Commons Chamber

Monday 20th October 2025

(began 3 hours, 8 minutes ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
14:35
Josh MacAlister Portrait Josh MacAlister MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Whitehaven and Workington, Labour)
-
-
I I thank I thank the I thank the Minister I thank the Minister for I thank the Minister for his response. Vaughan Deane Sixth Form College in Brighton is the only state funded IB provider in Sussex. It has warned that without the large programme uplift, the IB will become programme uplift, the IB will become financially unviable. Many Mid Sussex students have gone from Vaughan Dean to study engineering, medicine and maths at leading medicine and maths at leading universities. Does the Minister think it right that this world class qualification becomes available only qualification becomes available only in the private sector, entrenching a two tier education system? And will he meet with me and Vaughan Dean he meet with me and Vaughan Dean students to discuss the benefits of the IB for the state educated pupils and why this decision must be reversed.

 I thank the honourable member for her question. Mr Speaker, the government has made big decisions at the Spending Review to increase the overall amount of funding available to 16 to 19 courses. That means that next financial year, there will be an increase of over £800 million. That means that the per pupil funding is going up substantially. The large programme uplift sits on top of that, and the government has made the decision to prioritise the large programme uplift on students who are doing multiple A-levels in Stem subjects.

We still support the International Baccalaureate and recognise it as a programme that can Anderson.
14:36
14:36
14:37
14:37
14:38
14:39
14:39
14:40
14:41
14:41
14:42
14:42
14:43
14:43
Munira Wilson Portrait Munira Wilson MP (Twickenham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. We Liberal Democrats warmly welcomed this government's decision earlier this year to finally adopt our long standing policy of extending free school meals to all children in households in receipt of Universal Credit. Now, at the time, ministers repeatedly refused to confirm how they were funding this extension. And now research from Northumbria University shows on average, every primary will have to find £11,000 and every secondary about £25,000 to fund this policy at a time when they're already cutting teaching assistance and extracurricular activities to balance the books.

So, Mr Speaker, given the Secretary of State has made both this policy and rolling out school breakfast clubs the centrepiece of her bid for deputy leader of the Labour Party, will she confirm when she's actually going to fund them? Mr Speaker, I'm grateful to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for drawing attention to the fantastic Labour policies that this government is rolling out. We are expanding free school meals to half a million more children, to half a million more children, backed up with an extra billion pounds of funding through this spending review.

That is the spending review. That is the difference a Labour government is making, and I am delighted that we now have 750 new free breakfast now have 750 new free breakfast clubs from April onwards. Next year another 2000 will open, reaching another 2000 will open, reaching half a million more children, lifting children out of poverty and backing families. And that is the difference a Labour government makes. makes.
14:44
14:44
14:45
14:46
14:46
None Portrait Q4. What steps her Department is taking to improve support for children with special educational needs and disabilities in mainstream schools. (905854)
-

Jo Platt.
14:46
14:46
14:47
14:48
14:48
14:48
14:49
14:50
14:50
14:51
14:51
14:52
14:52
14:53
14:53
14:53
14:54
14:55
14:56
None Portrait Q5. What steps her Department is taking to help improve the SEND system. (905855)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Doctor Danny Chambers, I want to speak. About.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

About. Minute apologies, Mr Speaker,
14:56
14:56
14:56
14:57
14:58
14:58
14:59
15:00
15:00
15:01
None Portrait Q6. What steps her Department is taking to ensure that it meets its target of two-thirds of young people participating in higher-level learning. (905856)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Anneliese Midgley. Question number six, please. Mr Speaker. Sir, stay. Thank you, Mr Speaker. With your permission, I will answer question
15:01
15:01
15:02
15:02
15:02
15:03
15:04
15:04
15:04
15:05
15:05
15:07
15:07
Bridget Phillipson Portrait Rt Hon Bridget Phillipson MP, The Secretary of State for Education (Houghton and Sunderland South, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

There. Mr Speaker, I'll be setting out through the white paper and the statement later on today, the action statement later on today, the action that we will be taking to make sure that the regulator, the office for students, has the power to ensure students, has the power to ensure high quality courses and good outcomes for young people going to university. What I would say to the honourable gentleman, however, the honourable gentleman, however, the policy that he's just outlined was in their last manifesto was roundly rejected by the British people, was roundly ridiculed for being completely financially illiterate because the funding system simply because the funding system simply doesn't work in that way.

The message that I want to come across loud and clear from this despatch box is that of young people have got what it takes, and they've got the qualifications to go on to university. That is a good route for university. That is a good route for them, and they shouldn't have their prospects and their opportunities dismissed in such a casual and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

snobbish way by the party opposite. Secretary of State. I don't cough for my benefits. It's to help.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's to help. You rather me having to get up. Let's have a Shadow Minister. Nick Timothy. Thank you. Mr Speaker. On higher.
15:07
15:08
15:08
None Portrait Q8. What plans she has for the free school application decisions that were paused in October 2024. (905859)
-

Blush.
15:08
15:09
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:11
15:11
15:12
15:12
15:12
15:13
15:13
15:13
15:14
15:14
15:16
15:16
15:16
15:16
15:17
15:17
15:17
15:18
15:19
15:19
15:19
15:20
15:21
15:21
15:21
15:22
15:22
15:22
15:24
15:24
15:24
15:24
15:25
15:26
15:26
15:27
15:27
15:28
15:28
15:28
15:29
15:29
15:30
15:30
15:31
15:31
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:33
15:33
15:33
15:34
15:34
15:34
15:35
15:35
15:37
15:37
15:37
15:37
15:38
15:38
15:38
15:38
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:40
15:40
15:41
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:43
15:43
15:43
None Portrait Urgent question: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will make a statement on the Home Office’s involvement in the alleged case of spying against Members of Parliament
-

about Home Office involvement in the alleged China spying case.
15:43
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to respond to it today. As I have.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As I have. Repeatedly set out to the House, the Prime Minister, Home Secretary, the wider government are extremely disappointed that this case will not be heard in court. I have heard the strength of feeling right across the strength of feeling right across the House, and I share members concern about the threats that we face from about the threats that we face from espionage. The witness statements released last Wednesday vindicate what the Prime Minister and other what the Prime Minister and other members of the government have stated repeatedly.

The Deputy National Security Adviser, National Security Adviser, faithfully and with full integrity, set out the various threats posed by set out the various threats posed by the Chinese state to the UK and did so in order to try and support a so in order to try and support a successful prosecution. Now, this Urgent Question asked about the Home Office's involvement following the charging decision being made in early 2024. Under the previous early 2024. Under the previous government, the CPS advised the witness that he could not share the evidence with others in government.

Therefore, the Home Office's involvement following the charging decision that was taken under the decision that was taken under the previous government, was heavily restricted to avoid breaching the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

CPS requirements. Now, I have we. We don't need any help from the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We don't need any help from the side. Please. This is a very important statement that really does affect members of this House.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister. Mr Speaker, as I have repeatedly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr Speaker, as I have repeatedly made clear in this House, ministers and special advisers were not and special advisers were not involved in any aspect of the production of the evidence. And I stand by that statement today. The stand by that statement today. The Prime Minister has also made clear that he was informed of the CPS decision only a matter of days before the case collapsed. There is nothing that the Prime Minister or nothing that the Prime Minister or any other minister could have done at that point and would have changed at that point and would have changed what the law and what the policy was under the previous government under the previous government between 2021 and 2023.

Now, Mr Speaker, for those that have read the NSA's statements, they will see that they clearly articulated the threats posed from China based on the previous government's policy at the time and detailing the damage the time and detailing the damage that was caused by the alleged offences. Ultimately, it was an entirely independent decision by the CPS to discontinue the case, and they have confirmed that they came under no outside pressure to do so. Mr Speaker, like members on all sides of the House, I remain very frustrated that this case won't be heard in court.

Mr Speaker, we wanted to see this trial. Go ahead. And I have made clear on many occasions the decision not to proceed was an independent one for the Crown Prosecution Service, and the DPP has given assurances that there was no government interference in their decision. I note that the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy will be undertaking an inquiry on the case and intends to hold public evidence sessions. The Intelligence and Security Committee have also invested, have also indicated that they will also investigate.

We welcome the launch of the inquiry and the investigations, which the government will, of course, fully cooperate with. And, Mr Speaker, I have already set out the range of activity this government is taking to combat Chinese espionage threat. I hope that that is well understood. But let me provide this House with the reassurance that the government will take all necessary action to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

keep the UK safe and secure. Shadow Home Secretary, Chris.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shadow Home Secretary, Chris. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Last Wednesday, the Prime Minister told
15:48
Chris Philp Portrait Rt Hon Chris Philp MP (Croydon South, Conservative)
-
-
Wednesday, the Prime Minister told this House that no minister or special adviser was involved in the handling of the China spy case. Yet the Sunday Times has since reported that the Home Secretary had quotes, heard the case might collapse, and had made representations to ensure the evidence put forward was as strong as possible. So I ask the minister, when did the Home Secretary become aware the case might collapse? And what representations did the Home Secretary or her proxies make about the evidence and to whom? Why has the House been told, including just now, that ministers and advisers were not involved in any way? When the Sunday Times reports that they were? The Sunday Times also reported on a key meeting that took place on September 1st, a meeting the government originally denied took place.

Is it true Jonathan Powell chaired that meeting? Did the meeting discuss the C.p.s. View that the evidence provided to that point was inadequate? And did that meeting discuss the possibility of providing further evidence in the case? And will the Minister agree to publish the minutes of all meetings in which this case was discussed and the correspondence relating to it? The Sunday Times reported that following the meeting, the Attorney General's Office was asked to speak to the CPS. Did anyone from the Ago speak directly or indirectly to the CPS after that meeting? And can the Minister confirm that Dan Chugg from the Foreign Office was at that 1st September meeting? And can the Minister also confirm it was the same Dan Chugg who approached the Lord speaker with a proposed deal in which the Chinese ambassador would be allowed back into Parliament? The Sunday Times also reported that the DNC is understood to acknowledge privately that the decision not to say China is an ongoing threat was political in nature.

Is that true? Finally, the current government's position has been that all the evidence provided related to the last government's policy. But we now know that is categorically not true. We know from Matt Collins third statement of August this year in paragraph eight, that he copied and pasted from the Labour manifesto, and he stressed the importance the current government attaches to a positive relationship with China, weakening the evidence compared to 2023 and bringing in current government policy. Contrary to what we have been told in recent weeks.

So why has the government been providing this House with inaccurate information, and why did ministers know what the CPS wanted but refused to give it to them?
15:50
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
Mr Speaker, with great respect, a lot of what has just been said doesn't actually relate to the question that was initially asked by the shadow Home Secretary. And I have to say, the opposition's position is confusing. They initially criticised the government for intervening. Then when it became I will answer the question, I am answering the question. I think it is important that on these matters of national security, that we try and debate these things in a reasonable and sensible way.

That is the approach that this government will seek to take if members opposite.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think we've had enough. Mr. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The opposition's position is confusing. They initially criticised the government for intervening. Then when it.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Then when it. Became absolutely clear that we hadn't done that, they criticised us hadn't done that, they criticised us for not intervening. They asked for greater transparency. And then when we provided it, they accused the we provided it, they accused the government, wrongly, of hanging people out to dry. And given that people out to dry. And given that this Urgent Question related to the activities of the Home Office, I'm not at all clear why the Shadow Home not at all clear why the Shadow Home Secretary thinks it's appropriate, given accusations that have been made previously about hanging made previously about hanging officials out to dry, to name an official in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

How does that relate to the Urgent Question that was asked? Now, I do wonder. I do wonder, Mr Speaker, when could.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

wonder, Mr Speaker, when could. Sorry, I think I need to help a little bit. It is in order to mention another department. You mention another department. You can't ring fancy without the people. I'm sorry. It might not be comfortable, but the fact is, the comfortable, but the fact is, the questions being asked that is within order and that's what matters. Minister, I'm.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to you, Mr Speaker, for your guidance. And I'm simply pointing out to the shadow Home pointing out to the shadow Home Secretary that members opposite had previously criticised ministers and previously criticised ministers and the government to use their words for hanging out to dry officials. And the shadow Home Secretary has And the shadow Home Secretary has just named twice an official from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. I do wonder it's not. I've said to this side I don't need chipping in. I certainly don't

**** Possible New Speaker ****

need chipping in. I certainly don't need it starting it this way and all along the bench. Speaking, I do wonder whether at

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaking, I do wonder whether at any point the shadow Home Secretary and certain members, not all of them, but certain members opposite, them, but certain members opposite, have considered the need for some humility to acknowledge their part humility to acknowledge their part that these activities took place on their watch when they were in government, and under the government, and under the legislation of the of the time. Now. It's a.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's a. Sorry, sorry, Mr. Philp, you've had the benefit of an Urgent had the benefit of an Urgent Question about the benefit, some might say, of listening to you, in which case I want you to have the benefit of listening to the minister. Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The shadow Home Secretary would be well advised to listen to the points that are to listen to the points that are being made. I'm seeking to respond to the questions that he and other Right Honourable and honourable members have raised, and I'm doing members have raised, and I'm doing that in good faith, and I'd be grateful for the opportunity to do that. Now, I remind the shadow Home that. Now, I remind the shadow Home Secretary that we're only here today because the previous Conservative government didn't move quick enough government didn't move quick enough to fix the glaring holes that existed within our national security existed within our national security laws.

The charges in this case, as is well known, I hope, were brought under the Official Secrets Act of under the Official Secrets Act of 1911. This antiquated legislation was drawn up before the First World was drawn up before the First World War. It's why the party opposite began reviewing the legislation in began reviewing the legislation in 2015, because it was widely known that it was not fit for purpose, but that it was not fit for purpose, but it took eight years, eight years to introduce the 2023 National Security introduce the 2023 National Security Act.

Now, fortunately, the law has now been updated with cross-party now been updated with cross-party support, but not in time to protect our Parliament from Chinese espionage. Now, if the party opposite had acted faster and the National Security Act had been in place when these alleged offences happened, the prosecution would likely have proceeded and the Right Honourable gentleman and members

**** Possible New Speaker ****

opposite. Sorry. Look. I'm trying really hard and people

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in positions should know better. Minister. Let me make this point crystal

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Let me make this point crystal clear. Mr Speaker, no member of this government, nor any special adviser government, nor any special adviser was in any way involved in the evidence submitted to the CPS or the evidence submitted to the CPS or the decision by the DPP not to proceed with the case. And, Mr Speaker, with the case. And, Mr Speaker, there was an important omission from the shadow Home Secretary's remarks just now. As members will know, the just now.

As members will know, the first substantive witness was provided under the previous

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government when the Right Honourable member was a Home Office minister. Yet neither he.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Nor the leader of the opposition had taken the opportunity to say what involvement Conservative ministers and Conservative special ministers and Conservative special advisers had in the main tranche of the evidence. Now the Prime Minister has confirmed that no Labour ministers or special advisers were involved with the provision of involved with the provision of evidence for this case. And last Wednesday, during Prime Minister's Questions, the Prime Minister asked Questions, the Prime Minister asked the leader of the opposition to confirm if that was also the case under the previous government.

Now, I was in the House last Wednesday, Mr Speaker, and I think that I heard the leader of the opposition confirming from a sedentary position that she did know the answer to that question. But the party opposite have refused to confirm if any Conservative ministers or special advisers were involved in the provision of evidence under the previous government. I wonder if any of the former ministers here can provide the answers today. Mr Speaker, as ministers have repeatedly said from this despatch box, this government is extremely disappointed that the case did not proceed to trial.

I gently say to the opposition frontbench they need to stop throwing mud and start

**** Possible New Speaker ****

coming to terms with what happened on their watch. Andy Slaughter. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker,
15:57
15:58
15:59
15:59
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
grateful for him for the points that he has raised. Let me take them in turn. I lead on behalf of the government on the issue of vetting. And there has been a lot of work that has taken place in government since we came into office, in order to ensure that the systems and processes that underpin of our vetting are fit for purpose. He's right to ask about it, because although it may seem like a reasonably niche point, it is actually a very important one because our national security is underpinned by our ability to vet those who have access to privileged information.

He, for reasons that I completely understand, drew reference to a link between that work that we're doing in government and the importance of making sure that the appropriate vetting procedures are in place for this House, I know that he will understand that fundamentally, that will be a matter for the speaker and for this House. But I give him an absolute assurance that we work very closely with Mr Speaker and with the Deputy Speakers and all those in this place to make sure that we look carefully at what happened and satisfy ourselves that the vetting arrangements are absolutely fit for purpose.

His second point related specifically to two members of this House. And let me say to him, I don't believe that either of those two members are in their place today. I'm keen to work closely with them, and I'm keen to meet with them and to ensure that the government are providing the support that they may want or require. And I'm very happy to speak to him and to those members about the point that he's made with regard to the final point that he made, which was specifically about China, I hope that he will acknowledge that the government have been crystal clear about what our position is with regard to China and Right Honourable, honourable members.

Chuckle. We've had this debate. We've had this debate previously. If there are members who think that the nature of our relationship with China can be defined by a single word, then I don't believe that they are serious about the nature of the relationship. The specific point all members in this House have an absolute responsibility to decide for themselves what meetings that they take. I don't believe with great respect to him, it's for government ministers to opine from the despatch box about whether

**** Possible New Speaker ****

individual members should take meetings or not. Fred Thompson. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
16:02
16:02
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister. Well, I'm grateful to him, not only for his question, but for his previous previous service and for previous previous service and for the work of his constituents with regard to underpinning our national security. I think he does make a very important point. He will know, as will you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the MPs are published guidance just recently, which is designed specifically to provide honourable members with the advice and the guidance to ensure that they are best able to deal with the nature of the risks and the threats that all of us in this House face.

But to come to the second part of his question. This is something that the government takes incredibly seriously. We inherited the Defending Democracy Task Force from the previous government. That was a good institution. And I, on many occasions previously have paid tribute to all of those opposite who were involved with the setting up of that particular institution. The Prime Minister has renewed the mandate of the Defending Democracy Task Force. It is the fulcrum point across government that brings the different departments and law enforcement together, alongside with members of this House, to ensure that we are doing everything that we can to address and tackle the threats that we face.

I've always believed and always maintained that that should be a shared endeavour right across this House, and my door will always be open to members of this House who would like to discuss

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it. It's a rapidly. I rather thought
16:04
16:04
16:05
16:06
16:07
16:08
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
hon. Gentleman. And genuinely the remarks that I made earlier about the ISC that he sits on are or genuinely meant. I think that the IC has got an important role to play in terms of looking at precisely what has happened here. And I give him an absolute commitment that we want to work very closely with his committee on this specific issue and on others. Let me try and give him a bit of detail, because I think he's asked this question in an entirely reasonable way.

Let me reiterate the point that I hope is understood by him and His committee that the final evidence went in August of this year, and there was nothing that any minister could have done. Post that, and hopefully he's crystal clear as I am that there was no political interference. But let me say this to him in each of the three statements, the NSA. Let me just say something about him, because he is an outstanding public servant who does a very important job and does a very important job very well.

And I think it is a terrible shame that there has been commentary about him as an individual. He has acted with integrity throughout this process, and we as a Parliament owe him a debt of gratitude for the service that he's offered. But let me say something about the evidence that he gave, because in each of the three statements, the NSA makes it crystal clear that China poses wide ranging threats to the UK. In his third statement, he says that the Chinese intelligence services are highly capable and conduct large scale espionage operations against the UK to advance the Chinese state's interests and harm the interests and the security of the UK.

Very clear about that. He adds that China's espionage operations threaten the UK's economic prosperity and resilience, and the integrity of our democratic institutions. So he's been very clear in terms of the evidence statements that he provides. I don't think there is much more that I can add to that other than to reiterate that it was

**** Possible New Speaker ****

DPP. Thank you. Thank you very. Much.
16:10
16:10
16:11
16:12
16:13
16:14
16:15
16:16
16:17
16:17
16:18
16:19
16:20
16:21
16:21
16:22
16:22
16:23
16:24
16:24
16:24
16:24
16:25
16:26
16:27
16:27
16:28
16:28
16:29
16:29
16:31
16:31
16:32
16:33
16:34
16:34
16:34
16:35
16:36
16:36
16:36
16:37
16:38
None Portrait Urgent question: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make a statement on the decision to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv F.C. fans from attending their fixture against Aston Villa
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Huddleston. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. To ask the. Secretary. Sport.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sport. If she will. Make a statement on the decision to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv FC fans from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv FC fans from attending their fixture against Aston Villa. Just state. Thank you. Madam
16:38
Lisa Nandy Portrait Rt Hon Lisa Nandy MP, The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Wigan, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just state. Thank you. Madam Speaker. Last week Aston Villa released a statement that away fans would not be permitted to attend the game event against Maccabi Tel Aviv game event against Maccabi Tel Aviv on the 6th of November. This decision was taken by Birmingham City Council on the advice of the Safety Advisory Group and based on a risk assessment by West Midlands Police. The risk assessment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

considered a range of factors such as the risk of protests, the threat of wider disorder, previous. Fixtures with.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Fixtures with. Maccabi Tel Aviv fans and the impact on the wider community. It is a long. Established principle, set out in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Established principle, set out in law, that the Police and Safety Advisory Group are operationally independent of government, and it is independent of government, and it is for them to take decisions on safety. However, this decision has safety. However, this decision has far wider implications. In any situation there is a risk that must be assessed, but in this case, the be assessed, but in this case, the risk this event prevent presents is in no small part down to the risk in no small part down to the risk inherent in where the away fans come from and who they are.

It is in that from and who they are. It is in that context that the solution that is proposed to exclude a group from attending is wrong. It chooses attending is wrong. It chooses exclusion rather than looking at the full options available to manage that risk and include. And Madam Deputy Speaker, this is about who we are as a country. A lot of the public discussion around this game public discussion around this game has focussed on events in the Middle East. Let me be clear.

It is perfectly. Legitimate to hold and perfectly. Legitimate to hold and express strong views about what is happening in Israel and Gaza. People happening in Israel and Gaza. People are free in this country to protest peacefully. They are free to lobby government and event organisers about which countries can participate in tournaments, and they are free to choose not to attend events or purchase products that they find unacceptable. But they are not entitled to dictate who can participate in competitions, attend the football match or walk the streets for fear of threats or reprisals.

Whatever your view on the events overseas, this is a fundamental principle that this government will fiercely defend. And let me be clear, this decision was not made in a vacuum. It is set against the backdrop of rising anti-Semitism here and across the world, and an attack on a synagogue in Manchester in which two innocent men were killed. It has a real world impact on a community who already feel excluded and afraid. It is therefore completely legitimate to support the independence of the police, to conduct that risk assessment, and to question the conclusion that follows when it excludes the people at the heart of that risk.

Following the decision last week, the government has been working with West Midlands Police and Birmingham City Council to support them to consider all the options available and to tell us what resources are needed to manage the risks to ensure fans from both teams can attend safely. If the assessment is revised, the Safety Advisory Group will meet again to discuss options. In the last few days, I have spoken to Jewish community groups, sporting organisation, fan groups and Aston Villa Football Club to ensure we have the fullest picture possible.

The Home Secretary and the Community Secretary have had extensive discussions with the police, local government and others. Ultimately, the law is clear that responsibility for this decision lies with local agencies. It is not for the government to assess the risks surrounding this football match, but we are clear that resources will not be the determining factor in whether Maccabi Tel Aviv fans can be admitted, and that this fundamental principle that nobody in our country will be excluded from participating in public life because of who they

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Huddleston. Yeah. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker,
16:41
Nigel Huddleston Portrait Nigel Huddleston MP (Droitwich and Evesham, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I thank the Right honourable lady for those comments, because I'm sure most of us in this House will sure most of us in this House will believe that the decision to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from the upcoming Europa League game against Villa is the wrong one. It's also embarrassing and a disgrace. Have we really reached the point where we cannot welcome visitors from overseas to our second city, because we cannot guarantee their safety on British streets? In British football grounds? This is not how modern Britain should present itself to the world.

And some, astoundingly, including some in this House, have claimed that the ban on Israeli fans is for their own safety. Safety that has been put at risk precisely because of the anger and hatred being whipped up by some of those very same people demanding a ban, equating football fans with terrorists, for example. We cannot give in to this kind of rhetoric, and I hope the Minister will join me in condemning it. Football and all sport has incredible potential to bring people together.

It should not be used as a deliberate tool to divide. The UK has a great and hard won reputation for hosting major international sporting events, banning an entire fan base sends the wrong signal and may jeopardise our ability to host such events in the future. And how disappointing is this decision to the residents of Birmingham, who only three years ago welcomed from people from around the world to the Commonwealth Games, which showcased Birmingham and the West Midlands and its diverse, vibrant and hospitable best.

We therefore call on the government to intervene and get this ban reversed. But Aston Villa and the Safety Advisory Group may only be able to do so, with guarantees of additional support from the government. So can the minister confirm what additional resources may be provided and who will pay for these additional resources? Can she confirm when the Home Office and DCMS were first made aware of the intent of the Safety Advisory Group to make this obviously controversial decision, and is she confident that they talked to all the right people before making the decision? And if the decision is reversed, what practical steps will be taken to ensure the safety of all fans and residents? And while many football teams have some undesirable supporters intent on causing trouble, let's recognise the vast majority of fans want nothing more than to enjoy a good game of football.

And if we are to truly wrap our arms around the Jewish community, as the Prime Minister promised following the attack on the synagogue in Manchester, does the Minister agree? We need to take action and not just warm words? Finally, is the Minister confident that this incident will not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

jeopardise our ability to host major future? Thank you. OK.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

OK. Well, first of all, can I thank him for bringing this Urgent Question to the House? I know it's
16:44
Lisa Nandy Portrait Rt Hon Lisa Nandy MP, The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Wigan, Labour)
-
-
Question to the House? I know it's of concern to so many parliamentarians and so many people outside of this place. And can I thank him for the tone that he has adopted? I've watched with dismay, as there have been people in this debate who have sought to use this moment to heighten tensions, and I want to commend him for the way that he's conducted himself and his part in this. He asked a particularly important question about who will pay across government.

We are united. The Home Secretary, myself, The Chancellor, the Prime Minister and the community secretary are united in saying that we will find the resources that need to be made available once the West Midlands Police has come forward with the risk assessment and will work with one as one government to make sure that those resources are forthcoming because of the important principle, fundamental principle that is at stake about what sort of country we are. He asked if I was confident that the decision was made based on the right information.

I've seen a lot of facts flying around that don't seem to have any evidential basis, particularly on social media. In recent days, we're working with our international partners to make sure that West Midlands Police have the fullest range of information on which to base an assessment. He he mentioned also the impact that this is having on the Jewish community. I absolutely feel and understand that, and I've had numerous conversations with members of the Jewish community over the last few days. We have experience of policing events in this country, vast experience of policing events in difficult circumstances.

And he's right to say that there are a minority of supporters in every club and in this club in particular, who, who, whose behaviour is reprehensible. But that is not the case for all fans. And what is astonishing in this case is that it is unprecedented in modern times that all the way funds have been banned because of the behaviour of a small minority. So we're working with the police to try and support them, to be able to look at that in the round.

He's right to say that we need action, not just warm words. I am particularly concerned, having met with Jewish funds, about the way that some of the events in the Middle East are not just having an impact on national competitions, but are also having an impact on grassroots sport as well. And it's something that I've committed to working with them on to make sure that young people in this country can turn up to local grassroots events and not feel anxious about participating or not being able to participate because of who they are.

And finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, he asked if we he he asked about the signal that this sends to others around the world that is not lost on us. We are a tolerant, diverse nation and Birmingham, as one of our great cities is a great example of that. That is what we're fighting to uphold and defend. That's the Britain that we believe in. And the message from this government is that this government will always defend that country. We are a better country than some of the comments that have been made and the actions that have been taken in the last

**** Possible New Speaker ****

week, and we determined to uphold that. Graham Stringer thank you.
16:47
16:48
16:49
16:50
16:51
16:52
16:53
16:54
16:54
Paula Barker Portrait Paula Barker MP (Liverpool Wavertree, Labour)
-
-
I'd like to pre-cursor my comments by saying everybody in this place was horrified by the attack on the synagogue.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

today. Are purely based on safety, because the year before the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

because the year before the Hillsborough. Disaster safety concerns at Sheffield. Wednesday Stadium were raised by an official, but.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

an official, but. The ex council safety officer was told by bosses in 1988 to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Keep his nose out of such concerns. Nobody in. This place needs to be reminded. What happened as a result.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

What happened as a result. Of. Ignoring that safety advice. 97 innocent men.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

97 innocent men. Women and children lost their lives. We have safety advisory groups for a reason, and it's a groups for a reason, and it's a slippery slope when safety concerns are ignored and I believe, unprecedented for a government to unprecedented for a government to try to overturn such advice. And I will just respectfully disagree with the Secretary of State. When she.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Secretary of State. When she. because. We have a we've had a lot of cases, both. Nationally and.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Nationally and. Internationally, the. Most recent one being Napoli versus Frankfurt. So can the versus Frankfurt. So can the Secretary of State be explicitly clear? Has she seen the safety advice? If so, does she disagree.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

advice? If so, does she disagree. With the safety advice? And if she. Does disagree. Can she tell the House on what

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can she tell the House on what grounds she disagrees? Because it is imperative. This House is clear. Because if you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Are successful, if the government is successful in having the decision overturned, particularly after the scenes we witnessed last night with the Israeli derby, then people are going to ask.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

going to ask. Questions, well, can I can I thank the honourable friend? And as somebody who represents the Hillsborough, some of the
16:56
Lisa Nandy Portrait Rt Hon Lisa Nandy MP, The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Wigan, Labour)
-
-
Hillsborough, some of the Hillsborough families, and I say to her that we as a government and I as an individual member of that government, take the safety of all fans and the wider community with the utmost seriousness. We would never treat safety as the secondary consideration. But she says that we're trying to overturn the police advice. We're doing absolutely no such thing, and I think I made that completely clear in the statement that I just made. We are working with West Midlands Police and local partners to make sure that we take into account the risks that they have raised in order to ensure that this game can go ahead safely with both sets of fans present.

And I would say to her that yes, in the discussions and the consideration that I've given to the risks that West Midlands Police have highlighted, what is completely different about this case. It's not just that it's the first time since the early 2000 in this country that a decision has been taken to ban entirely away fans from attending a game. It's that the risk assessment is based in no small part on the risk posed to those fans that are attending who support Maccabi Tel Aviv because they are Israeli and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

because they are Jewish. Now, we should be appalled by that and never allow it to stand. The Andrew Mitchell. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, can I commend the Secretary. Of.
16:57
16:58
16:59
Gareth Snell Portrait Gareth Snell MP (Stoke-on-Trent Central, Labour )
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Gareth Snell. Thank you very. Much, Madam Deputy Speaker. It was reported over. The. Weekend that. In August.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In August. A legal. Observer to. One of the. Protests was arrested simply for wearing a. Star of David because.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Star of David because. It was considered to be antagonising. Now, with. The decision to ban the Maccabi

**** Possible New Speaker ****

fans from coming. To the UK. There is a genuine cumulative people.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

people. In this country. And the effect that it has on those people that are family of those people that are family of Jewish people in this country who watched their friends and family tortured about whether or not they have a role in this country anymore.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That we should all be. Significantly aware of. But I. Also think, Madam Deputy Speaker,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

there is a the challenge will be if this ban is allowed to go ahead. The game after.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The game after. The Maccabi game is with the Swiss based Young Boys. Their fans have been involved in two riots, including hospitalisations. If they're away, team is not banned. The question should be what is different between the Maccabi fans

**** Possible New Speaker ****

different between the Maccabi fans and the young boys fans? And what is it that we want to talk about? Yeah. I think the honourable gentleman
17:00
17:00
17:01
17:01
17:02
Lisa Nandy Portrait Rt Hon Lisa Nandy MP, The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Wigan, Labour)
-
-
I'm really happy to give her that assurance. Muslim who grew up in Birmingham in the West Midlands and did my did my business there, I was deeply business there, I was deeply saddened by this decision. I was saddened for the British Jewish community. We are a tolerant, diverse nation and tolerant, diverse region. And this decision was bad for two reasons. It was bad for Birmingham, it was bad for the West Midlands, and it was actually bad for the British Muslim community.

for the British Muslim community. Many of them have reached out saying they did not want to be dragged into this, and they feel they feel that similar amounts of anger. My worry now is there's a flashpoint that's been created, which is the second problem with this decision, because now there will be those who will want to take advantage of the fact that this is now in the headlines. They will be those who will want to They will be those who will want to come and cause trouble and drag Birmingham's name and the West Midlands name through the mud.

 No. Look, can I really acknowledge that and say I too am saddened by the way in which this has played out? And I'm saddened about the impact on people in Birmingham who I've always found to be extremely welcoming, tolerant and know that they're stronger for their diversity, not weakened by it. He's right to say that the recent events, and the way in which a number of people have sought to prey on them, has heightened the level of risk. That's something that West Midlands Police of course, have to consider.

But my commitment to him and to all members of this House and to the people of Birmingham, is that resources will not stand in the way of this going ahead.
17:03
17:04
17:05
17:06
17:06
17:07
17:07
17:07
17:09
17:09
17:09
17:09
17:09
17:10
17:12
17:12
Lisa Nandy Portrait Rt Hon Lisa Nandy MP, The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Wigan, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Overturn decisions like this? Yeah. Well, sir. There is a long established principle in this country as set out in law, that the police are operationally independent. And I am surprised to hear the honourable gentleman seek to question that. I've been really clear that this the risk assessment and the decisions around safety and what would be needed for this game to go ahead needed for this game to go ahead safely with all fans present is for the police. But what is a right and proper role for the government is to work with them, to support them, to ensure that that happens.

That's not just a question of resourcing. We are looking at a whole range of factors and practices that are well established in this country and across Europe, including making sure that you have transportation that gets fans safely to and from the game. We're looking at the numbers of ticket sales that are made available to away fans. We are looking at the measures, many measures that have tried and tested in order to ensure that elements who would seek to create trouble are excluded from the game.

It is absolutely not right to characterise the position of this government as simply standing on the sidelines when it comes to this fundamental principle about who is entitled to walk the streets and attend football games in our country because of who non-negotiable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lukman. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm sure the Secretary of State will
17:13
Feed Live - Click to view video
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page