Nepal all-party parliamentary group. The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) and Baroness Winterton provided vital assistance with casework and with briefings on the fast-moving situation.

I turn now to the support provided by charities. The Disasters Emergency Committee has played an important role, and I am pleased to see the continuing work it is undertaking in Nepal. UNICEF provided me with a briefing and support, and the United Nations has done important work in this situation.

More locally, I pay tribute to the community groups, including the Greater Reading Nepalese Community Association and others around the country, who provided such heartfelt and important support. I would like to mention a number of local residents, particularly Bhimsen Khadka, who is the chair of the association in Reading; Dev Bahadur and his wife Aruna Gurung; Chandra Budhathoki, who is the head of the Forgotten British Gurkha charity, which provides important support to retired Gurkhas in our area; Pratikshya and Deepak Gurung—Pratikshya is a local councillor; Ram Galami, a retired serviceman who works to support service personnel; and Bipin Duwadi, the chargé d’affaires at the Nepalese embassy, who has been extremely helpful in providing briefings and encouraging ongoing links between Britain and Nepal and those of us who have Nepalese communities in our constituencies.

I will offer an indication of what it felt like at the time, because it is worth understanding the sense of feeling—I am sure colleagues will deal with this as well. We had a spontaneous vigil in Reading town centre outside our large Marks & Spencer store on Broad Street, which is the main shopping street in the town. It was on a Sunday evening, and hundreds of people showed up. It was organised by the Greater Reading Nepalese Community Association. However, there was huge support from people who are not from Nepal—people from all walks of life across the town—and that was echoed across the country, from what I understand.

The sense of support was incredible. The sense of patriotism—both Nepalese and British patriotism—the deep connection with the armed forces and the sense of solidarity between people was quite overwhelming and powerful. For example, Pratikshya, who is a local councillor, had a resident turn up at her house randomly and say, “I would like to give you 50 quid towards this campaign, because it’s so important to me.” We had other people coming up to us in the street when we had the vigil and asking if they could light a candle to show their support. The level of support was very impressive and, indeed, overwhelming. I would like to thank all those who helped, and that help is continuing and developing.

My office and other MPs’ offices have been active in working with local campaigners. I pay particular tribute to English Martyrs school in Reading, and English Martyrs church, which are some of the many organisations that have offered their support—they are offering to do some fundraising through a sponsored walk. That is typical of the kind of community-based activity that is under way, which will support the help for victims and the much-needed long-term reconstruction of the country. I would like to thank everyone for that.

I appreciate that other colleagues need to address the issues in their communities, but I would like to ask the Minister a series of specific questions, and I look forward to hearing his answers. One of the biggest impacts has been on families both in Britain and Nepal, and some of the casework is very difficult for us to deal with as local MPs. I cannot go into individual cases, but what has happened to so many families—those in Britain with relatives there, and those in Nepal—is really awful. People who were on pilgrimages to the lakes where the water came from are still missing, and in some cases they are older people. One gentleman from Reading, a retired Gurkha who was on a pilgrimage, is still missing, and there are many others, including from other British communities. Many Hindus make pilgrimages to those sacred lakes. It is worth considering the serious impact on families in the short term and the longer term, and I look forward to the Minister saying a bit more about that.

A very large number of people have been affected—something like 84,000, including about 32,000 children, some of whom are orphans. I was speaking to someone about that earlier this week. Some orphans are being cared for in Buddhist monasteries in the area, and some are being cared for and put up in schools. What happened is still having very real practical implications. This is a terrible human tragedy, and there is an ongoing need for practical development and assistance in the area. Nepal is a developing country—it is one of the world’s lower-income countries.

Will the Minister provide an update on the humanitarian response and the ongoing work in the area, including within the affected river system? There is a need to rebuild bridges, schools and homes, and to provide greater resilience if climate change is increasing the risk of such threats. In particular, will the Minister address the environmental issues and the long-term concerns? There was a smaller flood this week in the Gorkha district. The Budhi Gandaki river flooded, and a number of people are now missing. It was a mudslide—a large amount of mud and rocks went into the river—so it is not quite the same, although it is happening in the same geographical location. There are great concerns in the British Nepalese community that this type of disaster may occur again.

I declare an interest: several members of my family are environmental scientists. My dad visited Nepal for a programme in the 1990s, through which a number of countries provided assistance to developing countries to provide greater resilience against natural disasters of this kind. Separately, I visited Nepal as a walker with my wife some years ago.

Will the Minister address the particular risks in mountainous regions such as Nepal with very steep river valleys, high levels of rainfall, glacial lakes and glaciers that may sadly now be melting because of the climate emergency? What are the practical implications? How can the UK and other advanced countries provide greater resources, including monitoring and early warning? What measures can be taken to provide greater resilience to the communities involved, which now appear to be far more at risk of threats from this type of disaster, even on a smaller scale?

I look forward to the Minister’s answers to those questions. More generally, will he talk about the ongoing work that Britain is doing with Nepal to encourage its development? Nepal hoped to move out of a certain category of developing countries. It did not quite make it, but it is developing and there is incredible potential. Its new Government are working closely with our Government. The first official visit to the new Government was made by a British Minister, which is an important indication of the special relationship between our two countries. There is scope for greater trade and support, and the British Nepalese community is very active in our country. I look forward to the Minister’s response. I realise that this is not his brief, but will he contact his colleague in the Ministry of Defence and ask for an update for the community on the unrelated issue of pensions for a certain group of Gurkha soldiers—those who retired before 1997 and have a different pension arrangement from that of more recent retirees?

Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak, Ms McVey. I am really grateful to Mr Speaker and the House authorities for granting me the opportunity to have this debate. I look forward to hearing more from colleagues and the Minister.

--- Later in debate ---

[Matt Rodda]

It has been a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I thank Mr Speaker for granting this debate, the House and the Members who have spoken today, including the Opposition Front-Bench spokesman and the spokeswoman for the Liberal Democrats. Today’s debate has raised some important issues, and like the Prime Minister, I believe that Nepal has always been there for Britain, so now Britain has to be there for Nepal. I was pleased to hear the Minister’s response, and, in particular, about the work under way this week at the UN and the World Bank, where the Foreign Secretary is working closely with the Nepalese Finance Minister. I look forward to hearing more details about that and the vital consular and reconstruction work.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered Government support for the situation in Nepal.

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Wednesday 4th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)]

The Government are cutting our aid budget by a third, from 0.5% to 0.3% of gross national income, by 2027—the steepest reduction in a generation, driven by the defence spending review. Much has already been said on this matter, and I am not here simply to oppose the cuts or argue that, in the current climate, we must instantly reverse them. Perhaps it is precisely the right moment in the arc of economic history to ask how we can do more with less, what we are actually buying with this money, and how we can get to the point at which we can say, hand on heart, to our constituents that we know the impact of our spend.

The FCDO’s stated aim remains

“alleviating poverty and stabilising countries to enable them to go on that journey themselves”.

That is the right ambition, but the model we have used to deliver that has been confused for far too long. We often hear of the financing gaps—the trillions that must be filled to meet the sustainable development goals and to overcome the challenge of climate change—but the reality is that overseas development assistance cannot so much as touch the sides in all this.

Furthermore, we know that our developing country partners across the world primarily want investment, not aid, and partnership, not paternalism. To unleash that investment, we must ensure that we level the financial playing field and build capital markets, both public and private, that ultimately drive growth and prosperity in those countries. Global debt reform, an area in which the City and the English courts could play a globally leading role, is just one of many ways in which we can strengthen the macroeconomic stability and financial capacity that these countries so desperately need.

Less aid need does not mean less investment overall; it means that we can no longer afford the luxury of, at worst, waste and, at best, a misallocation of resources. When done well, investment means trusting local knowledge, building local institutions, and empowering local businesswomen and businessmen, who are ultimately responsible for delivering economic growth that sustainably lifts people out of poverty.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is giving an excellent speech, and some powerful points are being made. Does he agree that many development charities have made these points for some time, including Oxfam, the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development and many others? In their experience, this is a well-known approach.

[Noah Law]

I greatly welcome the advocacy work of the charities that my hon. Friend mentions, as well as the grassroots work of charities, which are increasingly not funded directly by ODA. I welcome the work that they do; it is really important that we build a coherent view of the financing, investment and donor ecosystem that we need to work within this constrained world.

As I have suggested, I very much welcome our Government’s shift from donor to investor, but I have a question for the Minister. At a time when we effectively have an in-built bias towards capital investment over resource spending in our Government’s fiscal policy, why are we not able to go further in capitalising on some of the very institutions that we know will deliver on the development and climate goals, and in helping to mobilise the vast sums that we know are needed to develop the world’s poorest economies? That capital could return to Britain’s public coffers, so that it can be put to future use.

First and foremost, overseas development aid must be allocated to problems that investment cannot solve, be they the world’s worst humanitarian crises or investment in public goods, such as climate adaptation, which cannot easily be monetised yet can save billions of dollars-worth of damage to some of our most climate-vulnerable countries around the world in the long term.

At a time when we have been considering cutting ICAI, why are we looking to create new bodies such as the ODA delivery board and the new Soft Power Council, rather than working to embed rigorously or incorporate better the assessments of value for money—an explicit, albeit qualified, return on our goal of raising the number of people lifted out of poverty for every £1 spent—in every aspect of the FCDO’s development work, so we can say to our constituents, hand on heart, that beyond all doubt the money is well spent, and show that, despite the smaller sums, the money is going further every year?

Let us be partners, not patrons; let us invest smarter, trust deeper and step back a little further where necessary; and let us measure success not by how much we give, but by how little is eventually needed.

Ukraine

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Wednesday 25th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[John Healey]

The principle on which we have donated British-made weapons to Ukraine has been consistently for the defence of Ukraine. That is how Ukraine has been using them, and using them effectively.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I appreciate the tone of the Secretary of State’s speech and offer him my wholehearted support. Will he say a little more about the valuable work under way in our tech industry on defence technology and how he is modernising procurement to encourage those vital companies to come forward?

[John Healey]

I know that my hon. Friend has some advanced defence tech firms in his patch. There are things we can do in this country that are valuable to Ukraine, and I will come on to a particular joint programme we have with Ukraine in a moment, but I have to say to my hon. Friend that the Ukrainians have the most creative, combat-experienced defence industry and armed forces in the world at present, and we also have a great deal to learn. It is important that we are able to welcome Ukrainian firms that wish to set up new factories and plants in the United Kingdom. I know that the shadow Defence Secretary has welcomed such a Ukrainian company into his constituency—it is set to open this week, I hope.

--- Later in debate ---

[Frank McNally (Coatbridge and Bellshill) (Lab)]

I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this afternoon’s debate. I wholly welcome the remarks made by my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary and by Members from across the House, including the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Lewes (James MacCleary), and the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton).

This is a debate we would rather not be having, but the actions of the Kremlin have led us to this place and to the untold death, injury, suffering and displacement of millions of Ukrainians. Up to 2 million people have been killed or injured or are missing on both sides, 3.7 million Ukrainians have been displaced internally, and there are close to 6 million refugees—men, women and children ripped from their homes, their work, their schools, their families and their very way of life. All that has happened at the hands of a Russian aggressor whose intransigence towards this conflict means that it will continue into its fifth year, despite the catastrophic losses that the Russians themselves have experienced.

There is no doubt that the invasion of Ukraine was a defining moment of our time, although in many ways it was inevitable, given Putin’s rhetoric and actions over the last 25 years. However, the arrogance and the hubris of Russia also resulted in a vast overestimation of its might and a failure to account for the gallantry of the Ukrainian forces, as well as the robust leadership of President Zelensky and the stout resistance and resilience of the civilian population. Far from taking Kyiv in two weeks, Putin has resorted to terrorising the citizens of Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities from a distance with frequent deadly air raids. The comments made earlier about air defence, and the Government’s actions in that regard, are therefore to be welcomed.

There are so many enduring and stark images from this conflict, but two of them stand out for me, the first being the evacuations on the platforms of Lviv railway station. Ukrainians were forced to flee for their lives, never knowing whether they would return. A significant contingent—nearly 400—made passage to North Lanarkshire, and many of them still reside in the High Coats area of Coatbridge in my constituency, joining a long legacy of successful settlement in North Lanarkshire over the years by people fleeing crisis and danger from across the globe.

[Matt Rodda]

Perhaps my hon. Friend will say something about the important work of Ukrainian community centres around Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In my community, they have been stalwart in supporting their colleagues back in Ukraine, sending aid and raising funds, and also maintaining Ukrainian culture through the Ukrainian language libraries and other facilities that have kept families in touch with their own culture while they are living in Britain.

[Frank McNally]

My hon. Friend is entirely right. In the High Coats area, the way in which the Ukrainian community are supporting those who are fighting on the frontline is admirable. In Coatbridge, the Ukrainian population have celebrated their national holiday, organised kids’ clubs, and formed a tenants’ association and walking groups. There is now a flourishing community of Ukrainians who are celebrating their own culture and thinking about how they can contribute and what they can offer to the wider community.

Sadly, that open celebration of their culture by Ukrainians in Coatbridge stands in stark contrast to the experience of Ukrainians thousands of miles away in Ukraine, where the Russian occupying forces have sought to erase Ukrainian culture and identity in the territories that have been devastated by those forces over the past four years—by the boundless terror, kidnap and murder that we have seen, and the monstrous stealing and indoctrination of thousands of children, which has already been mentioned. The first person to draw my attention to the scale of that was my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter), who, as the Defence Secretary mentioned, is at this moment in Ukraine receiving the Order of Merit, and deservedly so.

The other defining image that I recall from the early days of the war followed the liberation of Bucha, particularly when President Zelensky walked through what had been left after the brutal massacre and war crimes perpetrated by Russian forces, for which there must be full accountability. Despite Bucha—and, indeed, Mykolaiv, Mariupol and Kharkiv—the Ukrainians fight on. It is, of course, vital for our own security, as well as being our moral obligation, that we continue to have their backs. I greatly welcome the Government’s action on defence spending across the UK, and it is important that we build on that. Defence spending is worth £2 billion a year to Scotland and supports 12,000 jobs, from the Clyde and Rosyth to Coatbridge and Bellshill and across the country.

In addition to implementing the strongest possible sanctions, we must continue to support those Ukrainians who have settled here and built a life over the course of the past four years. For many it has not been by choice, but our communities have become their home, and we must always keep that at the forefront of our minds. However long this war has left to run, we must remain resolute in supporting the Ukrainians to find a just peace that satisfies their terms and ensures that the depredations of Putin’s regime are ended in Ukraine and never visited upon anywhere else in Europe.

Ukraine

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Doughty]

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are well aware of the number of cases. Russia has obligations under the Geneva convention, and we expect them to be upheld. We regularly raise these cases at the appropriate levels. I am happy to talk to him separately about that specific case, but he can be assured that I am well aware of that and a number of other cases. We are clear that international law must be upheld, including the basic principles of treatment of prisoners of war and situations involving children. That goes to the heart of the nature of what the Russian regime has been doing and the lengths it is willing to go to. We urge the upholding of the commitments to basic decency and the treatment of individuals, to which we are all signed up.

We are standing with Ukrainian people on the ground in their hour of need. We have provided more than £577 million in humanitarian support for vulnerable citizens since the invasion began, including those forced to flee their homes. This year we will spend up to £100 million on support, including to help families through this harsh winter. We have upped our support in energy, particularly in response to regular attacks on energy infrastructure. A lot of our work is to help to mitigate that, but the scale of those attacks is severe and they have a daily impact, as Members can see in media reporting and from what we know on the ground.

There is no firmer friend for Ukraine than the UK. Indeed, our commitment runs deep. I have mentioned the crucial 100-year partnership that the Prime Minister signed with President Zelensky in Kyiv. That agreement has enhanced co-operation across defence and security, science, trade and culture.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for his update, particularly the in-depth overview that he is giving us. Further to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali), I would appreciate an update on the work that the Minister is doing to support families in this country. I commend to him the work of the Ukrainian community centre in Reading, where there is a Ukrainian language library. It is one of the very few in the south of England, and people visit from west London and Oxford to use it. It is important that families are able to maintain their native language and that children can retain their culture at this difficult time. Will he say a few words about the importance of that form of domestic support?

[Stephen Doughty]

My hon. Friend makes a hugely important point. Indeed, there is a similar initiative—a Ukrainian language library—in my constituency. It is absolutely crucial that that support is given, not only because it is the right thing to do for those young people, enabling them to maintain a connection to their culture, heritage and language, but because it stands in stark contrast to the attempts by Putin to wipe out their language, culture, history and heritage—not least through the abduction of children and continued attacks. One of the most moving moments during my visit to Kyiv was in a bunker under a school, where I saw the remarkable fortitude and resilience of young people and their teachers in the face of Russia’s attempts to destroy their lives physically and psychologically. They stand firm and resilient, as Ukrainians do. That should be a lesson to us all.

Under the 100-year partnership, as well as the joint development of drone technology, trading links, digital connection and other matters, we also have important school-twinning programmes. Those things will, collectively, deliver long-term economic growth and security for the UK and Ukraine, and strengthen ties between our nations.

I will end my remarks as I know that many Members wish to contribute. The UK’s support for Ukraine is iron-clad. The Ukrainians’ security is our security. We fully support US-led efforts to secure a just and lasting peace. As we have said repeatedly, only the Ukrainian people can decide their future. We remain committed to the principle that international borders must never be changed by force, and any deal must guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty and security—and, indeed, Europe and the United Kingdom’s security—in the future. In the meantime, we will not hesitate to keep supporting Ukraine and ensure that it has the military equipment to defend itself, while sustaining the economic pressure on Putin to cut off the revenues funding this barbaric war, and ensuring accountability for the appalling scenes of destructions and devastation, be they against children, infrastructure or the whole nation of Ukraine. Slava Ukraini.

Budget Resolutions

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Wednesday 26th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris Evans]

Yes, we are in charge and we are taking the action we need to take. I do not understand what the hon. Gentleman wants us to do. Does he expect us to stand there and do nothing, or to walk away? Is that what he wants? At the end of the day, this is going nowhere. What we need to talk about are the fundamental problems.

We have heard a lot of analysis from the Opposition Benches about what is wrong, but what are we to do? We have to grasp the nettle. The fact is that net zero is here. We hear a lot of Members on the Opposition Benches saying, “Net zero is causing us problems.” The simple fact is that it is here and there are countries that are way ahead of us. We have an opportunity to be a green superpower. We can invest in nuclear energy. We can invest in tidal power. We can invest in renewables and carbon capture technology. These are the waves of the future, along with AI. This is where the jobs will come from. This is where the growth will come from. We have to pick winners, but we have to have the political will as well.

I have visited a number of companies in my constituency and the issue they have is energy bills. Captiva is a very successful spa and Team Rees Gym is also very successful. Both have talked to me about energy bills. I welcome the reduction in energy bills of £150 on average and £300 for the most impoverished, but I would like to see some sort of deal on energy for businesses to ensure that their costs come down and they can carry on competing. I welcome the increase in the minimum wage, but I also ask the Chancellor for some help for small and medium-sized businesses, so that they can carry on employing people and producing apprenticeships.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech, and I wholeheartedly agree about the appalling damage done by the Conservatives to our economy over 14 years. I wonder whether he would also mention the significant benefit to both employers and employees of the freezing of rail fares, which will make an enormous difference in my community. We have a net input of people commuting into Reading, but like Caerphilly we also have many people who commute to London and other destinations on the railway line. Many residents will benefit, and many employers will also benefit through the increased labour mobility.

[Chris Evans]

I absolutely agree, and I wish the Conservatives would apologise. It is quite simple: freezing rail fares mean that people can get work easier and can commute from places like Reading; it will bring money to the shops, restaurants and everywhere else. It is a really important move for social mobility, and will allow more people to travel from Reading to London, too.

I would say one thing in caution. I still do not understand why we have a Budget in November. I ask that the Treasury move the Budget to April, at the end of the financial year, so that businesses can plan from there and we do not have the speculation we have seen over the past couple of months.

In conclusion, I support the Budget and I support what we are doing. I am sure that in years to come, we will look back on this Budget as one of the more significant.

--- Later in debate ---

[Janet Daby]

I thank the hon. Member for his support for the Chancellor’s Budget and the lifting of the two-child benefit limit. I agree with what he said.

I remind Members what my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier) said: 70% of children in poverty have parents who are in work. Children are not in poverty because their parents are not working. This Government are doing everything they can to lift children out of poverty. I also remind Members about the Children Act 1989, which states that the welfare of the child is paramount. If memory serves me correctly, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs refers to food. Getting children out of poverty means ensuring that no child goes hungry and that children have their basic needs met. This Government are very much committed to that, which is why I am delighted that the measure is in the Chancellor’s Budget.

[Matt Rodda]

My hon. Friend is making an excellent point. Is she ready to move on to the importance of breakfast clubs? Last week, I had the pleasure of welcoming the Prime Minister and the Education Secretary to Reading, where they visited a breakfast club providing excellent support to many children. The programme to expand them is really valuable, as it will invest in our young people and make huge differences to families. It will also help employers by helping mums and dads to get to work earlier.

[Janet Daby]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments. I will indeed come to breakfast clubs—how could I miss them out?

The Resolution Foundation has estimated that scrapping the two-child limit would bring 330,000 children out of poverty and prevent a further 150,000 children from falling into poverty over the course of this Parliament. Children in my constituency will therefore have an improved standard of living, which is exactly what I want for them, just as Labour Members—and others, I am sure—want for their children. In fact, it is estimated that in Lewisham East, 3,530 children’s experience of relative child poverty will be reduced.

That builds on the vital work already begun by this Government, including on expanding access to free school meals, opening free breakfast clubs in every primary school and investing in historic amounts of affordable and social housing. Alongside that, we have the recently announced freeze of rail fares and prescription prices.

Every child deserves to be free from poverty and the effects of poverty. For far too long, successive Conservative Governments allowed child poverty to skyrocket; this Government will not. As a result of that failure, almost a fifth of children in my constituency grow up in poverty, but with the policies announced today, it is evident that the Labour Government are tackling child poverty as the moral imperative that it is.

Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Committee of the whole House & 3rd reading
Monday 17th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

--- Later in debate ---

[Seema Malhotra]

The right hon. Member will be aware that the UK also made a declaration upon the signature of the BBNJ agreement stating that the Antarctic treaty system comprehensively addresses the legal, political and environmental considerations that are unique to that region, and provides a comprehensive framework for the international management of the Antarctic. It is important to recognise that it is also about the international management of the Antarctic, to which we are committed as part of the international community. I thank the right hon. Member for his comments.

In part 3 of the Bill, clauses 11 to 13 implement the provisions relating to area-based management tools, including areas beyond national jurisdiction designated as marine protected areas. Clause 11 contains provision for the Secretary of State to be able to make regulations to implement decisions adopted by the BBNJ conference of the parties under part 3 of the agreement. Many activities under UK jurisdiction or control in areas beyond national jurisdiction, such as fishing, are already regulated domestically, and where existing powers suffice, the clause 11 power will not be needed. However, where new measures are adopted by the conference of the parties, where they require additional controls or restrictions, the clause ensures that the UK has the necessary legislative mechanisms to comply. Clause 12 sets out the parliamentary procedure for regulations made under clause 11.

Clause 13 provides a power for the Secretary of State to issue directions to UK craft, without the need for secondary legislation in order to implement emergency procedures adopted by the conference of the parties. As emergency procedures may require immediate action to prevent serious harm to marine biodiversity, regulations alone may not provide sufficient responsiveness. The clause enables swift operational steps, such as directing vessels to avoid a particular area. Clause 13 is modelled on existing direction-making powers available to the Secretary of State’s representative under schedule 3A to the Merchant Shipping Act 1995. Given the nature of any scenarios that could arise, it is power-limited in scope and emergency in nature.

Part 3 of the Bill ensures that the UK can meet its obligations and exercise leadership in protecting ecologically important areas beyond national jurisdiction.

[Matt Rodda]

The Minister is making an excellent speech, and I pay tribute to her work and that of the Government in showing UK leadership in this important environmental area. Could she also briefly touch on the importance of working in a multilateral way with partners from around the world, and—perhaps she will move on to this point later in her speech—could she outline how the UK will work with other countries to protect these areas and carry out other important work?

[Seema Malhotra]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that this is an area where obviously no nation can work on its own. It has to be done through being influential on the world stage, working through and with the UN, and with our international partners and other nations. Indeed, through the course of all of our conversations, be that in the FCDO, DEFRA or other Departments, we maintain dialogue on this and other important matters in relation to our environment and climate impact around the world. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that issue, because it is another example of where being outward facing as a nation, as this Government have chosen to do, is incredibly important for not just what we achieve at home but our responsibilities on the world stage.

I will make some progress on part 4 of the Bill. Clauses 4 to 19 implement the environmental impact assessment provisions of the agreement, where relevant to marine licencing, and ensure that UK marine-licensable activities and areas beyond national jurisdiction are subject to the appropriate level of scrutiny. Clause 14 amends the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 to ensure it can be used effectively to regulate planned UK activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Government amendment 1—a minor amendment—has been tabled to omit the heading “on the continental shelf”, which will adjust the 2009 Act so it more accurately reflects the content of this section, including the section that is amended by clause 14 in part 4 of the Bill.

Clause 15 updates the Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007 to bring them into alignment with the BBNL agreement. Government amendment 2 would add “or person” to subsection (5)(b) as a minor clarificatory amendment to the regulations. Clause 16 allows regulations to be made to implement the standards and guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties under article 38 of the BBNJ agreement. Clauses 17 and 18 ensure that equivalent provisions exist for Scotland, amending the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, and enabling Scottish Ministers to make regulations where it is a devolved competence, and to implement environmental impact assessment obligations for Scottish regulated marine activities.

Clause 19 amends the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, to ensure that any future environmental outcomes reports can apply to licensable activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The BBNJ environmental impact assessment provisions closely replicate our existing domestic arrangements for marine licensing, which operators are familiar with. These are minor technical changes to align our existing regime with BBNJ processes. Together the provisions deliver a coherent and modernised framework for assessing and mitigating the environmental impact of activities linked to the United Kingdom on the high seas.

BBC Monitoring Service

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Thursday 4th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Sir Julian Lewis]

I could not agree more. May I take the opportunity to thank the hon. Gentleman again for the excellent debate on the BBC World Service, which he led on 26 June, if I remember correctly, and which gave me the idea to bring forward the subject of BBC Monitoring separately?

Over very many years, BBC Monitoring had built up the closest conceivable relationship with its United States counterpart, known as Open Source Enterprise, or OSE. Indeed, the two organisations were based on alternate floors of the Caversham Park headquarters, dividing between them the coverage of global broadcasting to the enormous benefit of both countries in the transatlantic alliance. This was the nerve centre of world-beating open source intelligence, yet the BBC decided to evict OSE and sell the Caversham estate.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for making such an excellent speech. Caversham Park sits in my constituency, and it was a wonderful facility. I pay tribute to those who worked there over many years, breaking vital news stories and providing information to the Foreign Office, such as the initial news reports of the Iranian revolution in 1979 and many other similar events that were only able to be recorded because of the amazing talents of the linguists and journalists based at the facility, which has sadly now been mothballed and is due to be sold to a developer. Would the right hon. Member like to comment on the role of those staff?

[Sir Julian Lewis]

I am extremely grateful for that intervention. I am sure that the staff of BBC Monitoring, both present and past, will be grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the support that he has rightly expressed for them.

Ukraine War: London Talks

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Thursday 24th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Doughty]

While I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s party’s continued support for a united front on Ukraine, I do not recognise his characterisation of the talks yesterday, which were productive and constructive, and involved the United States. The Foreign Secretary also spoke to Secretary of State Rubio just the night before, and we are in regular contact with our US counterparts. Secretary of State Rubio welcomed the fact that we were hosting special envoy Kellogg alongside others. Of course, the Prime Minister has been in contact with President Trump in recent days, and the Foreign Secretary has been in contact with his counterpart.

We share the President’s desire to bring this barbaric war to an end. Of course Russia could do that tomorrow by withdrawing its forces and ending its illegal invasion. We are working with all our allies, including the United States, on a plan to stop the fighting. We obviously need agreement among all of us on that—European allies, the United States and others—and we are working closely with President Trump on that, but we are also clear that Ukraine’s voice must be at the heart of any talks. We warmly welcome the agreements and discussions between the United States and Ukraine, but ultimately the ball is in President Putin’s court. He continues instead to fire missiles and cause the destruction and killing that the hon. Gentleman rightly highlighted. It is utterly horrific. The responsibility lies with one person, and that is Vladimir Putin.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I associate myself with the Minister’s comments about the appalling attacks on Ukraine last night, and I thank him for his statement today. Will he update the House on the support the Government are offering to Ukrainian communities across the UK at this very difficult time, such as the large Ukrainian community in Reading?

[Stephen Doughty]

I thank my hon. Friend for his support, and he rightly references Ukrainian communities across the United Kingdom. I have met the Ukrainian community in my constituency, and just this week I met Ukrainian community members to discuss a range of issues, including the horrific abduction of children, which Russia has continued to perpetrate, one of the most shocking and heinous aspects of this conflict. I am really proud of what British communities have done across the country to support Ukrainians, and the strong ties that have been built. It is fantastic that we have signed a 100-year partnership, so that for 100 years into the future, we have that relationship and give that iron-clad support on every level—economically, diplomatically, militarily, and of course through crucial people-to-people links.

Kashmir: Human Rights and Peace

Matt Rodda Excerpts

Wednesday 12th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Tahir Ali]

My hon. Friend and I are on the same page when it comes to Kashmir and the struggle for Kashmiris. The violation of international humanitarian law should not fall on deaf ears from the international community.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I commend my hon. Friend for securing today’s debate. I want to raise a specific issue about internet communications, which has been raised with me by my constituents and is of great concern to many people. Does he agree that although it is important that India and Pakistan agree a way forward and solve the issues in Kashmir, the needs and views of local people in Kashmir need to be taken into account?

[Tahir Ali]

Absolutely; my hon. Friend’s point is bang on. The outcome of the plebiscite has to be one where the Kashmiri people decide. It is their future and they are entitled to decide that.

The Indian Government seem to think that they are above international law, as is evident from their horrific treatment of Kashmiris. Kashmiris have been subjected to physical and sexual violence, emotional distress and having their voices taken away from them. The question now is what more must they go through before the international community starts to pay attention to them?

This Government must now take steps to right the wrongs against the Kashmiri people. Notwithstanding the more than 25 United Nations resolutions calling for a solution of the dispute, India is reluctant to grant Kashmiris the right to self-determination. Kashmiris are not begging for freedom, nor will they beg. It is a birthright that will eventually be achieved. Let me be clear that this is not a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan alone. The international community needs to take responsibility.

United Nations resolution 47 not being implemented is the unfinished business of this Government, given that the resolution was determined when the United Kingdom was under a Labour Government. It was a Labour Government then and it must be a Labour Government now who help the Kashmiri people in their fight against injustice. This Labour Government must not roll out the red carpet for Modi, as the previous Government did. The UK Government must push for the long overdue plebiscite and hold India accountable for its actions against the Kashmiri people.

Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords]

Matt Rodda Excerpts

3rd reading
Wednesday 18th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

It is a particular pleasure to follow the swift passage of that important Bill on financial assistance to Ukraine. It was also a particular pleasure to join the Ukrainian Foreign Minister twice in the last two weeks and to assure him of our continued support at this time, especially as we approach the Christmas season, but also, crucially, to assure him that we will continue our financial commitments and that there is unity across the House and, indeed, the country.

This too is an important Bill, on which there is again a huge amount of unity across the House. I hope that it will not detain us long. I pay tribute to all Members for their co-operation in getting the Bill this far so quickly in the new Parliament and under this new Government. It is a rare occasion when the House finds itself in such agreement, but the Bill has continued to receive unwavering support from Members in all parts of the House. That is a true testament to the importance that Members ascribe not only to the aims of the Bill, but to the aims and values of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I strongly endorse the sentiments that the Minister has expressed. May I offer my thanks and support to the CPA, which recently staged an excellent visit to Reading on behalf of the Barbadian Parliament? It was a wonderful experience, which was interesting and supportive both for me as a parliamentarian and for my colleagues from Barbados. It helped the Barbadian community in Reading to build and develop vital links. Our town once had the largest concentration of Barbadians outside Barbados itself, and there is a strong heritage there. The visit was much appreciated, and I wholeheartedly support the CPA and thank it for its work.

[Stephen Doughty]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments, which underline the importance that we ascribe to our relationships with our Commonwealth partners as parliamentarians and, of course, as a Government. As my hon. Friend will know, the Foreign Secretary made his own visit to the Caribbean just last week. Those ties are hugely important, and it is important that we maintain them in the House as well.

This is a significant moment for both organisations. The CPA has been seeking this change in its legal status for more than 20 years, and the ICRC has been doing so for over a decade. We are now finally able to deliver that. The passing of the Bill will ensure that the CPA’s headquarters remain in the UK, and its treatment as an international organisation will allow it to continue to operate fully across the Commonwealth and international fora. It will also allow the CPA to participate fully in areas where it is currently restricted.

As I have said, we ascribe great importance to our membership of the Commonwealth, a vibrant global network of 2.5 billion people united in the pursuit of freedom, peace and prosperity. In October this year, Samoa hosted the first Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in a Pacific island country. It was His Majesty the King’s first CHOGM as head of the Commonwealth, and there was a strong Government attendance. I was especially delighted that the representative of the UK overseas territories was present—the current president of the UK Overseas Territories Association and Premier of the Cayman Islands. This is the crucial context within which the CPA operates, and it is crucial that we secure status change so that it can continue its work in promoting democracy and good governance across the Commonwealth. Having participated in its work in the past, with both incoming and outgoing delegations—I think fondly of my visit to Ghana a few years ago, working with Commonwealth parliamentarians from across Africa—I have seen that work at first hand.

Throughout the Bill’s passage, Members have been vocal about the crucial role the ICRC plays in conflicts to protect civilian lives. It has a unique mandate under the Geneva conventions to provide humanitarian assistance to people affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence and to promote the laws that protect victims of war, and it works globally to promote international humanitarian law. It also has a unique legitimacy to engage with all parties to conflicts, and has unparallelled access to provide protection and assistance to vulnerable groups in conflicts around the world. It is therefore critical that it can operate in the UK in accordance with its international mandate, maintaining its strict adherence to the principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence and its working method of confidentiality. I know from our previous debates that Members are in agreement on why the Bill is so important in enshrining those principles.

We will continue to work with both the CPA and the ICRC to agree the written arrangements that will set out the parameters of the status change, as well as the privileges and immunities that the Government have decided to confer on both organisations. Those arrangements will be specified in Orders in Council, which will be brought to the House to be debated and voted on before being implemented.

As Members are aware, this is not the first time the House has considered the Bill. It was first a private Member’s Bill that was introduced in the last Session by the former Member for Basingstoke, and I pay tribute to her for her efforts in pushing it forward. I also want to put on the record my gratitude to the team of FCDO officials and lawyers who have worked tirelessly to ensure the Bill’s readiness and provided support to various Ministers throughout its passage. I thank my noble Friends in the other place, Lord Collins and Baroness Chapman, for their work in ensuring the Bill’s smooth passage. I also express my thanks and appreciation to the drafters in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel for preparing the Bill, and to the House authorities for all their work behind the scenes.

Given that this is likely to be my last outing before the festive season, I want to wish a very happy Christmas to Members of the House—Nadolig llawen—and I wish everybody a successful festive season. I am delighted that we will get this Bill to its conclusion imminently.