Commons Chamber

Wednesday 20th May 2026

(began 3 weeks ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:34
None Portrait Oral questions: Science, Innovation and Technology
-

I I remind I remind members
11:34
11:34
11:34
11:34
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:39
11:39
11:40
11:41
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:47
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:55
11:57
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:01
12:02
12:03
Keir Starmer Portrait Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer MP, The Prime Minister (Holborn and St Pancras, Labour)
-
-
Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. Speaker, in relation to fuel duty, under the plans that we duty, under the plans that we inherited, fuel duty was due to go up by 5% in April. We stopped that up by 5% in April. We stopped that and they voted against it. We're now extending the freeze because of events in the Middle East. I know the Leader of the Opposition claimed responsibility for things that have got literally nothing to do with her. In her mind, she won Eurovision on Saturday and scored the winning goal in the FA Cup final, but she's never takes any responsibility for what they did for 14 long years.

Mr. speaker, in relation to oil and gas, oil and gas is coming out of the North Sea 24 over seven. It will play an important role for many years to come. We are we're supporting existing oil and gas fields throughout their lifespan. We made changes actually in November to allow neighbouring fields to be exploited. But families across the UK are fed up with their bills going up and down because of global contracts. The only way to take control is through renewables.

Mr. speaker, we've now consented renewables to power 23 million households. The Leader of the Opposition wants to stick with the old Tory energy policy, which is leaving households exposed to higher bills year after year.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. speaker, what's causing problems for British consumers is problems for British consumers is the high energy prices which are caused by his policies. I asked him why they voted for this. He had no why they voted for this. He had no answer. So let me make clear what is going on. We are losing a thousand jobs a month in oil and gas. I asked him about new licences, not about existing drilling. And not about existing drilling. And then late last night, Mr.

Speaker, the government snuck out an announcement that it was removing sanctions on Russian oil. So can the Prime Minister explain why oil from Russia is acceptable? But oil

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from Aberdeen is not. Well. Mr. Speaker, let me address the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. Speaker, let me address the sanctions head on, because we have been united across this House on these issues since the beginning of these issues since the beginning of the conflict. What we announced yesterday was a strong new package yesterday was a strong new package of new sanctions going well beyond existing sanctions. So it's a new existing sanctions. So it's a new package. This includes new bans on maritime services, on LNG, a new bans on refined oil products from Russia.

We also issued two targeted short term licences to face the new sanctions in and to protect UK consumers. Mr. speaker, that is standard practice. This government has used. This government has phased in sanctions in this way before, and the last government used exactly the same technique when they introduced sanctions and when they did so, Mr. Speaker, we supported them because we could see the sanctions were the right thing to do, to bear down on, on, on Russia. So these are new sanctions being phased in.

This is not a question of lifting existing sanctions in any way whatsoever, and we will continue to work with our allies on further sanction packages.
12:06
12:07
12:08
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:12
Kemi Badenoch Portrait Rt Hon Kemi Badenoch MP (North West Essex, Conservative)
-
-
Mr. Speaker. It gets worse and worse. He doesn't understand the worse. He doesn't understand the policy. I am asking him about new oil and gas licences, new oil and gas licences, which they voted gas licences, which they voted against yesterday. If they had approved those licences for Jackdaw and Rosebank like we did, we would have that oil in this country now we would just listen to him and I wonder if he is OK. He is so deep in the bunker, Mr. Speaker.

He's importing sanctioned Russian oil. He's nationalising steel. He's imposing price controls in the supermarket. It's like the Soviets won. This country needs a government that has got its act together, Mr. Speaker. Instead, what we have is a Prime Minister hanging by a thread, fake support from his backbenchers too scared to take difficult decisions, losing his moral compass by backsliding on Ukraine. Yes, he is, Mr. Speaker. Look, the shakes of the head are so feeble. It's so, so feeble.

He has got. They can. It's absolutely laughable, Mr. Speaker. It's absolutely laughable. Yesterday we saw them huddled in the corridors talking about Andy Burnham and Wes Streeting. The fact is, he's got a Cabinet fighting to replace him. And the worst part is they aren't getting rid of him over his terrible agenda. No, they actually like it. They just want a better salesman. So isn't it the case, Mr. Speaker, that it doesn't matter who replaces him? The real problem is the Labour Party.
12:13
12:14
12:15
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:25
12:26
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:37
Kit Malthouse Portrait Rt Hon Kit Malthouse MP (North West Hampshire, Conservative)
-
-
Kit Malthouse. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. >> In five weeks time. >> The government will be introducing penal. Tariffs on steel imports into the UK and at the same imports into the UK and at the same time, massively reducing tariff free quotas. This will cause enormous damage to the UK manufacturing base in the absence of adequate steel making capacity in the UK. More than that, the way the tariffs are drawn up mean that for my.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Constituent company, Stannah Stairlifts, a world beating company based in Andover, for them to based in Andover, for them to import steel in the UK and manufacture their product will face tariffs. But for a competitor tariffs. But for a competitor import finished product made from the self-same steel will not attract tariffs. This cannot be a attract tariffs. This cannot be a situation that can be allowed to persist. So can I ask the Prime Minister, please, to arrange for his Secretary of State to focus on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

his Secretary of State to focus on this issue and get it sorted out? Amen. Can I thank him for raising this really important issue? And can I give him assurance? It's not just the Secretary of State. I am also absolutely focussed on this because absolutely focussed on this because we're all very well aware of the consequences that would otherwise follow. So I am personally vested follow. So I am personally vested in this. And the entire Cabinet is because it is a very important issue, as he rightly points out.
12:39
12:40
12:40
Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant MP, Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Rhondda and Ogmore, Labour)
-
-
Ministers Mr Speaker. Putin must >> Ministers Mr Speaker. Putin must never be allowed victory in Ukraine and we will do everything we can as a government and as a country to debilitate and degrade the Russian war machine. That is precisely what our sanctions regime is designed to do. We sanctioned more than 3300 individuals and organisations and hundreds of shadow fleet tankers. It's as tough a sanctions regime as any in the world, and we are proud of it. I want to make it absolutely clear that our sanctions regime today is tougher than it was yesterday or last week.

In fact, thanks to the Russian Russia sanctions, EU Exit Amendment Regulations 2026 Statutory Instrument. We will, for the first time from today for the first time, ban the import not only of uranium but also the import of Russian oil products processed in a third country. We are not lifting any existing sanctions at all. We are like other countries phasing in these sanctions, which is why, in the light of the situation in the Middle East, we have issued a targeted temporary licence to allow the continued import of diesel and jet fuel.

These licences are temporary and targeted. We will review them regularly and repeatedly, and will suspend them as soon as we possibly can. As a result of all of the measures that we have taken, there will be less Russian oil on the market, not more. Russia will be poorer, not richer, and Putin will be weaker, not stronger.
12:42
Andrew Bowie Portrait Andrew Bowie MP (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you very much. Mr. speaker, >> Thank you very much. Mr. speaker, Mr. speaker, in its 18th package of sanctions in January this year, His Majesty's Government prohibited the import of Russian petroleum import of Russian petroleum products produced in third countries from Russian oil, obliging importers to provide proof of the origin of oil used in petroleum product production. Yet yesterday evening at 7 p.m. whilst we in this very chamber were debating the future of our own North Sea oil and gas industry, and Labour MPs were being whipped to vote against new oil and gas licences in the North Sea.

The government slipped out an announcement that general trade licence for sanctioned processed oil products now permits certain activities prohibited under the Russian Sanctions Regulations 2019, such as the import of diesel and jet fuel to the UK. In other words, Mr. Speaker, this government has rolled back on its commitments to Ukraine and given the green light to purchase Russian oil from third countries, while at the same time as they were whipping their MPs to vote to shut down our own oil and gas production the exact same time.

It is an absolute disgrace and they should all be utterly ashamed of themselves. What message does this send the international community? What message does this send to the people of Ukraine? And what message does this send to our workers in our own North Sea oil and gas industry, which is being crushed by the misguided eco zealotry of Secretary of State for Energy Security and net zero? And also, Mr. Speaker. We are not only rewarding the thuggish and criminal behaviour of the Russian state, we are punishing ourselves and the skilled workforce here in the United Kingdom.

And who loses out? Mr. speaker, whilst we signal to Russia that we are willing once again to buy their oil, the British people. Mr. speaker, we are seeing 1000 job losses in oil and gas in the UK every single month, losing out on £25 billion in tax revenue over the next ten years, which we could be investing in our public services. Just yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I pointed out that Moscow would be celebrating the useful idiots opposite, and today the government has proved my point.

According to the government website where the announcement was made yesterday, the Secretary of State does have the power to revoke or suspend this licence at any time. So can the Ministers say if the Secretary of State will consider this decision? Can I ask the Ministers why he believes that increased reliance on foreign imports improves British energy security? What alternatives did the government consider, and who on earth is in charge of our energy security, the Energy Secretary, the Prime Minister, or is Vladimir Putin?
12:44
Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant MP, Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Rhondda and Ogmore, Labour)
-
-
Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. speaker, first of all, I thank the member must have missed the fact that there was a Statutory Instrument which implements the ban on on refined Russian crude oil products processed in a third country for the first time coming into force today. It didn't come into force earlier in the year. It didn't. Incidentally, Mr Speaker come into force when he was in government because when they were in government, they allowed the continued processing of oil products to come into the UK.

And he personally did absolutely nothing about it. The truth is, both sides of the House agree. And in fact, I think all sides of the House agree. Well, we've not heard from reform yet, but I think all sides of the House agree that we need to make sure that Putin doesn't prosper. One of the key ways of doing that is making sure that we tackle the the shadow fleet, which we've been doing very successfully. More than 500 tankers have been disrupted, 1.6 billion USD worth less oil and being transported this year than last year because of those sanctions.

And and to be precise about the question that he's asked, will we review the licences? I've already said that we will review the licences. They are there for a very simple reason, which is that just as when he was a Ministers, the previous government nearly always introduced sanctions in a in a phased way. That's precisely what we are doing in relation to these sanctions on on oil products that have been processed in a third country. We're doing the right thing here.

And I would have thought that he he would want to praise us. Unfortunately, I think he's tried to find a political headline rather than look into the facts.
12:46
12:46
Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant MP, Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Rhondda and Ogmore, Labour)
-
-
Ministers so there are two things here. There's a there's a things here. There's a there's a set of sanctions which come into force today, including on oil and the and oil products that have been processed in a third country. That's the first time that the UK has gone down that route. As I say, the previous government chose not to go down that route, even though there were people arguing for it. And I think that this will be an important new measure, ratcheting up the pressure on the Russian regime and at the same time, in part in recognition of the instability that there might be in the in the energy markets as a result of the events in in in the Middle East and the war in Iran, which obviously we've chosen not to take part in as a result of the instability that there might be in those markets, we've decided to implement these, as many other countries have done, including Australia and Canada, in a phased way.

And that is why we've introduced introduced these licences in relation to diesel and jet fuel. As I said before, I want these licences to last as short a time as is possible and is necessary to manage that market instability, and that's why we will review them as much as possible. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend. As our trade envoy in Ukraine, we stand 100% beside our friends in Ukraine and indeed the package of sanctions that we've introduced, this this time round is the toughest of any.

And I know our them.
12:48
12:49
12:50
12:50
12:51
12:52
12:53
12:54
Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant MP, Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Rhondda and Ogmore, Labour)
-
-
Mr. speaker, you will be aware of the phrase that sometimes it's conspiracy, and sometimes it's conspiracy, and sometimes it's something else. And and I just want to say that I think in this particular regard, in relation to the communications around all of this, I think it's not a there's no conspiracy. Nobody is trying to undermine our support for Ukraine. We we were always the Statutory Instrument in relation to the tougher measures was always going to come into force. Today, up until today, it was perfectly legal to import Russian refined goods products that have been refined in third party countries into the UK.

It will no longer be legal to do so, and there are several categories under that which will be banned. So, for instance, it will tackle carbon fibre used in the production of Russian drones, chemicals used in precision missiles and goods used in emerging emerging technologies such as quantum computing and AI. And I want to make sure that these licences will be as temporary as possible. I am in 2022, along with the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, visited not just Kyiv roughly a fortnight before the full scale invasion.

We went to Avdeevka, right at the very edge, and we saw Russian troops, snipers pointed at Ukrainians. This battle has gone on since 2014, not just since 2022, and I can assure her that the British government stands 100% beside the Ukrainian people.
12:56
12:56
12:57
12:58
12:58
12:59
13:00
13:00
13:01
Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant MP, Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Rhondda and Ogmore, Labour)
-
-
So, first of all, it is true >> So, first of all, it is true that this piece of the jigsaw in relation to sanctions policy lies across two departments. So the FCDO is in charge of sanctions policy and we're in. We are in we in the EU, in the Department for Business and Trade have responsibility not only for trade but also for export licences. And that's why there's been a bit of a miscommunication between the two departments. But I have to tell him that is entirely my fault and nobody else's.

So if anybody wants to have a go at anybody, they could just have a go at me. And I can't remember what the second half. Oh, about Europe and the second half. So it is true that the European Union introduced their legislation faster than we did. They did it earlier. They did it before the Iranian conflict came into play. And I think and that's one of the reasons why there's been some difference between us. Normally, we try to align ourselves all the way with the European Union and with others.

But I note, for instance, that the United States today, only today, I think, has extended its waiver for another month. And and I think I'm right in saying, as I said earlier, that Australia and Canada have done something very similar to us, but it has been standard practice when we've introduced these kind of sectoral sanctions, that we've introduced them in a phased way, because that makes it possible for UK businesses, apart from anything else, to accommodate themselves.
13:02
13:03
13:04
13:04
13:05
13:06
13:06
13:07
13:08
13:08
13:09
13:10
13:10
13:11
13:11
13:12
13:13
13:13
13:14
13:14
13:15
13:15
13:16
13:16
13:16
13:17
13:17
13:18
13:18
13:19
13:20
13:20
13:21
13:21
13:22
13:22
James Cartlidge Portrait James Cartlidge MP (South Suffolk, Conservative)
-
-
Yeah, yeah. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. >> I beg to move the amendment as on the Order Paper, and it is an honour to open the final debate on honour to open the final debate on the King's Speech on defence readiness on behalf of the opposition. But may I begin, Mr. Speaker, by expressing how saddened I was to hear of the death of Lance Bombardier, Kiera Sullivan from the King's Troop Royal Horse Artillery. My condolences and the condolences of the whole of the opposition are with her family, both personal and regimental.

Now, before turning to the defence related matters that were or were not included in the government's programme for the next legislative session, I pay tribute to the men and women serving in our armed forces right now across the globe, whether on board our nuclear submarines, providing a continuous at sea deterrent or those deployed in the Middle East to defend our overseas bases, I thank them for their service and unwavering professionalism. And I also want to pay tribute to our brave Ukrainian allies who continue to defy those original expectations of an early Russian victory.

And, Mr. Speaker, I do want to say, when we take steps to publicly show our sympathy for Ukraine's heroic struggle, such as by wearing badges, as I have done every day since the invasion, or by displaying Ukraine flags from local and national government buildings. We do it not just to show solidarity with a democratic nation under brutal attack by a dictatorship, but because it is firmly in our national interest to assist Ukraine in keeping Putin's military in check. So when newly newly elected councils make their first priority on entering office, pulling down the Ukraine flag, we are entitled to ask if the party in question cares about the fate of its people and understands the implications for our own national security.

If Russia were to triumph. And finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to pay tribute to all those who served our country in the past, our brave veterans. Which brings me to Labour's plans, as set out in the King's Speech. Now, of all Britain's military capabilities, few are more important to our defence, nor more widely admired, particularly by the United States than our special forces. And yet, at a time of war on two fronts, Labour are ploughing on with a Bill which will reopen vexatious legal actions that not only threaten our veterans, but would undermine the morale of all who serve today, in particular in the Special Forces special forces like the SAS and those of that regiment on duty in Loch Gall in 1987.

Mr. Speaker, who shot IRA terrorists headed to a police station, driving a digger with a bomb in its bucket, firing machine guns into the building as they approached. I believe that those soldiers were acting to defend our society from terrorists intent on mass murder. But whatever one's view, surely going back almost 40 years to events that took place in split seconds makes no sense. Now, crucially, in October 2023, coroner Justice McAlinden declined to list a new inquest into Lock Hall precisely because of the cut off date set by our Legacy Act, an act which therefore did its job in halting such cases and genuinely protecting our veterans from endless litigation.

However, in his comments, Justice McAlinden did add that preparatory work for the inquest should continue because he noted there would be a general election the following year, stating, and I quote, that may affect how the legislation is implemented. Mr. speaker, he had a point, didn't he, because fast forward three years and with war now facing us, not just in Ukraine but in the Middle East, the government of today remains intent on repealing the protections for veterans that we put in place.

It goes without saying that Labour's plans will harm our veterans once again, keeping them awake at night with fear of whether they will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hauled before our courts. I give way to my friend. Mr. Speaker, first of all, can I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. Speaker, first of all, can I commend the Shadow Ministers for bringing this forward? He's right to put this on record. This is very much part of this debate, but it goes further than that. And the veterans who can't sleep at night, the families who are worried about the families who are worried about what's going to happen to their their father, their brother or their sister, whatever the case may be. But it does the humble gentleman also agree with me. It's affecting recruiting.

Those who want to join the Army are saying, if we join and we get involved in a battle to protect this country, we could find ourselves being being persecuted for it or taken to court. Does he feel for that reason and other reasons? Government must be fair when it comes to the legislation, and must follow the very points that the Ministers has

**** Possible New Speaker ****

put forward? Well. I am always grateful to him for his very, very good interventions, and he's hit the nail on the head. This isn't just about veterans. It's important as that is. It is about the wider impact on recruitment. And we don't just take my word for it or the hon. Gentleman for Strangford. In November last year, nine former November last year, nine former four star generals wrote, and I quote this lawfare is a direct quote this lawfare is a direct threat to national security, going on to say that the troubles bill achieves nothing and ongoing lawfare risks everything.

So I asked Labour MP this question when considering the troubles Bill and the issue of lawfare. Surely the overriding factor to consider is the threat we face as a nation and the impact of this legislation on our ability to defend ourselves? Do they really think in their heart of hearts that this is what they should be prioritising? Just when we need our soldiers more than ever? I just want to make one more point and then I'll give way to Mr. Speaker.

I put this challenge to all those who intend to stand in Labour's leadership contest. Will those candidates seeking to become our next Prime Minister recognise that the first duty of any leader is defence of the realm, and that therefore it is in the national interest to scrap the troubles bill

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and back our brave veterans. I give way to honourable leader. I thank the Shadow Ministers for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Shadow Ministers for giving way. Would he acknowledge that no party and no victims group in Northern Ireland supports his in Northern Ireland supports his party's approach to the past, and that even the Dillon judgement last that even the Dillon judgement last week did not in any way rule it legal. And would he not agree with me that, you know, soldiers following the rule of law is a matter of recruitment, and no soldier wants to be painted with a brush that they don't follow the rule of law.

And would he care to articulate to the House? Out of 300,000 soldiers who served under Operation Banner in Northern Ireland, how many actually have faced any judicial proceedings? It's in the very low two figures.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I respect the hon. Lady and I respect the strength of her view on this matter. I would just say we have to deal with what is certain here. In my view, Mr. Speaker, it is extremely unlikely Speaker, it is extremely unlikely that any new cases would lead to prosecutions. It is, however, certain that were this process to recommence, it would damage the morale of our armed forces at a time of war on two fronts, and I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

time of war on two fronts, and I interest. I'm grateful to my right hon. Friend who's making an excellent intervention. Can I just say to him, in answer to that and to others, having someone who served in Northern Ireland, I have spoken to many veterans that I was there with and others that were there before. There is a scintilla of real question mark about how they will be treated. The vexatious nature of these complaints will, of course, drag them eventually back into the courts.

That's the fear. They are sure that they are innocent, but by the time the courts have finished with them, innocent wouldn't matter at all because they will have a destroyed life. Does he not agree with me?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I don't need to add a great deal because my friend served on Operation Banner. He speaks with great authority. He has always been great authority. He has always been passionate on this issue, and I do think he hits the nail on the head as that so many people have said, as that so many people have said, so many veterans have said to me, it is the process itself which is so punishing with this lawfare. It is so damaging. It is not in the is so damaging.

It is not in the national interest, and it will damage the British armed forces. And I'll give way to my hon. Friend.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I'll give way to my hon. Friend. As my hon. Friend knows, the then Defence Committee did two reports into this question, and in the course of those inquiries, we interviewed for eminent professors of law, including one particularly famous left wing one. We didn't ask them what they wanted to happen. We asked them what could legally be done about a statute of limitation, and they all agreed, however reluctantly, that it would be legal to have a statute of limitation provided it was coupled with a truth recovery process which met the requirement for an investigation to occur, and that the other key condition was it applied to all people involved in the conflict.

Now the government could pursue the line that these four professors of law took, but it doesn't want to do so, and it's happy to shelter behind court

**** Possible New Speaker ****

judgements that it could appeal but won't. OK. Well, it's an excellent point, my friend is absolutely correct. my friend is absolutely correct. Our legacy act was based on what happened in South Africa and which happened in South Africa and which is where we may not like it, but if you want to have peace and reconciliation, any changes in the law which favour those who may have been guilty have to apply to both sides. It is simply a statement of sides.

It is simply a statement of fact. And as and I think I just showed with Loch Gall how our Act of Parliament, the Legacy Act did indeed stop an inquest which would have been damaging to the armed forces, but which I do not believe would have led to any actual prosecutions. So, turning to what wasn't in the King's Speech Madam Deputy Speaker, the Strategic Defence Review promised, and I quote, a new Defence readiness Bill to provide the government with powers in reserve to mobilise reserves and industry should crisis escalate into conflict now, with war on two fronts, surely such legislation should be the absolute top priority of this government.

But alas, there is no defence readiness bill in the King's speech. And why not? Because, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Defence Readiness Bill isn't ready. And what else is not ready? Madam Speaker, of course, the Defence Investment Plan and we know. We know they're working flat out and but and at pace. But almost a year ago, the Secretary of State promised from that Dispatch Box that the Defence Investment Plan would be published last autumn. It is now ten months late. So when the Ministers responds, can he tell us exactly when we are going to get the defence investment plan? Most importantly, we are bound to ask why do we still have no defence investment plan? Now, of course, the dip is meant to set out the detailed procurement decisions intended to implement Labour's strategic defence review.

So what do the authors of Labour's SDR, appointed by the Prime Minister, actually think about the failure to publish the dip and the impact on delivering the SDR? Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, the three key authors, Doctor Fiona Hill, General Sir Richard Barrons, Lord Robertson, every one of them has absolutely slammed the government for its failure to deliver with Lord Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary, a former Labour defence secretary, a former secretary general of NATO, stating and I quote, we cannot defend Britain with an ever expanding welfare Budget.

We agree 100%. The fact is, the current Prime Minister bottled it on welfare reform u-turning repeatedly, despite a majority of over 160 and failing to make even modest changes to working age benefits whilst removing the two child benefit cap. I give way to my hon. Friend.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to him giving way to be charitable to the government. Maybe they are given. They had Maybe they are given. They had another U-turn on the Chagos deal. There is actually £34 billion that could be spent in defence. Maybe could be spent in defence. Maybe there's a delay in the plan because they're trying to decide how to spend that money. Or is there another reason you can think of?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

another reason you can think of? Well, my hon. Friend has remarkable foresight because I will be coming to the Chagos issue. But this is the key point. Had the Prime Minister held his nerve and reformed the benefit system, including toughening rules for working age benefits and keeping the two child limit, as was his previous position, he could have found the billions to fund defence rather than entrenching welfare dependency even further. So with this total failure of nerve from the Prime Minister, he had some brass neck using his response to the King's speech last Wednesday to accuse us of defence austerity.

Just to remind the House, last year the government insisted on £2.6 billion of reductions to the Ministry of Defence Budget this year. They are insisting on a further £3.5 billion of cuts are, they will say, but they were the last government to spend 2.5% defence on defence in 2010, always omitting the caveat that when the same Labour government came to power in 1997, they inherited defence spending from us at 3%. Indeed, in talking about so-called austerity, they conveniently forget as well that the IFS found that had Labour won the election in 2010, they were planning to cut 25% from the defence Budget.

But at least they achieved. Secretary to the Treasury at the time had the good grace to leave a note confessing. Inverted commas, I his message said we all know there's no money left and once again relying on us to clear up the mess of a Labour government that had run out of other people's money, not for the first time in history, but the worst thing about Labour's resort to history is that it's completely irrelevant. I have repeatedly accepted that defence spending fell under successive governments since the end of the Cold War.

Irrefutable. But that was because the the world we lived in was one where we thought peace would last, whereas today the threat is completely transformed and instead of looking back, the public want us to confront the challenges we face right now to be ready for battle. And above all, they want us to be honest about the choices needed to find the cash for defence. That's why we've started to set out a a set of fully funded steps towards 3% of GDP on defence, as was last achieved under a conservative government.

So take Chagos as my hon. Friend said in a very good intervention. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, Labour may delude themselves that, like the parrot in Monty Python sketch, their Chagos deal is merely resting pining for the archipelago. But we know the deal is dead. It is an ex treaty, and even if they disagree with no treaty legislation in the King's speech, it must be clear, even to them that the hundreds of millions of pounds due to be sent to Mauritius. This Parliament, primarily from the MoD Budget, must now be available to be spent elsewhere.

That's why earlier this month in Portsmouth, the Leader of the Opposition and I set out that we would use Labour's Chagos Cash for a better purpose, accelerating the construction of the 13 frigates being made in Scotland that we ordered in government. The fact is, there is no other way to address the shortage of surface ships very serious in the short term, than accelerating the build of those 13 fantastic new warships. Indeed. If you bear with me, just a few days after we set out our policy to do exactly that.

Lo and behold, HMS Iron Duke was withdrawn from service, confirming the urgent need to act on defence readiness and be willing to to divert cash from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

elsewhere. I give way to the lady. Thank you. I thank the hon. Member, right hon. Member, for taking an intervention. Would he agree with me that had his government not got rid of shipbuilding in my city and had put some plans into place, we may well some plans into place, we may well have been able to continue to build ships in my city rather than decimate it and leave us with three

**** Possible New Speaker ****

decimate it and leave us with three incompetent ports of Ministers. Well, I'm very grateful for the hon. Lady, but I think she would be hon. Lady, but I think she would be better focusing on the type 45 destroyers in government. They were meant to order 12 type 45 seconds. They slashed that order in half to just six. And worse than that, in an act of genius, they inserted an engine that didn't even work. And we've had to spend years trying to replace through the PIP programme.

But Madam Deputy Speaker, on the issue of welfare and defence funding, we've been the first party to explicitly set out how we would reduce benefit expenditure to increase defence spending, with confirmation that we would restore the two child benefit cap and use the savings for our military. We have set out plans to move 2 billion a year from R&D, from other government departments to fund drones and drone tech across the board. But if we are to become the world leader in uncrewed warfare that I still believe we can be, not least after our extraordinary support for Ukraine.

We don't just need our services to have the cash to test and train. We also need to invest billions into transforming our defence industrial base. I'll

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way to my friend who's an expert on industrial. Based on the type 26 global

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Based on the type 26 global combat ship, and I welcome that. That's a really important, as I'm sure my right hon. Friend will important naval deal with Norway? Is it not the case? The timeline of Is it not the case? The timeline of those delivery will give the first ships to Norway and not to United ships to Norway and not to United Kingdom. If I'm wrong, great. And if is the case, then there must be a discussion with extending the life of the existing.

Well, I'm great if I'm wrong, great. Well, you know, I'm used to being wrong many times, but I'm happy to be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

wrong on something we need to get right. Thank you. I'm grateful to my friend, and I'm aware that timelines are an I'm aware that timelines are an issue in in a couple of dimensions in this chamber at the moment. So I will I will come to my conclusion will I will come to my conclusion shortly. But to my friend, he does make a fundamental question about the Royal Navy. Madam Speaker, at a time when we know we have shortages time when we know we have shortages of surface ships, I do hope that the Ministers will set out exactly how many type 26 we are going to how many type 26 we are going to order, irrespective of the Norway deal.

I support the Norway export deal. How

**** Possible New Speaker ****

How many will we be ordering in addition to that? Because the written answer he gave me was very, very ambiguous indeed. So Madam very ambiguous indeed. So Madam Deputy Speaker, it's to get that extra money into industrial base, which is why our alternative King's Speech has a Sovereign Defence fund Speech has a Sovereign Defence fund bill. But there is finally one other important bill in our alternative King's Speech, our promise to repeal Labour's terrible troubles Bill. It is not enough to oppose Labour's lawfare.

We would oppose Labour's lawfare. We would restore full legal protections for our veterans, boosting morale and sending a signal that we will always have the back of those who serve. Madam Deputy Speaker, the public know that it is madness at a time of war for the UK government to be prioritising putting our soldiers back in the dock for serving their country. That is why our motion today calls on this House to reject Labour's plans and scrap the troubles Bill. We will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

always defend those who defended us. Hey. The original question was that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The original question was that an Humble Address be presented to His Majesty as on the Order Paper. Since when amendment oh has been Since when amendment oh has been proposed as on the Order Paper. The question is that the amendment be made. I now call the Ministers
13:41
Luke Pollard Portrait Luke Pollard MP, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Plymouth Sutton and Devonport, Labour )
-
-
Ministers Luke Pollard. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I know members across the House and I know members across the House will join me and the Prime Minister who said earlier in sending our condolences to the family and friends of Lance Bombardier, Kiera O'Sullivan, a gifted soldier horsewoman who died on Friday. A young leader, a young life taken too soon. Madam Deputy Speaker His Majesty opened his gracious speech with a warning that increasingly dangerous and volatile world threatens the United Kingdom.

And as we debate our response in this chamber, our armed forces are on missions across the world facing down those threats, strengthening our alliances, defending our overseas bases and our overseas territories, and preparing for missions to the High North, the Strait of Hormuz and a Post-ceasefire Ukraine. Our armed forces are working around the clock, protecting our homeland, our allies, our interests equipped with some of the most advanced capabilities in the world. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz is hurting all our constituents right across this country.

They see it in their newsfeeds. They feel it at the petrol pumps. They pay for it through rising bills. This government is determined to do all we can to end that pain as soon as we can. We have stepped up to lead a multinational response, with the Prime Minister and the Defence Secretary building and co-chairing a new 40 nation coalition united in our mission to secure the Strait of Hormuz as soon as a lasting ceasefire is in place. With the UK's armed forces leading the way deploying advanced autonomous minehunting equipment, new uncrewed boats and drones, working alongside the heavy metal of HMS Dragon.

Deploying to the Middle East with its cutting edge Sea Viper Counter-drone system. Because, Madam Deputy Speaker, innovation, hard power and the ability to sustain it are the currency of our more dangerous and unpredictable age. Hard power is the essential building block of effective deterrence, and deterrence is our insurance policy against the growing threats that we face as a nation. That is why this government is investing in hard power, investing over £270 billion in defence over this Parliament. Defence innovation working twice, once for national security and once

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for British industry. That is the Labour way. Please. I'm grateful to the Ministers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the Ministers for giving way. He makes a strong case for hard power, and the investment in British defence is one that we in these benches one that we in these benches support. However, he also knows that generals on both sides of the Atlantic have made the case that investment in development is necessary in order to prevent a conflict. In fact, they say that prevention is better than military intervention. So can the Ministers take this opportunity to assure the House that there will be no further cuts to the international development Budget in the forthcoming period?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for his intervention. He knows as well as I do that we have a commitment to get back to have a commitment to get back to 0.7% of GDP on international aid when we can. But I will also remember the time when his party in government cut defence spending as well. And so I appreciate what he's trying to say. But let's unite now in understanding the threats we face today. Require investment in defence, require an increasing defence Budget, and that is what defence Budget, and that is what this government is delivering, investing more in our armed forces and those who wield the hard power.

Is this government's approach investing more in our defence industry that develops and sustains it? Is this Labour government's approach and investing more in our alliances that multiply that hard power? Is this Labour government's approach?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend, please. I'm grateful to my hon. Friend. He's making a very powerful case for how investing in our armed forces and defence, after 14 years of Tory defence, after 14 years of Tory neglect, is imperative to get Britain growing and for our defence preparedness. But would he agree with me that these capabilities with me that these capabilities must always be exercised in the right way? 30 UK arms licences to right way? 30 UK arms licences to Israel were suspended in September 2024, but in light of the Iran war that he mentioned and the fact that 72,000 Palestinians have now been killed in Gaza, could Ministers revisit this? I know that this worsening means many constituents want to end all arms sales with the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Netanyahu regime. Ministers. Can I thank my friend for her intervention? This government has intervention? This government has called for a ceasefire. We've called for increased aid to get to the people who need it. We've introduced an arms export against those weapon systems that could be used in Gaza. We keep, of course, all export licences under review. But I think the whole house, whichever party we are in, want to whichever party we are in, want to see a lasting peace and a two state solution.

So the people of Gaza, Palestine can live side by side alongside a secure Israel as well. That is the effort that this government is making on that respect. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, the conservative equipment plan that we inherited in July 2024 was overcommitted. It was underfunded and unsuited to the threats we now face. This Labour government is rearming, renewing our armed forces and ending the Tory hollowing out and underfunding that we inherited. Our strategic defence review and our Defence Investment Plan will put that right.

And as we. If you're listening to the speech last

**** Possible New Speaker ****

night, you will heard him say, it's getting close. I'll give way. Really grateful for the Ministers for giving way. But when is this going to happen? All we can see around us. I represent a constituency with the highest constituency with the highest proportion of veterans in the UK. They take a really, really keen interest in what goes on in our armed forces. We look across the armed forces. We look across the harbour, across Portsmouth Harbour to ships that are sat there stationary, not going anywhere, and a defence industry which is being undermined at every step.

When is the government going to actually

**** Possible New Speaker ****

put this word into action? Yeah, yeah. Well, I can think of for intervention. She, like me, intervention. She, like me, represents an area with a lot of military personnel and a lot of veterans. That's why she, I know, will welcome the fact that veterans will welcome the fact that veterans spending is now at a record high under this Labour government. We are working to deliver the Defence investment plan, but that has not investment plan, but that has not stopped us from investing in new capabilities that I'll come to in a moment in this speech, but I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

moment in this speech, but I will give away to him first. Following his words. As always, with much interest.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Has he had a conversation with the former Health. Secretary. Who last Thursday spoke of dither and delay? And does he relate that to the extraordinary

**** Possible New Speaker ****

relate that to the extraordinary delay in the Defence Investment plan? Madam Deputy Speaker, I always welcome recruits to our armed welcome recruits to our armed forces and defence debates. The Member for Ilford North is absolutely welcoming our defence debates here today. But may I say politely to him, I focus a lot of attention on the gentleman opposite me here, who left an unfunded and hollowed out armed forces. But he too was a Ministers in that government that hollowed out an underfunded armed forces.

So I well, I welcome his intervention and his expertise. He cannot escape from his record of underfunding our armed forces. We know we're working to deliver that armed forces. Now, look, we are on a path. In a moment. We are on a path to war, fighting readiness. By 2030, we must be mission ready by 2030 against a peer adversary. That means investing in our armed forces. That mission is backed by our commitment to the largest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War, backed by our ambitious programme of defence reform, the most ambitious in 50 years and backed by Defence industrial strategy, a funded strategy.

Unlike the document that was worked on by the gentleman opposite that was unfunded and left on a shelf to gather dust, we are fuelling defence as an engine for growth, creating good jobs up and down the country, and because we are still getting on with the job of defending our country, this government has signed more than 1200 defence contracts since the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

election. Nearly 9 in 10 of those going to UK based firms. Happy giving way. Grateful to giving way. I pose

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Grateful to giving way. I pose this question to his colleague when he was last at the despatch box. Where is the dip stuck? He seemed Where is the dip stuck? He seemed to point the finger at the Treasury, but could I get an update of where the dip is actually stuck?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the dip is actually stuck? Well, I'm a big fan of Luke's. Even knew Luke's with beards as the gentleman opposite now is. But I have to say to him, not going to give a running commentary on the dip. We're working flat out to deliver it, and it will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

published when it is ready. Happy giving way. I'm grateful for the Ministers of State giving way. He's right to focus on procurement and defence kit and equipment. But of course all of that is nothing without all of that is nothing without defence personnel. So can I just sort of pivot his thoughts? I don't sort of pivot his thoughts? I don't know if he's going to come on to it. On his speech. A lot of our armed forces personnel with children with forces personnel with children with particular Send needs find it difficult when they are redeployed from different countries with the armed forces, even within different local education authorities within this country.

It's a very, shall we say, it's a patchwork of of quality, if I can put it like that. So would he commit in the national interest, in the interests of those individual children and families, to ensure that there is uniformity around SEND provision and recommendations. When our servicemen and women are redeployed

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with their families. Before the Ministers responds, I can. I can tell that the the question is incredibly serious and question is incredibly serious and needed the detail, but we are very short on time and over 40 people wish to contribute. So

**** Possible New Speaker ****

wish to contribute. So interventions and responses must be short. Ministers thank you, Madam Speaker. He was wrong in his first intervention about type 26 seconds, intervention about type 26 seconds, but he's right on this one here. It is important that we do that. That's why this government is putting the Armed Forces covenant putting the Armed Forces covenant fully into law. But if there's an issue he feels passionate about, I can arrange a meeting with the Ministers for Veterans and People so he can discuss it further, because it is an important issue make.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sure I welcome everything that government's putting forward with the spend in Northern Ireland. The Ministers himself has committed himself to that. There's been lots himself to that. There's been lots of visits to Northern Ireland to improve that and make it better. But the UK spend per head in the But the UK spend per head in the mainland here is £400. UK spend per head in Northern Ireland is £80 a big difference from what has to be done? Can I ask the Ministers what steps will be taken will be taken to improve procurement and defence

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to improve procurement and defence contracts for those businesses in Northern Ireland to ensure that we can have a quality. Thank you. But we have a brilliant defence industry in Northern Ireland. That is why this Labour government backed it with a £50 million defence growth deal I announced only a few weeks ago in Belfast. We'll continue to support businesses large and small in Northern Ireland. But Madam Deputy Speaker, in the past week alone this Labour Government has deployed advanced autonomous mine hunting equipment backed by £115 million of new investment for mine hunting drones and counter-drone systems for the Strait of Hormuz signed a £1 billion contract to equip the British Army with new remote controlled artillery.

We have equipped our typhoon jets with the advanced precision kill weapon system to make shooting down Iranian drones cheaper and easier for RAF, and we've announced funding for 13 new defence unicorns. We are a government that is backing UK jobs as we rebuild our armed forces, and we're also delivering

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for our people. As I was asked on people go on, that's my neighbour. Thank the Honourable Ministers for giving way. Very briefly. I've for giving way. Very briefly. I've got a very simple question for him. He keeps stating this thousand or so contracts, nearly all based in so contracts, nearly all based in the UK that have been signed. What percentage of those are SMEs compared to the primes?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

compared to the primes? I will get her the full details, but we're backing an increase in defence spending for SMEs, with a defence spending for SMEs, with a target of increasing it by 50% in the next two years. It's our mission to do so. That's why we've stood up the new Defence Office for small Business Growth, but I'll get her the figures that she asked for on the latest figures. But backing our people, we've given our armed forces the biggest pay rise in 20 years.

We've extended free childcare. We've introduced the first ever independent armed forces commissioner to improve service life. We have ended the Tory privatisation of defence housing and £9 billion investment to tackle the scourge of dreadful military homes that we inherited refitting, rebuilding 9 in 10 military homes with turned around the measures that were the Tory retention and recruitment crisis we inherited. Outflow is now down 8%, inflow up 13%. That is a Labour government that is delivering. But as the geopolitics shift, it is important that we across this House renew our support for Ukraine.

It is important that we all stand together. That is why the defence secretary now chairs the Ukraine Defence Contact Group. It is why the United Kingdom now chairs with our French allies, the coalition of the willing. And just as it is important to call out those parties that seek to take down Ukrainian flags, I think it is more important that we challenge them on what they would do to support Ukraine. So to reform, I ask, what will that party do to support Ukraine? Taking down the flags is a backward step, but I'm.

I'm interested in hearing what are the positive steps to the Conservatives opposite. I'm interested in restoring this cross-party unity on Ukraine that we used to have. That seems to be fraying because of party politics being played opposite. So could the Conservatives say when was the last time the Leader of the Opposition backed UK leadership on the coalition of the willing? I can't recall one, but I'm interested to see when that was, because we need to make sure that the message goes out clearly from this House that we back Ukraine.

We will continue backing Ukraine for as long as it takes. No, no, I need to make progress. Madam Deputy Speaker is clear that I have to finish in a moment, but thank you. Thank him for his interest. But, look, we know that in a more dangerous world, we need to spend more on defence. Now, turning to the legislation, I've heard nonsense about no defence measures in the King's Speech from the usual armchair generals on social media. But let's have a look at what is in there.

The Armed Forces Bill, which will further strengthen and improve service life, strengthen our armed forces and strengthen our strategic reserve. A new regulatory bill with measures to expand drone testing and use. Good news for our forces. Good news for defence tech firms in Swindon, Plymouth, Poole, Portsmouth and across the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. Troubles bill that will repeal and replace a law found unlawful with a new bill with new protections for veterans that we're working closely with veterans and veterans groups to deliver.

And I hear the opposition squealing about the Defence Readiness Bill, a bill they never thought of, a bill that they never implemented and a bill that they only complain about. He will know as a gentleman opposite that we are continuing to work on the Defence Readiness Bill, and it will be introduced later this Parliament, assuming that the usual processes allow. We are consulting with people, but he will know that it's a sequential bill. We're improving readiness in the defence with the Armed Forces Bill and we're working on new measures.

But all he has to offer to this debate is complaints. No apology for the underfunding, no apology for the cuts, no apology for the armed forces housing that our people are forced living with black mould. Not good enough. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, this Labour government is investing in our people, the largest pay rise in 20 years. Nine out of ten defence houses being refurbished or rebuilt, establishing an armed forces commissioner investing in our infrastructure. Billions will be spent on new housing and new docks in our industrial relations, delivering five defence growth deals, five tests in England, two hopefully in Scotland, one in Wales.

Announced £182 million defence skills packages, 1200 contracts signed in capabilities, new artillery, new missiles, new drones, new ships being built in Scotland, new deals with Cambridge aerospace for interceptor missiles, new commando insertion craft with Norway, new munitions factories, 23 new medium helicopters being built in Yeovil Proteus. The first flight of an autonomous UK helicopter. New defence warehouses, homes and facilities, more exports, a bigger defence industrial base, more alliances. Investing in the coalition of the willing. A new Ukraine defence contact group chaired by my friend the Defence Secretary.

A new deal with Germany, the Trinity House, a refreshed Lancaster House agreement, a new deal with Norway with the lunar house. This is a Labour government delivering for defence, delivering for Britain, backing our allies, backing our forces and I commend it and His Majesty's gracious speech to this House.
13:57
James MacCleary Portrait James MacCleary MP (Lewes, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, James MacCleary. spokesperson, James MacCleary. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. If His Majesty's most gracious speech was meant to show that this government has grasped the scale of government has grasped the scale of the danger facing Britain than it fell a long way short. We live in a more dangerous world than at any point since the end of the Cold War. Vladimir Putin is waging war in Europe. Ukraine is fighting not just for its very survival, but for the security of our entire continent.

Across Europe, we're seeing sabotage, cyber attacks, disinformation, intimidation and hybrid warfare. Further afield, the world order is being tested by the rise of China, by instability in the Middle East and by authoritarian regimes. Are watching very carefully to see whether democracies still have the resolve to defend ourselves. And at the same time, we can no longer assume that old certainties will still hold. The United States remains a vital ally, but President Trump has shown just how quickly long standing alliances can be weakened, questioned or taken for granted.

This is the reality facing Britain. So this should have been a King's speech that put national security at its heart. It should have been a moment of seriousness, urgency and ambition. Instead, once again, we got more delay and more warm words that are not backed up by action. Now, we all know the Conservatives hollowed out our armed forces, but this Labour government cannot simply point to the failures of the past and pretend that is enough. It

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now has a responsibility to act, but so far it is moving far too slowly. I give way. Giving way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And he is right to point out the devastating record of the party opposite. But will he share my sadness and frustration of the role sadness and frustration of the role played by the Liberal Democrats in hollowing out the size of our armed forces and waving through Budget forces and waving through Budget after Budget after Budget, which cut defence spending in this country. And will he own up to that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sorry record? Yes. Thank the hon. Member for his intervention has already been pointed out. Defence spending has been reduced by successive governments over a very long period of time. So I think I think focusing on the Liberal Democrats record alone is somewhat unfair, to say the least. I've certainly given Gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can you. Remind the. House which party. It was? Who in coalition insisted that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Who in coalition insisted that we delay cas d replacement. By two

**** Possible New Speaker ****

full years as a condition of the coalition? The hon. Member enjoys raising the coalition quite a lot. The. You're talking about the nuclear submarines, weren't you? Is that about.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

about. Order on your feet. I'm on my feet. On your. Excuse me? I wasn't talking about anything. So please

**** Possible New Speaker ****

don't use the word you or your James MacCleary. The Liberal Democrats have reaffirmed our commitment to our nuclear deterrent repeatedly, and we will continue to do so. The Defence Investment plan is still not published. Industry is still waiting for certainty. Our allies are still waiting for clarity. Our armed forces are still waiting for the investment they need. It was therefore deeply disappointing that the promised Defence Readiness Bill the promised Defence Readiness Bill was not included in the King's Speech.

It speaks volume that the government's own bill on readiness is itself delayed. That matters because defence cannot be switched on overnight. You cannot rebuild capacity in industry at the flick of a switch. You cannot train personnel, repair readiness, modernise equipment, strengthen supply chains and restore deterrence with vague promises or

**** Possible New Speaker ****

indeed working at pace. Certainly one of the things that we we need the government needs to we we need the government needs to improve upon. There needs to be better at. Is drone technology. I understand that for every one understand that for every one Ukrainian soldier is killed, they killed 14 Russians. With that massive move in technology, does he massive move in technology, does he feel it's time for this country, the United Kingdom, Great Britain and Northern Ireland, to have a and Northern Ireland, to have a partnership with Ukraine? So the technological advances that they're they're doing can be part of us.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the hon. Member and, yes, obviously, learning from Ukraine has been very important. And the government, to be fair, I think, government, to be fair, I think, have made some steps in this direction. But we can always do more to learn from our our friends more to learn from our our friends who are, you know, testing this technology in the field day in, day out. So I think it's very important point, but defence takes time. point, but defence takes time. Industry needs a demand signal.

Our allies need confidence. Our adversaries need to see resolve. That is why the Liberal Democrats That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for the government to commit to spending 3% of GDP on defence by 2030 at the latest, not as a slogan or a press release, but as a serious plan to make Britain safer. We must also understand that Britain's defence does not begin and end at our border. That is why forcing a choice between spending on defence and international development is entirely false.

Just yesterday, former senior British officers wrote in The Times about the danger that cuts to development posed to our security. They described it as the first line of defence for the UK. The government must urgently reverse course on these cuts that only undermine this country's security and soft power around the world. Last year's Strategic Defence Review highlighted the need for an urgent injection of cash into our armed forces. That is why Liberal Democrats are calling for the immediate launch of defence bonds, raising G20 billion over two years to support immediate capital

**** Possible New Speaker ****

intensive defence investment. I certainly will. That's always very generous giveaway, I have to say. Dear speaker, he says they issue war bonds for the for the extra defence spending, which is of course just spending, which is of course just other borrowing. But he's also said he would maintain aid spending at 0.7 percent. That's a huge increase in spending. How would that be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in spending. How would that be funded. So it's quite right. Of course defence bonds as with all bonds, would be borrowing. And all bonds, would be borrowing. And we've spoken before about the need to increase defence spending through cross-party talks and reversal in aid spending is part of an overall package of of how we would Budget in the future. I mean, one of the ways we've looked at, and we will be proposing later today, is rejoining a customs union with the European Union, which would generate increased spending for your own policy that would help modernise our armed forces.

It would strengthen our sovereign capabilities. It would support British defence firms, including the small and medium sized businesses that are so often at the cutting edge of innovation. It would give the the public a direct stake in the defence and security of our country. This is about spending better, not simply spending more. The too long defence procurement has been slow, bureaucratic and wasteful. Too many programmes have been delayed, too many costs have spiralled. Too often British industry has been left without the certainty it needs to invest higher, train and grow.

If we're serious about national security, we must also be serious about industrial security. That means backing British manufacturing. It means investing in research and development. It means supporting apprenticeships and skilled jobs. It means making sure that defence spending strengthens communities across this country, not just the balance sheets of a handful of prime contractors. It also means recognising that in the modern world, defence is not just about the number of tanks, ships and aircraft we possess. Important though they are, it is also about cyber space, drones, AI, secure supply chains, energy resilience and the ability to move quickly when threats change.

Climate change is causing global instability. Melting ice opens up new flashpoints in the Arctic. Stress on food and water resources drives displacement and conflict. Our armed forces need the tools to fight the wars of the future, not just patch up the gaps left by the past. But Britain cannot do this alone. If the last century has taught us anything, and if recent years have taught us anything, it is that our security is bound up with that of our of our allies.

That is why we must be unwavering in our continued support for Ukraine. We must strengthen NATO. We must deepen cooperation with Commonwealth allies like Canada and Australia, and we must rebuild a serious defence relationship with Europe. The Liberal Democrats have called for a new European rearmament bank and for UK participation in Europe's Safe Rearmament programme. These would allow Britain and our allies to mobilise investment at the scale required to ensure our defence industries lead the next generation of technology, while also generating the economies of scale needed to reduce costs over the long term.

This isn't about choosing between Britain and Europe, it's about recognising the obvious truth that Britain is safer when when Europe is stronger and Europe is stronger, when Britain leads. National security should not be subject to short term political gains. That is why we have called on the government to urgently convene cross-party talks on how we reach 3% by 2030. Our adversaries are not waiting for us to get our act together. Our armed forces should not have to wait either. Defence requires all of society to be involved.

Being ready to defend our nation means also building our national resilience. The government must move faster and show far more ambition to involve the public in defence and security, should the worst ever happen, than having 70 million of us ready to come to our nation's defence is the most powerful weapon of all. But it requires leadership from government, and that has so far been absent, despite promises of a national conversation. This means learning from our friends in the Baltic and elsewhere about how we can harness the talents of the British people to become more resilient and prepared country.

The best way to prevent a war is to prepare for it. The choice before us is clear we can continue with managed decline, delayed plans, underpowered commitments, or we can choose seriousness. We can publish the Defence Investment Plan and Defence Readiness Bill. We can commit to 3% by 2030. We can launch defence bonds, we can back British industry. We can rebuild our armed forces, we can strengthen our alliances, and we can send a clear and unambiguous message to Putin and to every other authoritarian regime watching us.

Britain will defend itself, its allies, its values and its way of life. That is the ambition that this King's Speech should have shown, and that is the action this country needs. And that is why Liberal Democrats will continue fighting for it. Here.
14:07
Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi Portrait Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi MP (Slough, Labour)
-
-
Select Committee Chair Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi. >> Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. His Majesty the King opened his speech by noting that, and I quote, an increasingly that, and I quote, an increasingly dangerous and volatile world threatens the United Kingdom. We have seen unprecedented military have seen unprecedented military action and instability internationally, with the conflict in the Middle East being only the most recent example. Closer to home, we have the continued concerns about the security of Ukraine deterring further Russian action on the European continent and creating a resilient society ready to support our government and armed forces if we have to respond.

As I have previously noted in this House, our once dependable ally, the United States, is withdrawing from its historic role as the protector of democracy in Europe. It has become increasingly clear to us on the defence Committee that there is an overreliance on the USA, both militarily and for access to its defence industrial base. When we see, as a result of the Iran war, the US delaying deliveries and increasing the cost of Patriot missiles already sold to Switzerland, we must examine our own dependencies.

That is, it is becoming increasingly unclear how far that is sustainable. I warned in March, Madam Deputy Speaker, that Russia is already operating in the grey zone against the UK, notably in sabotage and cyber operations against the infrastructure that supports our prosperity. Furthermore, we know that Russia and others and China are arming at pace and are increasing their readiness for war. And yet many UK capability targets are measured in years and decades rather than months. Neither the government, our military nor our society are yet prepared or resilient enough to cope with a large scale conflict.

As His Majesty warned us a week ago, and I quote every element of the nation's energy, defence and economic security will be tested. Madam Deputy Speaker, the UK's armed forces need to both improve their current readiness and adopt new technologies at pace and at scale. The government has consistently recognised that our armed forces are hollowed out. Both the Strategic Defence Review and the National Security Strategy committed the government to improving the UK's warfighting readiness. However, our credibility has been harmed in recent months.

The lack of available frigates and destroyers to carry out the tasks which we have set ourselves and often agreed with NATO, is merely one example of the difficulties faced. The US is carrying out a NATO audit and it's looking hard at us. Our European partners are questioning whether we can deliver the commitments which we have made to NATO under the defence planning process, and indeed, whether we continue to deserve our leadership role in NATO. Madam Deputy Speaker, in the Defence Committee's report, looking at the UK's contribution to European security, we warned that time is short, given the urgency of the threat and the work required to respond appropriately.

We raised questions both about the sufficiency of capabilities we provide to NATO and those which we could protect our homeland. We questioned the government's progress on engaging the population about both the threat and how we respond to it. We have also looked at long term procurement programmes, completing the previous committee's work on the Global Combat Air programme, along with undertaking a new inquiry into Aukus. We are well aware that decisions taken today, particularly those which delay programme or lead to the loss of sovereign capability, have a huge impact on our future ability to defend our nation and deter adversaries.

And so, Madam Deputy Speaker, we await the Defence Investment Plan. We know that the delay is damaging both our domestic industry and our international credibility. We don't have empty factories, spare components or a surplus of welders sitting around waiting to jump into action. Once the government decides what it wants. Companies don't have warehouses full of supplies waiting for government to put their order in. Defence industry needs to increase capacity. That means building production lines and training people so that they can build the products.

That is particularly relevant. Madam Deputy Speaker, if allies and partners are buying the same things at the same time, as we have seen as a result of the war in Ukraine, most importantly, we don't know at what rate the government intends to reach the targets of 3% GDP on defence spending, hopefully in this Parliament. Madam Deputy Speaker or the NATO 3.5% target by 2035, and all the various defence financing options need to be rapidly considered, with some implemented ASAP.

Also, I have asked the Prime Minister, Madam Deputy Speaker, if he would publish a timeline so that industry could plan, based on when this additional funding would arrive. He refused to give the certainty beyond 2027, and we need that certainty. The US and the EU are looking at our defence industrial base and working out how best they can tempt our companies to move out or to their countries so that they can benefit from British innovation. Whilst we fail to provide a reason to stay here.

Madam Deputy Speaker, the defence Committee warned in our European Security Report that establishing this takes time and if the government just decides to turn on the tap at the last minute, a lot of taxpayers money will be lost to defence inflation, leaving the MoD with very little to show for it. Let me now move on to the Defence Readiness Bill, which should have featured prominently in the King's Speech. But alas, the government has is to give the government powers in reserve to respond effectively in the event of escalation towards a war involving the UK or its allies, and facilitate external security scrutiny of the UK's ability to defend itself.

The government is determining which additional legal powers it needs and looking at measures to better protect our critical national infrastructure, providing for the mobilisation of wider defence capability in crisis and ensure Parliament's ability to scrutinise warfighting readiness. We were told that this work would include engagement with key stakeholders, including other government departments and the committee, during 2026 as specific measures are developed. Drafting Madam Deputy Speaker will then, and I quote, take place following robust evidence gathering and policy development.

All of this is welcome, but we need a timeline. In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is now more than two years since the end of the last Parliament. The government has demonstrated again and again that it understands the problems. What it has failed to do is to implement a transformative solution. We need to fund defence properly, with a timetable showing precisely how and when we will reach the agreed 3.5% NATO target. We urgently need a defence investment plan published before the summer recess, which shows what is being invested where, crucially, also where the disinvestments are and what the subsequent changes to the structure of the UK armed forces are.

We need a Defence Readiness Bill to be published in this session, and we need a commitment that it will undergo pre-legislative scrutiny. We need to engage the public in a national conversation that the Prime Minister has talked about, about spending more on defence and what the public's role is in our nation's security. We know, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the government is wary of panicking the public, and rightly so. But the best way to avoid that is by ensuring that the public understand what is required of them as individuals and communities, and also to ensure that our brave armed forces have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the necessary capabilities to defend us. Thank you very much. Sir.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sir. Iain Duncan Smith Deputy. Speaker It's always a pleasure to follow the hon. Gentleman who I to follow the hon. Gentleman who I voted for for his position, as he will recall, and I'll come for will recall, and I'll come for payback later on. Can I also say, while I'm making this, it's very good to see my right hon. Neighbour good to see my right hon. Neighbour in my area sitting there, and I will listen with great interest to what he has to say, and I hope that the Labour Party finds another use for him in its own talent spotting.
14:17
Iain Duncan Smith Portrait Rt Hon Sir Iain Duncan Smith MP (Chingford and Woodford Green, Conservative)
-
-
Can I put it like that? Can I say, can I say, Madam Deputy Speaker, I just want to touch on before coming to defence. After all, this is to defence. After all, this is about the the the address. I just want to touch on an issue that has arisen and my my assistant Britain arisen and my my assistant Britain assistant Alice Stuttaford, spotted yesterday something which tells me yesterday something which tells me that we are in a slight problem here with the government's commitment to the legal position now of the use of slave made products through the Great British Energy Company, and in answer to a question we discovered through which was raised by Politico, that.

What was their position with regards to whether they were implementing what was law? Thanks to many on the backbenches of the Labour Party and many of us here and my amendment passed became law. A spokesman for the government, when asked about whether they were applying that to the producers as well, said this he. I think he or she said, we have strict procurement controls in place to ensure that any solar panels. It's not just solar panels, it's all elements to do with net zero are free from forced labour.

And then they added this as far as possible. That is not the law. If there is no caveat to the law, everybody rebelled on that side and we passed it through as well at the same time. And we implemented an absolute which it is not, for the great British Energy Company to use any products that contain any kind of forced labour procurement or rather production within them. And I want to say to the government, I know this is not their speciality at this point, but I want to say, well, they will raise it with the government, because I then saw that in the Gracious Speech there were very peculiar commitments using immigration as a way for tackling forced labour, but it's not good enough.

I want to make the point here that we need to reinforce the Modern Slavery Act and make it an offence for any company to be importing or using any items or goods that contain slave forced labour. This should be a unifying factor on these benches, but I don't know why. The government has now watered down what was meant to be their intention in the first place, and Deputy Speaker will know full well, because she has been party to this, that this is a real cause, because it comes to the roots of one of the issues I'm going to come on to, which is the threat that we face from places like China.

If we go on strengthening them by buying their slave made goods, then we do our own defence, no good at all. And so I would ask the government to raise this with them, that what is needed is a wide ranging commitment through the Modern Slavery Act to ban all products made by slave labour. And I want to return to the debate today, which is on defence. The fact is, Madam Deputy Speaker, we are now facing the greatest threat to our freedom across the Western world that we have faced, I believe, since the 1930s.

I don't even believe that they are less than the Cold War. I believe this is greater in a way than the Cold War, because at least during the Cold War, we already knew and recognised what war was about, why we had to be prepared for it, and what we were defending. We've lost lots of that. Many people out there don't fully understand how that threat has changed and grown. And the reality is that China today, one shipyard in China, makes more naval ships than the whole of the United States.

In one year, they have over 130 times the capacity to be build naval ships than Europe and America are doing at the moment. Yeah. If people don't think that it's a threat, I always say don't listen necessarily even to what they say, go and have a look what these totalitarian states are doing. They are producing and preparing for war. I'm not, I hope, scaremongering, I believe this to be a reality. China is reinforcing and supporting Russia in its brutal invasion of Ukraine, that without China, Russia could not have continued this war.

They were running out of ammunition. But China brokered an arrangement with the North Koreans, who now produce millions of rounds of ammunition for them, and even soldiers that they used and abused on the battlefield who once wounded, etc. were then assassinated so they wouldn't be ashamed when they went back to North Korea. This is about totalitarian states. And I question and I say to the government, do not use the phrase authoritarian states. They are totalitarian. There is a difference, right? Authoritarian states are about dictators and others that are risen to power and at some stage have to be brought down.

Totalitarian states are where every element of the way that people live their lives is controlled, run, spied upon and arrested by the state organs regardless of whoever is in charge. Communism is the key and these states are communist and other extremist versions. After all, Iran is part of this alliance. They are an extremist organisation. And I still don't understand why the government has failed to proscribe the Iranian IRGC. It's high time. It really is high time they're here, present in our country, stirring up violence, stirring up hatred.

We should deal with them and say it's a criminal act to be here to that extent. Therefore, how the government responds in defence terms is critical. Now, I'm one of those people that has argued since the ending of the Cold War. We've made a mistake in reducing defence. Nobody listened to me then, and there's no reason why they should listen to me today. But I have to tell them the Ministers. I'm going to keep on saying it and I think others around should ask it, and I hope members on the benches opposite will ask this question.

I know what the restrictions are. I know that when you're facing the Treasury, when government faces the Treasury, they then dictate to the Department and say, we can't afford this, we won't do it. Treasury is the last people in the world ever to recognise a threat to anybody at any time, for anything, and they continue as though it was all sweetness and light because they don't want to make any changes. But it's for the defence Ministers to make the point about the threat.

Why, in heaven's name have we not published the Defence Readiness Bill? That is the. That is the Defence Department's greatest weapon in the fight with the Treasury over this. Every other department knows what I'm talking about, whether it's health or whatever. It's always a fight. But it has to be because we are facing what is likely to be the greatest threat that we have faced since the 1930s. And to do that, they need to make it clear to them, we can't go around this any longer.

We have to spend that money. We have to commit. Now, I know the government has talked about being committed to 3% in due course, but I say to them that will not be enough. During my time when I was serving, we were committed to 5% of GDP to face down the Soviet Union. We will need to have to do the same again, because I believe this is an even greater threat that we are about to face, and the Ministers will know that we will give them all support if they are prepared to fight about that.

Let's get the Defence Investment Plan published right away. It's really important these totalitarian states don't face these restrictions that we do, and we have those restrictions for a good reason because we believe in democracy. But freedom is the most expensive thing that we will ever try to own, and it can be taken away in just a wish. And our job and their job as the government is to stand firm, even in government and say the number one priority of all things that we must do is to defend the realm from threats, internal and external.

And if we don't do that, we will have failed, failed, and our obligations failed the British people and failed our allies and our friends who look to us for leadership in this matter. But we can only lead if we have the equipment to show them that we have the endeavour. When we took the Falkland Islands, we had 53 frigates and destroyers available to us. We couldn't do that today. That is the measure of how far we've gone under Labour and Conservative governments.

And I simply say to the government, please now, as the Defence Department tell them, enough is enough. We are going to publish this bill and we're going to publish the Defence Investment Plan. And by the way, where is the China audit? Let's publish that too.
14:26
Wes Streeting Portrait Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP (Ilford North, Labour)
-
-
Yeah, indeed. >> Yeah, indeed. >> Wes Streeting. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. >> Can I.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I. Begin by joining others in expressing my condolences to the family of Lance Bombardier, Kiera family of Lance Bombardier, Kiera Sullivan and Madam Deputy Speaker. Can I also begin by saying what a pleasure it is to follow my parliamentary neighbour, the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green, despite our best efforts to retire him at the last general election, the. The test of any of us in politics is. Did we leave things in a better place than we found them? Thanks to the choices made by this Labour government, the NHS is on the road to recovery.

Waiting lists fell by 110,000 in March, the single biggest fall in a single month outside of the pandemic. For 17 years. Ambulance response times for heart attack and strokes are now the fastest in five years. Patient satisfaction with access to general practice has gone from 60% to 75%. And at a time when public trust in politicians is low, we hit our target of recruiting 8500 more mental health workers three years early.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. And on social care, I'm proud that we're putting in an extra £4 that we're putting in an extra £4 billion worth of investment that we've delivered the biggest expansion of Carer's Allowance expansion of Carer's Allowance since the 1970s, that the £150 million extra in the disabled facilities grant is providing more dignity, freedom and independence to thousands more disabled people and that the first ever fair pay agreements will be delivered in social care, because the people who care for our loved ones should never struggle to care for their own.

All made possible thanks to the efforts of the entire NHS and social care team. In the four and a half years I've led for Labour on health and social care, I've met the best of them, the ones who ran towards danger in Southport and fought to save those children, the ones who scrubbed up and went to work during the pandemic while the rest of us retreated to safety. The ones who bring new life into the world, and the ones who hold our hands at the end leading that team has been the greatest joy of my life, and the depth of love and gratitude I have for the people I've worked with is beyond words.

The brilliant team of Ministers and officials at the Department of Health and Social Care, particularly my private office and NHS England, and the best team of special advisers in government and the leaders and frontline staff across this remarkable system. I am rooting for all of them and for my successor, who has my wholehearted

**** Possible New Speaker ****

support as he takes on the best job in government. Amen. I won't pretend that leaving government hasn't been an emotional wrench. The scars I bear on my abdomen from my cancer treatment are a daily reminder to me of a time in my life, not so long ago, when I wasn't thinking about when I wasn't thinking about politics, only survival, and the NHS was there for me when I needed NHS was there for me when I needed it. Walking through the doors of my department every day as the person entrusted with protecting the very service that saved my life has been a massive responsibility and the most enormous privilege, and not one I gave up lightly or hastily.

I left the government because we are in the fight of our lives against nationalism, and it is a fight that we are currently losing. Unless we change course, we risk handing the keys of number ten to reform, and I do not want that on our consciences. For the first time in our history, nationalists are in power in every corner of the United Kingdom. Scottish and Welsh nationalism represents an existential threat to the future integrity of the United Kingdom, and reform UK represent a threat to the values and ideals that have made this country great.

The values and ideals that are written into the DNA of the National Health Service. They were dismantled, its very existence an act of courage as well as conviction that healthcare should be provided based on what each of us need, not what any of us can afford. A reminder that even in our darkest hours, this country is capable of doing big things. It is our responsibility to defend that promise and the values it represents, not just for the NHS or even for the survival of this government, but to win the battles we thought that were long since won of progressives against reactionaries, of patriots versus nationalists, of hope over hate.

That is our fight. It's Andy Burnham's fight in Makerfield, and it is Labour's fight for the soul of our country.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. For too long and for too often, patriotism in Britain has been left to the loudest voices and the narrowest arguments, as though love narrowest arguments, as though love of country belongs to one tribe, one party, or one point of view. But the Britain I believe in is But the Britain I believe in is bigger than that, because patriotism is not about who you patriotism is not about who you exclude, it is about who you stand beside. It is not rooted in fear of change or suspicion of difference.

It is rooted in solidarity, in the belief that we rise or fall together. That is the best of our country's story. A Britain where people from different backgrounds, different faiths, different nations and regions still see themselves in one another. A country where the son of Indian pharmacists can become our first Hindu Prime Minister without having his Englishness questioned. A patriotism built not on blood and soil, but on shared values, shared institutions and shared responsibilities. I understand that the SNP implied Comrie will not see themselves in the English nationalist politics of the party that sits behind them.

But nationalism is not progressive and nationalism and patriotism are not the same things nationalism says. Look inward, protect your own. Turn away from the others. Patriotism says this country is strongest when we are confident enough to be outward looking, generous and united, united, but not always the same. On these benches we believe in a stronger Scotland and a stronger Wales as part of a fairer United Kingdom. And 28 years ago this week, the people of Northern Ireland took a leap of faith and voted to endorse the Good Friday Agreement.

The triumph of hope over bitter enmity, a reminder that a bigger and better politics is possible when people have courage. Yes, that is why we must reject the politics that tries to divide us, whether it's dividing the countries of the United Kingdom or the people who call Britain their home. The nurse from Nigeria is not the enemy of the factory worker in Newcastle. The family fleeing war is not responsible for the cost of living crisis. Division is the oldest trick in politics and Britain deserves better than that, because the future of this country will not be built by setting neighbour against neighbour, it will be built by renewing the bonds between us decent jobs, strong public services, safe communities, a place we can call home, and a sense that everyone has a stake in Britain's success.

That is the patriotism we need today, not a brittle nationalism built on grievance, but a confidence. British patriotism, decent, fair minded, internationalist, bound together in common endeavour, with the conviction that our greatest strength has always been one another. We need to mobilise that spirit as we face the gathering storm. The war in Iraq may be over for now, but this fragile peace has not resolved the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz. Even if it were resolved tomorrow, the long tail consequences for the global economy and the British people will be stark.

And the tragedy for this government is that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor has been delivering the fastest growing economy in the G7, falling inflation and lower interest rates. Her hard work undermined by the consequences of a war we did not choose. And I paid tribute to the Prime Minister for keeping us out of it. It will be painful for the British people who have weathered crisis after crisis. Some imposed on us, like the wars in Iran and Ukraine and the pandemic.

Others like austerity, Brexit and Liz Truss's joyride. With the British economy the result of poor political leadership. When I gave my maiden speech 11 years ago, I argued that none of the problems facing our country would be solved by leaving the European Union. Today, in the dangerous and volatile world we find ourselves in, dominated by an unpredictable superpower in the USA, a rising superpower in China and a failed superpower in Russia. It is even more clear that we would have been better off leading Europe than leaving the European Union.

Not despite our sovereignty and the need to control our borders, but to enable those things. This is why I argue for a new special relationship. It is also why I welcome the insurance, the assurances that the government is strengthening sanctions on Russia to underline our rock solid support that we have given President Zelensky and the Ukrainian people the front line in Ukraine is the front line for our freedom and democracy, and we are meant to be the party of internationalism and solidarity.

It is only too disappointing to see reform councillors taking down the Ukraine flag. When the British people want

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to fly in solidarity. It is truly. Truly shameful.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No no, no no. And of course, Madam Deputy Speaker, NATO Secretary General is Speaker, NATO Secretary General is right to warn today that our alliance has an unhealthy reliance alliance has an unhealthy reliance on one ally. We need to invest more heavily in our defence and more heavily in our defence and more rapidly. I know my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary and his team do not need persuading on this, nor do they need lectures from the Conservative Party who ran down our capability and now have the audacity to heckle from the sidelines, like the arsonist complaining that the fire brigade hasn't turned up fast enough? I'm with the Secretary of State and his team all the way, but we also, he says, the shadow Secretary of State says bankrupting the the the the country.

I think he's thinking about Liz Truss and the joyride that no doubt he was cheering on. I think I think a period of silence, or at least an apology might be welcome from the conservative frontbench. But we also need to recognise that a nation draws its strength from the condition of its people. A recent survey of 16 to 29 year olds suggested that around half of all young people in this country wouldn't be prepared to fight for it. I'm not so sure about that.

I think they would be every bit as brave and self-sacrificing as their grandparents and great grandparents were, or as their contemporaries. Holding back the Russians in Ukraine have been. When the cause is just and the need is urgent, they will step up regardless of what they might have told opinion pollsters. I know this because when this country was facing a dire threat from Covid, young people did step up. The generation least at risk, gave up the most to help the rest of us keep safe.

And how did Britain repay them, shortchanging them on their education, layering on debt, making it harder to get on the housing ladder, failing to protect them from the AI jobs. Apocalypse. This generation is the first left totally exposed to the time sucking algorithms and perils of social media. The Education Secretary and I have raised our concerns about the impact of this on their learning and their wellbeing, but I also wonder what it is doing to their sense of connection with community and country.

But patriotism isn't a lecture the old deliver to the young. It's a relationship. And for generations, Britain understood that relationship as a social contract. You work hard, you play by the rules, you contribute to society and in return you can build a decent life, a secure job, home of your own, a family if you want one, and the hope and conviction that your children will do better than you did a generation ago. The average home costs around four times average earnings.

In many parts of Britain. Today it is eight, ten, even 12 times earnings. Private rents consume vast proportions of household income. Millions of young people who work hard and do the right thing cannot see a path to home ownership or security. Today, nearly a million young people are not in education, employment or training. Many are trapped in insecure work, unable to move out, delaying starting their families, postponing adulthood itself. And layered on top of this, economic insecurity is a new technological anxiety.

For generations, people believed there was a ladder of advancement, an entry level job, skills acquired over time, promotion, security, progress. Now, many young people fear that artificial intelligence may remove the lower rungs of that ladder altogether. They ask what skills will still matter? Will there still be routes into stable, middle class lives for kids from working class families like mine? Will deindustrialisation be replaced with reindustrialisation and the jobs of the future? Will opportunities extend to our towns, rural and coastal communities, or will inequality become entrenched? These are not irrational fears.

They are rooted in real economic change. And unless mainstream democratic politics can answer these questions, others will exploit that vacuum. They already are. Yes, defence is about hard power and capabilities, but it is underpinned by the soft power that binds the country together pride, belonging, shared activities and institutions hope we need to rebuild them. For modern times. This is the calling of the Labour Party, brought into existence to champion the interests of the working man and woman, the many, not just the privileged few.

It gave this kid from a council estate in Stepney in east London, the chance to realise my potential to go to a great university and spend my career tackling the injustices that hold other kids from backgrounds like mine back. The greatest tragedy of Britain today is that the next generation. For the first time in our modern history, face worse prospects than the last. So the question isn't whether young people would fight

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for their country, but when their country is going to fight for them. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This is our generational challenge to not only deal with the immediate issues of affordability, immediate issues of affordability, small boats and NHS waiting lists, but also to face up to a turbulent world being remade by climate world being remade by climate change and the biggest and fastest industrial revolution in the history of the world. To make sure history of the world. To make sure that no one is left behind and no one is held back. That's our job now, as the old economy of the 20th century finally gives way to the AI revolution of the 21st, and to tackle the crisis facing the next generation as an emergency, with the urgency that the moment requires.

Never waste a minute. That's been my mantra in government, and it's why I don't believe our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

party has time To. water. Because the thing about emergencies is that they make the emergencies is that they make the impossible possible. Look back at the crises we've confronted. We couldn't vaccinate against the couldn't vaccinate against the deadly virus until we could. We couldn't nationalise the banking system until we could. We couldn't system until we could. We couldn't reorient our entire base towards building aircraft until we could. building aircraft until we could. We couldn't build hundreds of thousands of homes fit for heroes until we could.

In times of greatest peril, our country has been capable of doing big things. We still can. Britain used to punch above its weight in the world. We still can. Each generation used to provide a better future for the next. We still can. Another member of the cancer club, the late, great Bowelbabe. Dame Deborah James, famously said, take risks. Love deeply. Have no regrets. And always, always have. Rebellious hope. It is. With that in mind and with the belief that we can and must do better.

With deep love for my party and my country. With no regrets and with rebellious hope that I have left the government. The Labour Party was elected to deliver real change. We still can.
14:45
Andrew Murrison Portrait Rt Hon Dr Andrew Murrison MP (South West Wiltshire, Conservative)
-
-
And Doctor Andrew Murrison, after which we'll go to a speaking after which we'll go to a speaking limit of seven minutes. Doctor Speaker. >> And can I genuinely congratulate

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And can I genuinely congratulate the right hon. Gentleman for a remarkable speech and wish him well remarkable speech and wish him well in his future ambitions. But his speech and its content were, I'm afraid, not as germane as the contribution of the hon. Gentleman who chairs the Defence Select Committee. I agree with everything he had to say. I only regret I couldn't put it as elegantly as as he did the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ilford North resignation letter on Thursday is worth reading, and I'm very sure that members of the Treasury benches will have read it closely.

He talked of where we need a vision. We have a vacuum where we need direction, we have drift, and that should worry the government. And I agree with him, and I'm particularly mindful of the Defence Investment plan, which we haven't seen. And I'm very conscious that Defence Readiness Bill, which we were expecting in this King's speech, has yet to materialise. That's of deep and profound concern in the 1930s, where arguably we face a similar situation to that which we are up against now.

The government of the day decided about five years in advance of the outbreak of the Second World War, that it must gear up our defence industrial base to tackle the future. And it created things like shadow factories, initially with the opposition of industry and centred very largely, at least initially around the automotive industry and the production of aircraft, but extending much further than that. And it was truly a cooperative venture that led eventually to this country being able to turn out in those early years, more aircraft than Germany was able to do.

And I would have thought that this government would have learnt those lessons and would now be bringing forward, as a matter of urgency, its own defence readiness Bill. It has missed an opportunity and I'm very sorry about that, because there is no question of a doubt that industry is being held back as as as has already been mentioned this afternoon in its ambition to partner with the Ministry of Defence with Ministers and get things going in terms of reprovisioning what we have sent to Ukraine, quite rightly, and fitting our armed forces for the future.

Now, some have already mentioned hollowing out. I think it's worthwhile saying that in 1989, every country in the Western world was taking a peace dividend. It would have been extraordinary had they not, and they would have been punished by the voters. But that was then the big lesson I learned from what has happened in the years since 1989 is actually, you can afford to titrate what you provide in order to defend this country, which is never popular electorally with the threat that is facing you.

But you must do nothing to reduce your armed forces below an irreducible minimum, so that you can regrow at pace rapidly, as happened before in the years immediately preceding 1914 and 1939. And you must do nothing that will damage long term projects, because procurement isn't something you can turn on and off like a tap. Procurement takes decades. I think we've learnt that mistake, and one of the mistakes I think the previous government made was delaying the dreadnought class.

And the reason for that, as I referred to in the intervention, that the hon. Gentleman very generously allowed me to make, was the coalition government and pressure from our then coalition partner. Now, right now we are facing our principal ally, the United States, backing off in terms of its support for ourselves and our European allies. We can no longer entirely rely on that which we had previously heavily relied upon. We will be the only provider of a nuclear deterrent.

If it's as it seems likely the US proceeds on this particular course of action, and that is to say, nuclear deterrent declared to NATO. It is therefore important that in the Defence Readiness Bill, when we see it, we have a reaffirmed commitment to reprovisioning cas de. At pace. Now, much work has been done in terms of infrastructure and at a w e, but we are still facing a rundown Vanguard class that is obliged to go on patrol for upwards of 200 days, with consequent impact on the men and now women who man up the submarine service.

And of all the pinch point trades in our armed forces, it is those that exist within the submarine service that should keep us all awake at night. It is imperative that we accelerate that programme, and I would also ask Ministers to look at the F 35 alpha provision and agree with me that providing 12 airframes is hardly sufficient, given the threat that we now face. I need to, though I'd like to know. I'm sure the whole House would like to know, when the F 35 alphas will be operational, as opposed to providing training airframes.

Is it the intention of the government to expedite that programme? Is it the intention of the government to exploit the option that it has kept open to have more than 12 of those airframes? And will Ministers confirm that they will be nuclear enabled? Madam Deputy Speaker, I would strongly urge that Ministers look at the Sovereign Defence Fund Bill in the alternative King's Speech. It would repurpose the National Wealth Fund to overhaul our vital defence industrial base. Now, governing is about difficult decisions, and it seems to me that defence is a more urgent priority right now than using the fund to, in the words of government, help tackle climate change a more urgent priority, indeed, than ramping up welfare, as Lord Robertson has made very clear.

Now the defence industrial base is going to be pretty useless if it's not populated by men and women with the skills necessary to deliver what is needed in order to keep this country safe. The Youth Opportunities Bill in the alternative King's Speech, has the kind of imaginative content that I would have expected from an incoming government that had 14 years to think about these things, but unfortunately not all we had from the Prime Minister on young people on Wednesday was a load of waffle.

Time and again, it's as if he's a passive observer rather than an active participant. The Youth Opportunities Bill sets out how genuine investment in our young people will power and grow the economy, delivering a virtuous circle from which everyone benefits. It will cap state funding for pointless work, irrelevant, badly taught degrees and third rate institutions that are perpetrating a fraud on a generation. It will grow well focussed apprenticeships like those offered by Wiltshire College in my constituency.

Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would just want to say a few words in conclusion about Special forces, and we have to approach these issues with a great deal of care. I am extremely concerned by the messaging that has gone out from this government in relation to the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill. It isn't so much the case that has been put before the House by the Northern Ireland Office, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, but it is the way it has been received.

The hon. Gentleman sitting next to the Secretary of State for defence will know absolutely, because his contacts are probably better than mine, that this has caused a degree of disquiet, particularly among units that are absolutely crucial to this country's defence and security, and they will perceive that in years to come, a future government may decide that what is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

happening now and what is acceptable. Well.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well. Of course I'll give. Way. He this business about what's going on over Northern what's going on over Northern Ireland, it's not alone because it builds on a perception and the builds on a perception and the gratuitous pursuit of soldiers involved in Afghanistan and Iraq, partly by the Prime Minister in a previous life, but by the lawyers knowing full well that what they were pursuing were in fact complete untruths. And that has made them wonder what's the point? If politicians will not stand up for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

them, then who will? Yeah, I absolutely agree with my right hon. Friend. He won't be right hon. Friend. He won't be surprised to hear from me. I would say it's more the Northern Ireland, because Northern Ireland has read because Northern Ireland has read across to a number of theatres where our men and women are actively engaged or could be in the actively engaged or could be in the future. And it seems to me that the future. And it seems to me that the exodus from some of these units is going to cause irretrievable and irrecoverable damage to our ability to protect the men and women of this country.

So I would urge Ministers, I have no doubt that they're doing this. With all the best of intentions, to look at the messaging that is being given to the men and women of our armed forces, many of which I have the honour and privilege to represent and decide what they can do in order to address this legislation. And I would say, scrap it and start again. But if they can't do that, what they can do to prevent this idea, get this idea, getting penetrance among those units, particularly that the government is simply not on their side.

And in any event, even if they were, that governments in the future may, by the standards of the day, decide that what is being done in the name of the state at the moment in the king's name was no longer acceptable. Lawfare is a real and present danger for the men and women of our armed forces, and I feel certain that the Secretary of State, knowing him as I do, is cognisant of the threat that it. Face. Madam Deputy Speaker, conscious of the frog in your throat, I shall earn my remarks there.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Catherine McKinnell. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's an honour to follow the Member for honour to follow the Member for South West South West Wiltshire and it's very clear that when it comes it's very clear that when it comes to defence readiness, there is much upon which we can all agree. And I wanted also, before he leaves the wanted also, before he leaves the chamber, to pay tribute to the Member for Chingford and Woodford Member for Chingford and Woodford Green as well, and my right hon.

Friend the Member for Ilford North.
14:57
Catherine McKinnell Portrait Catherine McKinnell MP (Newcastle upon Tyne North, Labour)
-
-
I think the former set out in very powerful terms the challenges that we face as a country. However, it we face as a country. However, it was my right hon. Friend who set out in very powerful terms also the out in very powerful terms also the hope and the determination that we must show in government in order to must show in government in order to meet those challenges in a way that they deserve. And as ever, he shows they deserve. And as ever, he shows great courage and strength in leading from the front, because the debate today quite rightly focuses on defence and national security.

And it clearly couldn't be more timely given the challenges that we face. But that sense of security comes not just from investment in defence, although clearly that is important, and I will come to that shortly, but also that investment in the broadest sense possible in our people in creating strong, resilient, enterprising and cohesive communities. And that is what will ultimately keep us safe. The Armed Forces Bill and the National Security Bill are important steps forward, and with the disgusting and horrifying extremism and anti-Semitism that we have seen rising here in Britain, the Tackling State Threats Bill will also be a welcome response to those threats that we face on our own soil, including from Iran and the Islamic State Revolutionary Guard Corps.

And having called for this, I welcome the legislation

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that is coming, and I will be following developments on it very closely. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

But we cannot make meaningful progress on defence without the Defence Investment plan. And whilst Defence Investment plan. And whilst I know that the Secretary of State and his team are working incredibly and his team are working incredibly hard on producing this, the delay hard on producing this, the delay is and does risk having real world consequences. And we need it to maintain our international credibility. For example, in my role as UK trade envoy to Italy, I know how important the collaboration is for our GCap programme and the opportunities and the defence investment that will be unleashed in my region, the North East.

Our defence sector is a major employer, supporting thousands of jobs and a wide network of small and medium enterprises, and we could do even more. But we do need that certainty and that security about what is coming down the track. And that is as much to protect our supply chains as those big contractors that we know are still waiting, because without the investment plan, we risk undermining defence, manufacturing and sovereign capabilities. Both in my region and across the country.

And domestic production is not something we can gamble with. We have such a strong story to tell in Newcastle, the opening of the North East Space Skills and Technology Centre at Northumbria University has added a new dimension to our regional capabilities, supporting apprenticeships and graduate programmes and helping to build the next generation of skilled workers. And we know that defence investment, it doesn't just impact one industry, it boosts skills, innovation and opportunities across our whole economy and that's why we need to know the details of the plan so that businesses can provide that real, tangible support for our young people, so that they can access high quality training and employment.

And as a northerner, I'm pleased to see the Northern Powerhouse Bill also included in The King's Speech. And that must be backed by genuine investment. The North cannot possibly endure yet another round of broken promises, especially after the catastrophic HS2 management of the previous government. The Small Business Protections Bill is also long overdue. Protection for sole traders, freelancers and family run businesses who we know have been ignored by large companies for far too long. And I know that so many small businesses will welcome this, as it could genuinely save livelihoods, particularly in retail and hospitality.

And on the subject of retail and hospitality, the North East is home to some of the best. Newcastle North is the home of the Greggs sausage roll, after all. But many in the sector are concerned about the impact of the overnight visiting visitor Levy bill. So I do urge Ministers to keep an eye and keep an open mind on how it emerges and the evidence that comes through it, because we do need to ensure our hospitality industry thrives. And for many at the moment, it's too often a question of whether they'll survive.

So I urge the Chancellor to do everything possible to support our businesses, especially in retail, leisure and hospitality, because they are the sectors that give so many of our young people their first foot on the career ladder, and without them, we know that costs to the state and to those individuals will be so much higher. But too often the government doesn't fear the businesses feel like the odds are stacking up against them. But as a government, we just need to pull all in one direction.

It's in all of our interests to make sure that those opportunities reach us far and wide for jobs, for investment, and for community cohesion, because that is as much about our national security as investment in rotary blades and electronics. So I will continue to monitor this and call for it in my role as the co-chair of the Youth Employment All party group. And finally, the government's work through the Energy Independence Bill and Nuclear Regulation Bill are both welcome. They'll strengthen our energy security and our national security, and they will accelerate Home-grown renewable energy.

And as the chair of the all party group on warm homes, I want to see a really ambitious energy production, and I will continue to monitor the impact both on warm homes and the retrofitting of homes as well, because that is how we will help households manage the rising costs of living. There's so much in this King's speech to be welcomed by my constituents in Newcastle, North from the Commonhold and Leaseholders Rights Bill to the Social Housing Renewal Bill. But we have to ensure that they feel it, that they understand it, that they come with us and they see the vision so that we can help people to build better lives and stronger communities right across the UK.
15:04
Julian Lewis Portrait Rt Hon Sir Julian Lewis MP (New Forest East, Conservative)
-
-
Sir Julian Lewis Sir Julian Lewis. The hon. Lady for Newcastle North has such a sunny personality that I always feel cheered up after listening to her contributions, even when she's the bearer of somewhat disappointing news about the economy. Also, I was impressed with the speech of the former Secretary of State for health, who's just about to escape from the chamber, but it did leave me wondering, had I been a parliamentary sketch writer, what my headline would have been? And I think the headline would have been why on earth did he resign? It sounded much more like a manifesto in a leadership campaign than a trigger for calling one.

But there we are. We all have our own motives. And he did say one particular point of great relevance to this debate, which I had already, I promise, Madam Deputy Speaker, written down before I heard him make it, which was the comparison between the terrible experience of the pandemic and the terrible experience of a country involved in a full scale war. There were, of course, the casualties. There was the determination to learn from it. There was the outcome.

That means that we are a lot better prepared for the future. Should another deadly virus attack us, we will, as a result of the lessons learned during that pandemic, be in a much better position to develop vaccines. Effective vaccines, far more quickly. But the real parallel, I'm afraid, is not a very happy one. It is the fact that if someone had said before, we knew we were going to have that pandemic, you need to invest a considerable sum of money into developing a system to enable you to develop vaccines.

In quick response to the emergence of a new deadly virus. We probably would not have done it. And that is where the parallel lies with wartime situations, because for many years now, defence minded members on both sides of the House have been urging successive governments that we need to spend a lot more on defence. And if those warnings go unheeded, and if this country ends up in a full scale armed conflict with a peer adversary, we will not be talking about spending 3 or 4% on defence of GDP.

We will be talking about, and we will actually be having to spend 30 or 40% of GDP on defence, and we do not wish to get to that situation because not only is it economic loss, but think of the human cost, because if by investing in defence in peacetime, you can actually deter a potential enemy from starting a war, you then not only save the treasure, you save the blood that otherwise is shed so copiously.

So Russia, as we know, is spending something of the order of between a third and a half of its gross domestic product on military Gower and the Defence Committee in the past has looked at the question of what this country has historically spent, and in both a report entitled Shifting the Goalposts and in a second report, Shifting the Goalposts, an update, the. The figures were spelt out, which showed that my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford was completely correct in the mid 1980s, he said when he was serving that we were spending.

Of the order of 5.3%. In fact, in 1983 to 4, the figure given at the time was 4.4%, and in 1984 to 5 the figure was 4.5%. But in reality, that was because we held higher criteria for what counted as defence expenditure than the other NATO powers. And later on we adopted their standards. So looking back now, when we are talking in these percentage terms, we can see that those figures were actually 5.3% in 1983 to 4 and 5.5% in 1984 to 5.

Now, these are very big figures, and people talk about the way in which the peace dividend was taken. But as my hon. Friend on the front bench, as shadow Secretary of State pointed out in 1996 to 7, the year in which Tony Blair took over from the conservative government, that was already half a dozen years, at least since the end of the Cold War. If we count that as as 1991 rather than 1989, with the fall of the Berlin Wall, and at that time, 1996 to 7, six years after the ending of the Cold War, we were still spending 3%.

When you consider that that was the figure then, and when you consider, as quite rightly, the chairman of the defence Committee said in an admirably objective speech, that Russia is preparing for conflict now, but we are responding too slowly. He said time is short. Given the urgency of the situation. His. Exactly right. When we are talking about achieving figures of 3% in a few years time and 5% in a few more years time, I just put it to the house.

Does the killer in the Kremlin intend to give us that time? And if we want to deter him from taking a step, which would be to the detriment of the world, then we need to invest now. And as in the case of the pandemic, we need to find the money now. And if a war broke out tomorrow, we would find the money now. So let's find it today and diminish the chance of that terrible conflict happening on the day after.
15:11
Ian Byrne Portrait Ian Byrne MP (Liverpool West Derby, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. British people. >> At its heart, because. >> Madam Deputy Speaker, I believe one of the greatest threats of one of the greatest threats of security is the economic system governing this country, which has consistently failed working class people and communities, an issue which undoubtedly will be made worse still by the illegal and ill planned wall in the RAM. So now more than ever, we need a radical restructuring of both priorities and policies. More council housing, a total length of right to buy.

The nationalisation of our key industries sold off and gutted by Thatcher, including water and energy. And in 2026, no one in Britain should be going hungry. So I welcome the recognition in the King's Speech from the government that a food poverty crisis exists in the UK. However, redistribution of surplus food won't begin to end. The insecurity food insecurity faced by over 14 million people in this country. It's a sticking plaster over the gaping wound. We need a solution that acknowledges the sheer scale of hunger across the UK over the last five months, the Vital Food Commission I am proud to be part of has travelled across these islands from Liverpool, Knowsley to Newcastle, Northumberland, from Cardiff and Aberdare to Belfast, with Glasgow and London to come next month.

Listening to people. This country too often ignores not economists and boardrooms, not corporate lobbyists, but working class people in working class communities who understand better than anyone the scale of food insecurity in this country and how it is impacting the lives and health of the very people, the people living every day in hunger, every single day. I'm living with this consequences. The Commission have gathered evidence what I believe will be defining report for our generation a roadmap to finally making the right to food, the law of the land.

Because, Madam Deputy Speaker, in one of the richest countries on earth, millions of our people are going hungry, and that should shame every single one of us in this place. And I say this truthfully, because what I've heard over the last few months has left me absolutely devastated. I said prepared and skipping meals for their kids can eat. I've listened to disabled people tell us they're sitting in freezing homes, deciding whether to put the heating on or buy food, let alone a treat, a day trip or, God forbid, a holiday.

I've met with workers, workers in full time jobs, relying on food banks to survive. And that, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the scandal of modern Britain. Because these people are not failing. Britain is failing them. We have evidence from PCC's union members outlining how civil servants are using food banks because of low pay. The Bakers Union report on how the very workers who make our food cannot afford to put it on their own tables. Think about how obscene that is. Think about how flawed our economic system must be if it results in this.

And let us not stop pretending that this happens by accident. It did not. This is the result of political decisions 40 years in the liberal economy, economics that have seen people and communities disempowered and left behind, industries destroyed, trade union power, weakened, public services, hollowed out wages and incomes driven down while wealth flows upwards. And then after that, people are told to be grateful for charity. Madam Deputy Speaker, food banks were never supposed to be part of British life.

They declared a sign our economy and society is broken. But an entire generation of children are now growing up believing food banks are normal. That is not normal. It is not acceptable. And also it's not inevitable because hunger in Britain is not caused by a lack of food. It's caused by poverty. That is the truth of the heart of this debate, not scarcity, poverty, low wages, insecure work, sky high rents, broken security system and an economic system that pretends wealth while punishing the poor.

That's why I say gently to the government Ministers surplus food redistribution is not a solution to hunger. Yes, any support for struggling families matters? Of course it does. But we do not, cannot build a just system, just society on leftovers. We cannot normalise the emergency charity as permanent public policy, and we cannot allow food banks to become the Ford and made de service of the British state. Because we do. We are accepting managed poverty instead of ending it, and I reject that completely.

Earlier this week, the Mayor of Greater Manchester spoke about the damage done by 40 years of neoliberal economics. And he was spot on because everywhere the commission has travelled, there was a sense deep in communities that people have been abandoned. In Northumberland, one woman said something I will never, ever forget. She said, don't you dare call us disadvantaged. Call us asset stripped and my God, Madam Deputy Speaker. She was right. That is exactly what has happened to working class Britain. Asset stripped hope, stripped, industry stripped, security stripped and then those very communities that blamed and demonised for the consequences of political choices.

But despite everything, despite all the hardship, those communities still fight for one another. That was the beautiful thing we witnessed everywhere we went. Solidarity is still alive in this country. Working class people still feeding each other, looking after each other, organising together show more humanity and church halls and community centres than many have ever experienced in government. And that is the spirit. And that is what the Right to Food campaign is built upon. Because people do not want charity forever. They want dignity, they want security.

They want to know they can feed their families without fear. Madam Deputy Speaker, hunger is a political choice and the hunger is a political choice. And ending hunger must become a political priority. That means universal free school meals. It means wages people can actually live on. It means secure work, stronger trade unions. It means proper enforcement of the legal rights of food. And it means investments in community kitchens and local food programmes. And it means finally rebuilding the welfare state that protects people instead of punishing them.

And yes, price caps on essential items. These are not extreme demands. They're the bare minimum standards of civilised society, because in 21st century Britain, nobody should be going hungry in the community we have visited, everybody agreed food is our most basic human right, and good food should be a fundamental human right for law and right to food were placed this at the very heart of government decision making and history will ask all of us in this House a very simple question.

When millions of children were going hungry, what did you do about

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it? I know what side I'm on. My constituency neighbour, Mike

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Martin. Madam Deputy Speaker, you don't normally introduce me like that. So normally introduce me like that. So thank you very much. And it's a an honour to share a border with you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and to follow Madam Deputy Speaker, and to follow the hon. Member from Liverpool, West Derby, for clearly a heartfelt West Derby, for clearly a heartfelt and and powerful speech. Madam Deputy Speaker, Wars are raging in Europe and in the Middle East, and extreme tensions exist in the Far
15:18
Mike Martin Portrait Mike Martin MP (Tunbridge Wells, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
East. And moreover, these regional conflicts are starting to knit together. Russia and China supported Iran in the Middle East. North Korea supported Ukraine in North Korea supported Ukraine in Europe, and this knitting together of regional conflicts is is what we of regional conflicts is is what we saw in the 1930s in the foothills of the Second World War. And so there is an argument to be made there is an argument to be made that we are in the foothills now of another global war.

It's undoubtedly true that the threats that we face are increasing. Yet at the same time, day by day, UK military capability is actually decreasing. Madam Deputy Speaker, we must rapidly rearm to narrow this gap. It is the only way that we can deter conflict. Yet despite this, the King's Speech contains no programme for rearmament. The government speaks the language of urgency, yet refuses even to introduce the necessary policy and legislation. As has already been mentioned from all sides of the House, we've been waiting for the Defence Investment Plan since last autumn and we were promised a defence readiness Bill in this King's Speech.

Where is it, Madam Deputy Speaker, as an island nation, our navy is of the utmost importance, but it is also on its knees. While HMS Dragon took a week to deploy to the Mediterranean, the French sent an entire carrier group, an aircraft carrier, eight frigates and submarine. How did they do that? Well, on paper, France and the United Kingdom have comparable fleets, but in practice, France achieves around 80% availability for its escort vessels, while we only achieve 50%.

So through better maintenance, the France achieves a better outcome. Capability on paper is worthless if it can't deploy. And it gets worse. We started this year with seven frigates. HMS Richmond will be decommissioned this year, and HMS Iron Duke was withdrawn from service this month. This leaves us with five frigates. Furthermore, three build slots in Glasgow intended for new frigates have been ceded to Norway because of the lack of guaranteed investment due to delays in the Defence Investment Plan. This is a real world example of government inertia affecting our defence.

Putin exploits weakness and he shies away from strength. It pains me to say it, but our Navy does not project strength and Putin will continue to mount increasingly flagrant violations of our territorial waters until our navy is strong enough to make him feel twice. Will it take the severing of a data cable to cause us to act? Madam Deputy Speaker? Dry mouth is real. From the sea to the land. Madam Speaker, the MoD was unable to confirm to the Defence Select Committee whether it was able to deploy a battlegroup.

So a thousand soldiers to the continent of Europe. And this comes back to my point about projecting strength. Putin knows that if he were to test article five, the 900 British soldiers in Estonia would be in extreme risk. We have no ability to deploy reinforcements. The King's Speech doesn't do anything to change that. There is a gaping hole in our deterrence every day that goes unaddressed. The risks to our forces who are already deployed and to our nation at home, grow.

Our artillery systems have halved in number since 1997. Our precision DfE capability has been cut by a third. We have just 14 155 artillery systems. Although I note the government has just recently announced a new order. Poland donated 100 systems to Ukraine and rebuilt their own inventory. At the same time they donated and replaced. We just donated, which is why we have 14 artillery systems left. And meanwhile, warfare has changed and the UK has not adapted. During a recent NATO training exercise, a British brigade was effectively wiped out by four Ukrainian drone operators.

This is not an indictment of our soldiers, but a reflection of modern warfare. We cannot allow that situation to become a reality. The picture I've painted is one of systematic underfunding across all domains, and unless we rapidly rearm, we are going to be unable to deter. And if we want to deter, if we want to lead in the security of the Euro-Atlantic area, we probably need an army of about 100 000 with reserves of 50, a fleet of 50 ships, and about 250 combat aircraft with crewed systems surrounded by autonomous systems and one way effectors.

That is the sort of capability that we're talking about. If we want to lead and deter in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Euro-Atlantic, I will regret. For giving way. Following his remarks with a great deal of interest, and he mentioned the interest, and he mentioned the reserves. Well, I am a reservist. And would you give the government credit where it's due? And that is credit where it's due? And that is in carrying over the Armed Forces Bill, advancing the age of retirement for reserves to the age of 65, and agree with me that we can probably go further in looking can probably go further in looking at people who are skilled in particular areas, especially the reserves, who may be able to help us address the challenges of the future, rather the past.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Using the term UQ Mike Martin. Kim for his intervention, I served on the Bill Committee for served on the Bill Committee for the Armed Forces Bill and absolutely, as well as increasing the scope of who can be called up. the scope of who can be called up. It also creates a consolidation of different types of reserves and allows zigzag pathways for allows zigzag pathways for specialists who can come in and out of the reserve. So this is absolutely a step in the right absolutely a step in the right direction.

So the one thing that is missing at the moment that might perhaps create some of this political space for an increase in defence spending, and I should have said I was slightly waylaid by my friend there who intervened, but to create, to lead and deter in the Euro-Atlantic area, we're talking about a 50% increase in defence expenditure, not 1 or 2 billion here we're talking about a 50% increase in defence expenditure. That is the scale. I won't if that's OK, because we're short on time.

That is the sort of scale that we're talking about. And perhaps to create the political space to make some of those trade offs, because that is a huge amount of money. That's £30 billion extra every single year. We need to have this national conversation on defence that was announced in the Strategic Defence Review, but has been notable by its absence. So that's why, together with the hon. Member for Macclesfield and for Spelthorne and for Field Marshal Richards in the other place, we have formed the APPG on rearmament and we hope to raise public awareness not just of the threats, because I think the public understand the threats that we face, but of the the diminishing, the lack of and diminishing capability in the UK military.

I recently went to a school in my constituency and I was talking with sixth formers and and I've asked this question in several schools, since they all assume we have a fleet of about 50 or 100 ships, when I tell them that we have, what is it now? 14 frigates and destroyers, surface combatants. They are shocked. The general public does not know the state of the British military, and it is entirely incommensurate with the threat that we face. Madam Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, because time is very short, our military is a paper tiger.

Sooner or later we're going to be found out. And when we're found out and the battlegroup in Estonia is overrun or an aircraft carrier is sunk, Suez will pale into insignificance. This King's Speech falls far short of what required.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order! Order! Bayo Alaba. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. My belief in the importance of My belief in the importance of national defence is rooted in a single, simple idea that the United Kingdom is a nation inherently Kingdom is a nation inherently worth defending, not because of tradition or nostalgia, but because of the values of decency, respect, hard work and community, which continue to define our society and
15:27
Bayo Alaba Portrait Mr Bayo Alaba MP (Southend East and Rochford, Labour)
-
-
which can never be taken for granted. Sadly, these values are not universally held, and when we look beyond our borders, we see a world that is increasingly dangerous, worryingly unpredictable, and more divided than I can remember. That is why I welcome this government's steadfast commitment to improving Britain's defence readiness, both through its pledge to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP, and through the various measures outlined in the Strategic Defence Review. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, the scale of the challenges we face today is unprecedented and our job is to meet them.

Our approach to boosting Britain's defence readiness, however, cannot be focussed on spending alone. Instead, we need to think about how we strengthen the industries that support our military capability, whether that's by streamlining procurement or empowering defence focussed SMEs to better respond to global conflicts. Apologies, I will not give way because I'm conscious that I want colleagues to sort of come in. Very good. All too often we hear from SMEs in the defence sector that access to funding is limited, slow moving and difficult to secure.

And all too often we see innovative British companies sell up or even relocate overseas. Take ballistic dynamics, for example. An SME that is passionate about boosting the UK's defence capability, but whose founders report facing structural barriers such as a lack of consistent funding opportunities and frustratingly opaque tender processes. In these troubled. In these troubling times when our adversaries are increasingly bold in their challenges to our stability, Home-grown industries will be a key component of what we are calling our pre-war phase, or in some cases, our grey zone.

That pre-war phase must include the full utilisation of our highly trained and highly disciplined reserve forces, who are too often undervalued in defence planning. I'm glad to see this government's efforts to improve the recruitment process for reservists, and would encourage even greater investment in the facilities, institutions and training that supports them. I also appreciate the focus on the reserve forces more generally, but it has to be noted that the very limited reference to the active reserve forces within the SDR is causing concern among some sections of the Armed Forces community.

The strategic reserves as a concept is seductive, but relies upon many optimistic assumptions. But to be realistically relied upon as part of any defence plan. Whereas the active reserves exist now papering, preparing the United Kingdom for the potential future conflict is a monumental task and will require collaboration throughout Parliament. I urge members across all benches of this House to work together to protect the security of the country, its citizens and our shared values. Thank you. OK, sir.
15:30
Alec Shelbrooke Portrait Rt Hon Sir Alec Shelbrooke MP (Wetherby and Easingwold, Conservative)
-
-
Alec Shelbrooke thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And may I say it's a real pleasure to follow the honourable and gallant gentleman from Southend East and Rochford. He made some very important points there about being prepared and the importance of the reserve and and that actually, Madam Deputy Speaker, what I wanted to focus on this afternoon is what the actual threats are to this country as we stand here today, because I think that it, to a certain extent, gets overlooked at the threats we face on a day to day basis.

I think a lot of people think a Russian invasion of this country would look like any sort of war, missile bombs coming down. I think there's a long, long way that goes forward before you get to that space. And in fact, I think we are in many ways already at war with Russia. Let's not forget that in 2017, Russia launched a chemical weapon attack on this country. And if it hadn't been for favourable weather conditions, it had the potential to kill thousands of people.

And we must ask ourselves in those circumstances, would that have triggered article five? Because conversations I've had in my role in the NATO parliamentary assembly at the North Atlantic Council is that the general thought is that would have triggered article five, whether it was accidental or not. A chemical weapon attack of one of the most deadliest chemical weapons in the world was launched on this country. And these are often wrapped up in things called hybrid warfare. And let me just outline really what hybrid warfare is.

I mean, yes, there are cyber attacks, which I'll come back to sabotage, which we see across Europe, arson, vandalism, terrorism. When we see these destructive acts which are taking place on railway networks throughout Europe, that almost certainly is coming from the Russians. And of course, I've mentioned the chemical weapon attacks. And it's not the only example of the assassination attempts that take place on this very soil. And despite efforts of government, all governments, and all to be praised, of trying to crack down on malign finance.

We know it takes place. But perhaps one of the things which people don't realise is taking place in a day to day basis is information manipulation, cognitive warfare, that the Russians are brilliant at this and they are well embedded in this as well are the Chinese. And it starts when we've all described people who go down the rabbit holes of, of social media, of, of the internet. But that's where it starts that they're monitoring people's clicks. They're monitoring what it is.

You first of all, look at. They're building a psychological profile of what you are. And then they're identifying your psychological vulnerabilities. They then feed that line. And why are they feeding that line? They're feeding that line because they're trying to get this country amongst lots of other countries, to not really see the need for us to invest in defence. And therefore, and I'm sure most people in this chamber will have first hand experience of people saying to them that the war in Ukraine is NATO's fault, and it is Ukraine's fault that they represented a threat to Russia, and Russia had no choice.

Let me remind the House. And to the wider public, the only threat that Russia felt was when the people of Ukraine said, we don't want a dictatorial president anymore. In the Purple Revolution in February 2014, and they booted him out and said, we don't want to look to Moscow, we want to look to Europe, because that's where they have the freedoms of choice that we want to have. That is where Russia saw that as a threat that they couldn't let happen and immediately invaded Crimea.

And it is the shame to all of us that that wasn't taken at the warning at the time. And indeed, my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East, who I once again very pleased that he spoke before me because he brings such wide experience to these issues, spoke very widely on that issue at the time. But he also makes the point that the money we were spending back in the 80s are huge figures, and that's the point we have to get to.

This is what we have to tell the public, recognise the threats we are under, recognise that today. Marks and Spencers have announced a £131 million loss on their cyber attack. People can see things but they can't see things. They could see the empty shelves of Marks and Spencers, so they went to Sainsbury's or Morrisons. They didn't see that a cyber attack had emptied their shelves. They don't see that we make a mistake in the NHS on an upgrade of software and knock it out for 24 hours a couple of years ago.

These are the threats it represents. So when we look at and we say we are going to have to cut other budgets to pay for defence, that is probably the most unpopular thing you can say to a public. But the services that people want, that money spent on will be gone. They will not work. Probably the biggest threat that will happen in the first 24 hours of any attack is knocking out the power grid, knocking out the power system. There is embedded cyber technology in a lot of areas, and we have to make sure that we can deal with these.

Now, cyber warfare has to be a whole of society approach. Governments cannot do it on their own. They need companies like JCB, like sorry, like Jaguar, Land Rover, like co-op to be able to protect those areas. But the point I wanted to really get across today is this cost an enormous amount of money. And the best way, and we know this, and the phrase is old and well used, but the best way to have a peace is to prepare for war, and you have to have the credible threats.

And we have to spend huge amounts of money now at the very slightest deviation from our policy. I don't like percentages of GDP. I think there are nonsense. I think it's ridiculous. When NATO went there, we talk about what we were spending in the 80s. And I remind people that the 2% of GDP was something that came about in this century. When we look at the GDP figures of the past, it's because that is what it cost. So I urge the government look carefully at what we're saying about reducing the welfare bill.

Look what Lord Robertson said about the welfare bill. These threats are real. They are real. Today, we have to have the deterrents in place that just simply doesn't make it worthwhile. But it costs an enormous amount of money. And that cognitive warfare that is taking place on a daily basis is making the citizens of this country not recognise why we need to do that. It's a brave decision, but as we've made clear, we would support the government if they take that brave

**** Possible New Speaker ****

decision. Yes. And on a six minute time limit, I call David Taylor. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Wetherby and Shelbrooke, who I know is a vocal Shelbrooke, who I know is a vocal champion of tackling anti-Semitism, and that is a topic that I am turning to in these remarks. In Tower Hamlets last week, a young Tower Hamlets last week, a young man was filmed saying most chilling anti-Semitic words The Jews, you're going to be beheaded one by one, you dirty Jews. Now he has been identified and arrested, and I thank the Met Police for their action.

And I pick that as just one example of the crisis we face on anti-Semitism. From the Golders Green terrorist attack to the Hatzolah ambulance arson. These incidents continue to rise. And
15:37
David Taylor Portrait David Taylor MP (Hemel Hempstead, Labour)
-
-
what is behind this anti-Semitism? What radicalises individuals to act What radicalises individuals to act in this way? And who is responsible for these attacks? Now it should not need saying, but I will spell not need saying, but I will spell it out. Jewish people in the UK are not responsible for the actions of the Netanyahu government, and anti-Semitism did not start on the 7th of October. Israel had not yet begun its operations in Gaza in response to Hamas attack. When the deputy leader of the Green Party filmed a video saying that people should support the right of indigenous people to fight back.

Anti-Semitism is often called the oldest hatred. Now I welcome His Majesty the King specific mention of anti-Semitism in the speech, and the need to take urgent action to ensure all communities feel safe. I welcome the commitment that the Prime Minister himself has shown in tackling antisemitism, both in my own party but in government too, including the recent summit in Downing Street with the Jewish community. I further welcome the £25 million of additional funding to help protect Jewish communities, bringing the total to nearly 60 million.

Now, I agree with the Board of Deputies who call for an end to the incitement at pro-Palestinian protests, where anti-Semitic hate speech is frequently taking place, including the use of public order powers to restrict and ban marches where necessary. If we look at the last weekend as one example, speakers from one of the March organisers, Palestinian Forum in Britain, told the crowd Israel is a Zionist cancer. Meanwhile, across London, at the other far right march, a banner was proudly displayed that said end the Zionist occupation of Britain.

Perhaps they could have saved the taxpayer the £4.5 million policing Bill by combining their marches together. But let's be clear there is another major driver of antisemitism in this country, and that is the Islamist regime in Iran. The group HIYI YY has claimed responsibility for the ambulance arson attack, amongst others. The US Department of Justice now believes that it was a front designed to carry out terrorist attacks at the behest of the IRGC and its proxies. Meanwhile, we have Iran's press TV, as well as their Spanish mouthpiece Hispantv, their UK based show Palestine Declassified, has regularly platformed conspiracy theories and targeted Jewish schools in Britain and charities and individuals.

And I repeat my call for financial sanctions to be placed on them. As the US, Australia, Canada and the EU have as this would close a legal loophole that currently allows them to pay UK nationals and operate through intermediaries without restriction. Now connected to them is Media World, a company with links to Iran that the Sunday Telegraph just reported is using the skilled worker visa scheme completely legally, and I hope that the Foreign Office will revoke this immediately, as well as tracking individuals that came through on that scheme.

Then there is the issue of charities that the Shawcross review has linked to Iran. In the interest of time. I will not repeat what I've said before, but I do agree with the hon. Member for Bristol North East in calling for the Charity Commission to have extra resource to go after these charities and close them down. Now, I have, along with other colleagues across this House, been campaigning for the prescribing IRGC for some time. I'm therefore delighted to see the announcement in the King's Speech of the Tackling State Threats Bill to give the Home Secretary new powers to clamp on foreign states and organisations posing a threat to our national security, and I hope that goes alongside further and faster action to tackle the Iranian threat to us in the UK, just as we have tried to do against Putin, against their vast property empire in London, against their spreading of hatred and disinformation, on social, on social media designed to sow discord and division in the UK.

And are we robustly analysing companies House register to ensure that Bank Melli. I hope I pronounce this wrong and its many subsidiaries are not dodging sanctions simply by changing their name at company House. And should we also be talking more about the VAJA Iran's intelligence agency and its activities in the UK? Now, in conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, I also urge my government to ensure that as soon as this new law is passed, this new legislation is immediately acted on.

By which I mean that our intelligence officers fully understand the powers available to them, not only by this new legislation, but by existing legislation that we've always already passed. I had the pleasure this week of hosting Jonathan Hackett, a marine veteran and an expert on counterterrorism, counterintelligence and intelligence operations, who made the point that often, sometimes on the ground, some of our intelligence officers are not fully aware of the powers available to them, and it's crucial that they are both aware of the powers that they can take to take action, and also have the resources and capabilities to do so.

Thank you
15:42
Max Wilkinson Portrait Max Wilkinson MP (Cheltenham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
very much, Max Wilkinson. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I represent the constituency of Cheltenham, which is the home of Gchq, where thousands of people work every day thousands of people work every day to keep us safe. They work quietly. They never ask for our thanks. And in this House, it is right that we in this House, it is right that we acknowledge that whenever we can. I strongly agree with the points that have been made earlier about the urgency of investment in defence.

And as a member of the APPG for rearmament, I would commend the comments made by my friend, the Member for Tunbridge Wells, and I would. I would echo the comments made by my friend, the Member for Lewes, about the need to reintegrate with Europe as soon as we possibly can, if not on the economy, on defence reasons alone, because almost ten years ago this country voted to leave the European Union. But it is now clear a decade on that, whether you voted leave or whether you voted remain, you did not get what you voted for.

Has Brexit made us wealthier? No. Has it made us healthier? No. Has it made it easier for businesses to grow, as we were told by the Conservatives? No. Has it lowered our taxes? No. Has it helped us protect our environment? No. And the faeces flowing into our rivers suggests it strongly has not helped our environment. Has it helped us run a more effective immigration and asylum system? No. The gangsters, profiting from small boats are laughing all the way to the bank.

On the subject of today's debate, has it made us more secure and has it boosted national resilience? No. And we are now reliant on an unstable United States run by an unpredictable leader who many people now think is mad with a deputy who is intent on fomenting discontent on our streets, and who is responsible for the abject failure of Brexit. It is certainly not the people of this country. We all know in this House who is responsible for the failure of Brexit, and we all know that they are currently getting away with it.

But while the rest of us are undeniably poorer as a result of Brexit, there are 5 million reasons why the Reform Party must keep claiming that it has been a huge success. We all know what those reasons are. They are deluded, Madam Deputy Speaker, and so are their pals in the Conservative Party. They must en masse take responsibility for the fact that this country is now poorer and it is less secure as a result of their disastrous Brexit. Now on to the government that our government today has a responsibility to be so much bolder in reversing the damage caused to this country.

Every Labour backbencher and Ministers knows that rapid re-integration with Europe is the only way to increase prosperity, security and boost business too. Apparently the mayor of Greater Manchester used to know it, but he's not sure. For the next few weeks while he fights that awkward byelection. The good news, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that the departed health secretary is now wildly pro-European again, which may or may not have something to do with the Manchester mayor's current revivals. Who knows? This moment of national challenge demanded a King's speech, offering significant change to reintegrate with Europe for the sake of our economy and defence.

But regrettably, the Prime Minister has offered us more of the same. Politics, Madam Deputy Speaker, is about ideas and the ideas that inspire me, and those of us on these benches are liberalism and internationalism that will not change. Yeah, the challenge facing our nation today can only be met by those ends now at home. Communities are crying out for real empowerment. Yet this government's devolution agenda delivers only the illusion of local control to achieve growth, including in our defence sector.

Whitehall's grip must be loosened to devolve real power and funding, not just to distant regional centres away from our communities, but to towns and cities. Towns like my constituency Cheltenham, which stands ready to help, supporting the work of Gchq and building on it at the Golden Valley Cyber Park, which is supported by this government. And I welcome that and I commend the government's decision to do so. The King's speech also ignores the new reality in British politics. The two party system of the red team and the blue team shouting at each other is now over.

That undermines our ability to have a thriving economy. It undermines our ability to make long term plans to invest in the long term defence and security of our country. It is a pity that Andy Burnham has changed his mind on PR. That makes at least two U-turns before he's even rejoined this House, but let's hope he does a full 360 when he gets back here. Now, this government now faces a stark choice embrace proportional representation or usher in a future reform government propped up by the Conservatives to give us more of the same that they gave us before the failure of Brexit, the lack of security, the failing economy.

Sadly, this King's speech won't do what's needed to fix our relationship with Europe, to make us safer or to empower communities. And it will not change politics for the better. It is a crying shame that with this massive majority, the government has a massive lack of ambition to.
15:48
Warinder Juss Portrait Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. National security should be the primary duty of every government, and so I have been pleased to be present in this House whilst listening to the contributions made on defence readiness as part of the King's Speech. The King's Speech highlighted this government's plan to create a stronger, safer and fairer Britain, where the world today is more dangerous than it has been for a long time, where too many people are struggling with the cost of living and young people are finding employment prospects particularly difficult.

Last week I had the privilege of presenting the award for Overall Apprentice of the year at the Juniper Training Awards in my constituency of Wolverhampton West. What struck me at this event was not simply the talent in the room, but the determination, resilience and ambition shown by these young people. They are proof of the potential that lies within our young people, and we have a duty to invest in their futures. Juniper training is an example of an organisation which provides credible, credible alternative to traditional school or college pathways for young people who would otherwise be at risk of not being in employment, education or training.

Their programs offer not only qualifications for young people, but confidence, resilience and a sense of purpose. Providing a route into secure employment. Our young people deserve our full support, which is why I am pleased to welcome the Government's New Deal for young people as part of our wider Youth Guarantee. I'm especially proud that my constituency sits within the new West Midlands Trailblazer area, where young people are already beginning to benefit from these initiatives through funding provided by the Get Britain Working programme.

More than 800 young people across the West Midlands have already taken their first steps onto the career ladder, with a further 1200 expected to benefit from the £10 million committed so far by the end of 2027 in Wolverhampton itself. Our youth Guaranteed trailblazer proposal is focussed on structured work experience and transition support, intervening early to provide that crucial support. The Wolves at Work Open Door programme supports the Youth Trailblazer initiative and has placed more than 135 residents into work experience, and more than 50 of these individuals have already gone on to secure paid employment.

Madam Deputy Speaker, behind these figures lie a young person whose life has been changed. Someone who has gained confidence, stability and hope for the future. This is an achievement that my city of Wolverhampton can be proud of. More broadly, I am proud of the work that this government is undertaking nationally to support young people into work. The expanded Jobs Guarantee, now set to support an additional 35,000 young people, will provide vital opportunities to those on Universal Credit, whilst helping people to get back into employment and thereby reducing the long term welfare dependency.

Moreover, this government is expanding youth hubs across the country to ensure that young people access that advice and support they need to find employment. And through a £725 million investment in apprenticeships, we are backing our small and medium sized businesses by covering their full apprenticeship costs for eligible young people. In doing so, we are also supporting our businesses to create the wealth that this country so desperately needs. Madam Deputy Speaker, this Labour government is providing security and control to working people, and I am proud to support that mission.
15:52
Mark Pritchard Portrait Rt Hon Mark Pritchard MP (The Wrekin, Conservative)
-
-
Mark Pritchard.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. What? Oh thank you. Can I get cheering at the end rather than the cheering at the end rather than the beginning? But I appreciate it. So, Madam Speaker, can I thank you for Madam Speaker, can I thank you for calling me a lovely surprise. Can I pay a tribute to the right hon. pay a tribute to the right hon. Gentleman for Ilford North, who is not in his place right now, but I have notified him that I will be have notified him that I will be possibly condemning his leadership bid.

But I want to say I think it was in 21 years in this House. I think it was one of the best speeches I've heard. And we need to hear more from all sides of the House about uniting this nation, whether the speech unites the Labour Party. I'll leave that for the Labour backbenchers. But certainly at a time of nationalist talk and extreme talk on the left and the right of British politics, we need more people in all parties to stand up for the common good, for common purpose, and for those things that unite us as a country rather than those who seek to divide us.

I agree with him. It is the British values that whether you're from the left or right, whether you're gay or straight, whether you're Muslim or Christian, whether you're enlightened, educated, or some on certain benches suggest because you have British values, you are not enlightened or educated, but it is those values that unite us, whatever our party. And we all have a responsibility to stand up and be heard on these issues. May I also pay tribute? And he's not again in his place, but I have emailed his office to pay tribute to the former health Ministers.

The Member for Ilford North. No. Forgive me. The hon. Member for Glasgow South West, who has answered more questions more quickly, more substantively than any other Ministers again, in the period I've spent in this House apart from one other who went on to be Prime Minister, and that is the right hon. Member for Richmond and wherever it is now. So not Richard Foord, not Richmond, Yorkshire. Just to be clear, in Richmond, Surrey or London, it's 54 Lib Dem councillors that we.

We know that it's not the case in Richmond, Yorkshire. Hopefully never. But I think my speech has already gone out of the window, but I. I know it comes, it comes, it comes as great, great relief. But I want to pay tribute to all of our armed forces on this. What is today a defence day for the King's Speech? All of those at RAF Cosford in my constituency, the largest, second largest RAF base in the world, all of those at the Royal Irish Regiment in Clive Barracks at Ternhill and all of those within MoD Donnington, all of them contributing to our national security.

But as I mentioned earlier, yes, it's about defence procurement. Yes, it's about kit and equipment. But without defence people, without personnel, we have the Ministers responsible for personnel here today, the national defence falls apart and the Ministers wasn't here earlier, but his colleague, the Ministers of State for Defence Procurement, has volunteered a meeting with myself and the Ministers about the very important issue of the children of our armed forces personnel and in particular, those with with Send needs.

There are quite a few cases I've come across where we've had armed forces personnel relocated, redeployed, let's say, from the United States, back into the UK or redeployed out of, let's say, Scotland, into England. And yet there's been no send support or even send information when the families are redeployed with their parents. So I hope the Ministers for Defence Personnel will meet with me. We'll look at this issue because we have to look after not only I will in a moment, we have to look after our defence personnel but also their families.

Happy to give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. I appreciate the hon. Member giving way. Does the hon. Member agree with me that there should be a with me that there should be a national send programme for Armed Forces children for to support them

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in their changing schools so often throughout the United Kingdom? I think she's absolutely right. There is a if you like, a patchwork of quality and it's very, very different depending on the local different depending on the local education authority. So I think there is an argument, at least to look at it, between Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland and England. Look at whether there should be, if you'll forgive me, uniformity when looking at the particular needs of children with. Send within the armed forces.

May I go a little bit more parochial now and say that I welcome the investment of Ryan Bussell into my constituency? We are currently, as the Ministers will know, building the challenger three tank. And I'm grateful that the government listened to my representations and those of many others within The Wrekin and in Shropshire and the borough of Telford The Wrekin, to ensure that the gun barrel factory, which is a real strategic asset, was put into Shropshire. Secondly, can I also recognise all of those working so well on the Boxer Vehicle programme, an absolutely vital asset for this country, and pay tribute to all those defence engineers, men and women and also those apprentices that are doing such a great job in keeping us all safe.

I will now, if I may, pivot back to a more strategic comment, and that is some weeks ago, colleagues may or may not remember when I completely fluffed my PMQ and thankfully I had my notes on the side. I was raising the issue of a strategic missile threat to this nation. And of course, we do have a counter to cruise missiles. We do have a counter to many other types of missiles, but this country has a strategic shortfall when it comes to ballistic missile defence.

Now, of course, the Ministers might say, well, we have certain capabilities on certain ships and I know what they are, but unless the ships are in the right place at the right time, should a ballistic missile come to this country, then we are, quite frankly, as I've said previously to the Defence Secretary, a sitting duck that is not a that is not acceptable. It is the first duty of any government to keep this country safe. So how can this country be kept safe when we have direct threats from Russia with ballistic missiles, a proven technology, as we've seen, sadly, in Ukraine, and yet we have no plan.

Despite the Strategic defence review, no real plan to implement the need that we have. So I end on saying, I want to say thank you to all of our armed forces who keep us safe and keep our interests safe all around the world.
15:59
Mark Sewards Portrait Mark Sewards MP (Leeds South West and Morley, Labour)
-
-
Here. Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to follow the Member for The Wrekin, and I also want to commend the comments from my hon. Friend the Member for Hemel Hempstead for his speech earlier. I'm going to be touching on some of the same themes, and I'm only going to refer today, really to the Tackling State Threats Bill. And this new legislation does honour Labour's manifesto commitment to follow the Jonathan Hall review and introduce new powers that allow us to prescribe state threats, specifically the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the IRGC.

This is something that many of us across the House have been advocating for for a long time, and I, for one, am grateful to the Prime Minister, the Home Secretary, the Foreign Secretary, the Security Ministers for enduring my questions on this, both in this place and in private. It could not be more timely. We know that the IRGC directs Tehran's terror networks abroad and brutally crushes dissent at home. It oversaw the sickening repression following January's protest movement in Iran, which saw 3000 people murdered, and that repression continues to this day while the conflict goes on with torture, sham trials, executions all being used to try and beat the Iranian people into submission.

And we're only getting so much information out because of the internet blackouts. The IRGC, we know, is responsible for funding and arming terrorist proxies, including Hamas, Hezbollah and others across the region that seek to hurt our allies and destroy the world's only Jewish state. And we know that the new head of the IRGC is an internationally wanted terrorist implicated in the 1994 attack against the Amia Jewish Community Centre in Buenos Aires that killed 85 people and, for his part, also the interior Ministers.

In 2022, when Iran cracked down brutally on the women Life and freedom protest. But of course, all of this is about Iran and foreign countries. Today is about defence readiness in this country. And unfortunately, the IRGC seeks to wreak havoc on our shores. In November, the director general of MI5 linked the IRGC to no fewer than 20 potentially lethal threats here at home in the UK. In the last year alone, the threat has only grown. The chief rabbi has said that the British Jews, that British Jews and Iranian dissidents here are facing a sustained campaign of violence and intimidation.

And we've all seen this. We saw the ambulances belonging to Hatzolah, a Jewish charity serving the whole community, were targeted. We saw the Finchley Reform in Kenton United Synagogue attacked. We saw Jewish charities, the Israeli embassy, the Iranian media all targeted and most horrifyingly of all, we saw two Jews stabbed on the streets of London simply because they were Jewish. Now all of this. The police and security experts suspect, and there are ongoing investigations, is the work of paid proxies and criminal gangs on behalf of Iranian backed terror groups.

Directed by the IRGC. Now, obviously, since coming to office, this government has continued to ramp up sanctions against the regime and individuals. Travel bans, asset freezes, disqualifications from directorships. All very welcome, all very useful in the fight against this. However, these sanctions cannot and have not curtailed the IRGC s nefarious actions in the UK. That is why we need this prescription like tool now being legislated for by the government. And we need it now. We don't know the full detail of what's being proposed, which is why I'm here to say that the government must ensure that IRGC members cannot be active in any respect in the UK, including attending or speaking at meetings.

This new power must make it a criminal offence for anyone in the UK to associate with the IRGC. Profess support for it, sharing materials from it or attend any meetings with their representatives. And this new power must require all IRGC online material, be it propaganda or otherwise be removed from the internet. Now I also call on the government and the Prime Minister to keep his promise from just a few weeks ago, stating that this legislation will be prioritised and it will be accelerated through this parliamentary session.

We need to see this legislation as soon as possible. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'd also just take this moment to urge the government to build further on this legislation and take further action to protect our national security and the Jewish community. First, the Iranian embassy has been using the social media to incite violence on our shores. Both the ambassador and the Supreme leader's representative in the UK should be expelled. Second, the regime is using soft influence networks across the UK to advance its objectives under the cover of cultural, academic, charitable and media activity.

These must be identified and dismantled. And thirdly, the government's Protecting what matters strategy, which was extremely welcome when it was announced, needs to be implemented in full and implemented quickly. Now I finish by saying this, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Iranian regime is one of the world's worst abuses of human rights. It menaces our allies in the region with its support for terrorist proxies. It threatens the safety and security of the British people, including our Jewish community here at home. I do commend the government for the seriousness with which it treats this danger underlined by this new legislation.

Now we have to get on, pass these new laws and prescribe the biggest state sponsor of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

terrorism in the world. It is time to prescribe the IRGC. A Stuart Anderson.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A Stuart Anderson. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's a privilege to follow the hon. Member from Leeds South and West. Morley, who clearly West. Morley, who clearly understands his topic, speaks passionately and that was a great speech to follow on from. But I speech to follow on from. But I want to turn the House's attention to the following countries Poland, to the following countries Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Norway, the US, Denmark, Greece, Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands.

And I ask this this house, what do all these countries have in common?
16:06
Stuart Anderson Portrait Stuart Anderson MP (South Shropshire, Conservative)
-
-
Well, last year they all funded higher than the UK as a percent of higher than the UK as a percent of defence of GDP. But to put this into perspective, in 2021, there into perspective, in 2021, there were only two NATO countries that funded more on defence than we did. funded more on defence than we did. So there's been a significant change. And what I want to do is ask myself, what do these countries ask myself, what do these countries know that we don't know? I've been fortunate to be a member of the NATO parliamentary Assembly, and I've spoken with every one of these countries, representatives from Ministers to other parliamentarians, and they realise that the world is changing.

We are facing probably the most volatile geopolitical situation for over 80 years. And I do not believe, as I've said, continuously, the world is going to go back to how it was and how we've seen it in our lifetime. They understand the world is rearming, rearming, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, looking at these threats that they're facing, they're trying to break down democracy, destabilise the world. And we've just heard a great speech before me about how that's impacting the streets here in the UK.

So when we're seeing that, what do they see of the UK? And I'll back this comment up. They believe many countries believe we are leaving the room. We are not standing up anywhere near on the international stage as what we did. And one of my proudest moments on the NATO parliamentary Assembly was in 2022 in the Latvian Parliament. Cross-Party and I stood there when the Defence Ministers said to the UK and the US, hold your head up high.

You have led the world in this and we need to follow. You have funded and you've led. And that was a real proud moment in the last month. And I fed this direct into the Secretary of State. I won't say the country, but a NATO defence Ministers in the same forum sat there when I asked the question, he said, with all due respect, the UK are not leading, they are not even in the room and they are not funding where they were cross-party. I couldn't disagree with him and that was one of the saddest days on NATO parliamentary assembly of where we sat.

With that, we need this investment within defence. We need to clearly chart a course where we can ensure that we are funding where we need to be, and I'm doing this out of respect for the defence Ministers. I believe there's a credible set of defence Ministers, but the argument is not currently being won at the moment. And where we've dropped in those rankings, the NATO average is around about 2.76% for defence spending. And we're arguing around about 2.4%, give or take.

And actually, the argument that it's the largest sustained defence funding since the end of the Cold War is actually a bit of a mockery, that sentence, because we're comparing a peacetime situation to the most unstable geopolitical situation of our time, they're not comparable. And if you want to look at the actual facts, in 2019 to 2020, it went up 0.2%, which is similar now. I call that out. Then we were united in the Defence Select Committee, where we said that we needed to fund in the last Parliament six, seven years ago or six and a half years ago when I got in of 3%, that was the cross-party position.

Then. We need to get to that position now. We need our ships funded. We need more troops, we need drone warfare, as we've seen what's happening in Iran, we must expand our technological approach to defence, defence and how we how that shape is changing. And we need to look at this on a really serious level to be able to stand on the world stage. And our military strength has always been the bedrock of our global soft power. It has given us authority and a platform to stand up for British values.

But on the world stage at the moment, that is, that is waning. It is shaking at the moment. And what we're looking at with that, and I think as we look at this, as we chart this course, we have to have a serious response to this now, today, and I'm not interested what's happened in ten years, 20 years, 40 years, because as we've heard from hon. Members on all sides, defence funding was significantly higher many years ago. And it's very hard to put that across to the public.

That conversation is getting easier to be had when they see the impact from fuel prices, what's happening over in the Middle East? Will I be able to fly away and go on holiday in the summer? All these type of equations are coming to the forefront and people are asking, and when I speak at different dinners or events, every so often someone would talk about defence. Now it's almost every single question can we defend ourselves and can we rearm? And I I'm pleading with the Ministers to win the argument because I know every single one of them would want more funding for defence.

And I'm pleading to win this argument, to do whatever it takes to see that we can rearm and we can have the armed forces that we need, and we can stand on the world stage with our head held high. Thank you, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Deputy Speaker. Graeme Downie hey. Thank you very much, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's a privilege to follow the hon. Member for South Shropshire. What I think for South Shropshire. What I think has been a very constructive debate, with a lot of cross-party consensus. Can I begin by welcoming the speeches and contributions from Ministers earlier on regarding the measures included in the Queen's measures included in the Queen's Speech, such as the Armed Forces Bill and the commitment towards supporting drone testing. Something, again, I think we see across the House is very much required.

There are three points I would like to make during this speech around defence priorities, around about the threats that we face and some of the need for long term thinking. First of all, looking at some of the threats that we face, and we
16:11
Graeme Downie Portrait Graeme Downie MP (Dunfermline and Dollar, Labour)
-
-
heard this earlier on by the hon. Member for Wetherby and Easingwold, who is no longer in his place. Regarding the British people need to understand the threats that this country does face and what warfare country does face and what warfare looks like in a modern context. I am one of the ones who believe we already are in a conflict with already are in a conflict with Russia and should take action along those lines. And indeed, I believe in the High North, we actually are.

in the High North, we actually are. Not only that, we are a front line nation in that conflict with Russia, and we have only seen just this week of the threat we faced from reports of Russian submarines in the North Atlantic and attacks on energy, energy, infrastructure, and indeed, the threat we face on subsea cables. This is something that I see in here all the time. As chair of the All-Party parliamentary Group on Estonia, where I was privileged to visit earlier on this year, to see some of the work that they are doing to prepare not only their military, but their society as well.

There was an article I would highly recommend anyone to read this Week in Foreign Policy by Franz Stefan Gadi regarding the threats and indeed the weaknesses that NATO faces, not only on the military front, but on political decision making. And in that article, Mr. describes how he, while playing a war game, defeated NATO. And it was not actually about military strength. It was about the need for quick decision making. And in that he describes the UK forces in Estonia, as well as other NATO forces in Lithuania.

So in Smethwick, can I ask the Ministers to provide some reassurance around Kibrit and the fantastic British forces that we have in Estonia, the speed of their response and the operational decision making is in place to make sure that we are not delayed by political stasis in the event of Russian aggression coming forward through hybrid warfare, because we know that Russia's experience in Ukraine already points that once they control the battlefield, they make it very hard for a NATO or any other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

counterattack. I am happy to give way to the Romford friend. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. And he speaks giving way. And he speaks passionately about Estonia. Britain has got troops deployed in Estonia providing a tripwire, as he well knows, having no doubt spent some knows, having no doubt spent some time with him recently. Will he join me in encouraging the government to make every effort to arm and equip those troops with the arm and equip those troops with the necessary capabilities merely to survive? And does he agree with me that at the moment they provide not much deterrence force at all until we give them the technologies we know have been standard in modern

**** Possible New Speaker ****

warfare for multiple years now? Can I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention? I totally agree his intervention? I totally agree with him. We have to. If we are to have an effective deterrent in the Baltics, it must make sure it is an effective deterrent and not just effective deterrent and not just something which looks good on paper, but must be operationally ready to fight exactly that threat that he fight exactly that threat that he points out. I would like to move on to the role of information and where we are in informing the British public of the threat.

This British public of the threat. This is the point that I have made many times before, that I believe we must trust the British people with more information about the threat that they face, whether that is from cybersecurity, the threat to subsea cables and energy infrastructure, because unless the British people fully understand the threat that they face, they will not be providing the necessary pressure and indeed licence for government to act more quickly and to act in the way that we all know in this House that we must act to defend ourselves from the current threats.

I am very much of the belief that information breeds teamwork and togetherness, and a lack of it, and a void creates speculation and misinformation from our from our enemies, and indeed from some in this House. And we must make sure that the British people are the ones keeping us on our toes and making sure that they are, that we are defending them in the way that we should. And I would point to recent cyber attacks on cyber on Jaguar Land Rover, as was mentioned by a colleague earlier, no longer in a place in retail.

These are all threats that the UK is facing, and we must be much more upfront, straightforward and trusting of the British people with the information. Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to move on to talk about some of the priorities for long term defence of the United Kingdom, and that does, I am afraid, require uttering the initials D, I and P. I do not want to revisit some of the arguments we've already had so far, but I would like to urge Ministers that when looking at the Defence Investment Plan, we are looking at the long term planning as well and that when that document is published, we do not focus just on some of the things that are maybe more immediate.

In my own constituency. That was mentioned earlier on by the Member for South West Wiltshire, we are looking at some of the work that needs to be done around our submarine fleet. First, around contingent docking facilities at Rosyth, which will ensure that a lack of infrastructure does not delay or curtail the operation of dreadnought class submarines in the future. And I know Defence Ministers Ministers are well aware of the threat that poses that when we get to that position, the dreadnought must be able to enter service immediately, fully and quickly to take the pressure off the Vanguard service that has already been referred to earlier on today.

And the second, I am happy to give way to my friend.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. And might you allow me Madam Deputy Speaker, to put on record my support and recognition of the bold and principled speech of the bold and principled speech by the right hon. Member for Ilford North earlier today. Can I thank my hon. Friend for his support for hon. Friend for his support for this agenda? Does he share my deep disappointment about the news that British manufacturing scale up has gone into administration? We are about to create a potential to about to create a potential to create the UK's replacement to a Red arrows Hawk jet, and with their loss, we may in fact see our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

beloved Red arrows no longer being British. Can I thank my friend for that contribution? I know how closely he contribution? I know how closely he worked with the company to make sure that they were being considered as well. And indeed, considered as well. And indeed, having visited RAF Valley earlier on this year, seeing the need to replace the Hawk as a trainer aircraft is one that is pressing aircraft is one that is pressing and one I think must be met very quickly.

Just very. Finally, Madam Deputy aware, I have taken more Deputy aware, I have taken more interventions than perhaps others, so my apologies. The other thing I would like to urge Ministers to consider in the dip and more generally is the submarine recycling project, which I know is one that the Ministers for Defence Procurement is very well aware of, making sure that we have the space to, as submarines continue through, that, we have the space to make sure they are being managed and recycled effectively and safely.

And indeed, at Rosyth we have the HMS Vanguard or the HMS Swiftsure pilot project coming to an end, which has seen the dismantling of one submarine and that steel in fact being recycled and used in the dreadnought programme. An incredible way of making sure that we are actually reusing materials where possible, holding down costs and as well as securing hundreds of jobs in my constituency as well. Madam Deputy Speaker, these are the kinds of projects we must be focusing on for defence.

We must be making sure we are aware of the threats that we are facing, informing the British people of the threats we are facing and planning for the long term so that this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country remains safe. I will give very quickly. I will give way to the hon. Lady. Thank you very much. All right.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. All right. Thank you for your contribution. Very powerful. Some of the work Very powerful. Some of the work that we do on the Defence Select Committee actually involves an awful lot of private briefings that awful lot of private briefings that maybe members within the chair of the members of the public don't have the privilege of seeing. When have the privilege of seeing. When I asked the CDs recently why we don't tell the public more. His words were, we don't want to alarm people.

Now, would you agree that the public are grown up? We should maybe be. Let them know a bit more about this. They should probably be a little more alarmed than they already are, and they would come

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with us on this journey to say yes. Please spend more on defence. Can I thank my hon. Friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank my hon. Friend for her contribution? I couldn't agree with her more. I think we must bring the British people with us on this journey and trust them with this journey and trust them with that information. Only by moving together as a country can we defend ourselves against the threats that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we face. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Graham Leadbitter thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Less than two weeks ago, the SNP secured a landslide record breaking Scottish election victory, including securing two constituency MSPs who have left this place for Scotland's Parliament. And I know that regardless of political difference, there is a significant level of respect from across parties for their contributions in this chamber and to the wider work of Parliament. That experience will stand them in good stead for what lies ahead in
16:20
Graham Leadbitter Portrait Graham Leadbitter MP (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, Scottish National Party)
-
-
Holyrood. Madam Deputy Speaker, much more respect for Scottish voters is required from the UK government. When the Labour government in Westminster is founded. Month after month, failing to address the cost of living to address the cost of living crisis affecting all of my constituents, the SNP offered a message of hope for what Scotland message of hope for what Scotland can and should be with the vast natural resources it strategically important geographical position in the world and the incredible the world and the incredible talents of its people.

It is particularly notable that in Scotland, support for independence is now consistently polling above 50%, and Scotland's voters have elected a significant majority of MSPs who support independence more than ever before, and a clear mandate from the Scottish electorate to pursue an independence referendum. Madam Deputy Speaker, the theme for today's King's Speech debate is defence readiness. Many will focus on defence spend, defence procurement, national security

**** Possible New Speaker ****

threats and other direct defence issues. And I agree with many of the points that Have been made by hon. Members

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Have been made by hon. Members in this debate this afternoon. Many of them extremely well made, but I of them extremely well made, but I would contend that for around. 4500 personnel across three significant bases in my constituency, probably bases in my constituency, probably the same number again in family members, around 1000 permanent defence contractor jobs and their families, and an estimated 12,000 veterans and their families. A total of over 3000 people with defence connection. There are many, many issues that contribute to defence readiness.

Turning first to the cost of living crisis. Like every other resident in Moray West, Strathspey, our defence community are also struggling to cover bills, having to cope with more months than there is money. Defence personnel posted to the north of Scotland from elsewhere in the UK, will experience an amazing place to live and work, but they will also experience amongst the highest energy prices in Europe, caused by a regulatory system that is hugely discriminatory to the north of Scotland. Labour MPs promised that people would see a £300 reduction in energy bills, but they are projected to see a more than £400 a year increase.

There is little to nothing in the King's Speech that seeks to reverse that £700 plus difference from their manifesto promise, and that would also remove the discrimination faced by households and businesses in the north of Scotland. Discrimination that has gone on for decades with no action to address this by the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and New Labour. Up until yesterday, there was no plan from the Westminster government to address growing food costs, something the SNP is tackling head on. Seemingly, the Chancellor is now looking to do similar but critically, not in a compulsory way.

I very much welcome the government's late acceptance of the SNP's wisdom in this matter, but I would strongly urge the government that if they are going to do it, to do it properly. There is no plan to cut fuel costs. I promise today not to increase tax further, but no plan to reduce it. In constituencies like mine, where Carlisle is a necessity to access basic services, to access education, leisure and to access employment opportunities. That is especially disappointing. People in the north of Scotland deserve better than to be punished by Westminster just for living where they live.

Defence personnel, often hundreds of miles from their family, also deserve better than incurring the substantial costs that they have to pay to drive home. When it comes to energy and net zero, a sector that has always been a strong destination for retiring forces personnel and which is very suited to many skill sets of those coming from a military background. The current government is intent on repeating the mistakes of the past, of accelerating the decline of one sector, in this case oil and gas, at a rate that does not match either demand changes or the growth of the renewables sector.

It is simply Thatcherism all over again, which saw the tearing apart of coal and steel communities in Scotland. It is a betrayal of North Sea workers and the vast supply chain associated with those jobs, from skilled parts manufacturing jobs to the hospitality staff across the north of Scotland. Taxi drivers, cafes and corner shops that are seeing their revenues eroded to an unsustainable level. It erodes the opportunities available to defence personnel as well. The Conservative Party are no better. Their answer is simply to push the cliff edge further away rather than embrace a managed transition, which is what the industry wants to see.

Neither of those scenarios is acceptable to Scotland, and neither of those scenarios is acceptable to my constituents. This brings me back to the theme of today defence readiness. It is not attractive to people to join a military when key bases are seeing jobs and opportunity eroded around them. That stifles transition opportunities for personnel leaving the services and erodes the vitality of the communities that those bases are an integral part of. Defence spending needs to be significantly increased. Yes, we need to have a better offer for new military personnel and absolutely, yes, we need to have a much stronger defence, resilience and a more challenging world with dictators like Putin, who are prepared to risk peace on a shocking scale and threaten the infrastructure that is critical to our economic and social well-being.

However, at the heart of this are defence communities that are embedded in wider communities. Defence communities that have the same aspiration for the regions they live in and who want the same opportunities for themselves and the whole community that surrounds them. Madam Deputy Speaker getting these fundamentals right supports that bigger community age, recruitment and retention in our armed forces, and provides the opportunities that our veterans

**** Possible New Speaker ****

deserve when they exit service. Gill German thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, things feel insecure right now, be it the war in Iran, the now, be it the war in Iran, the cost of living pressures on families, or the sense that systems just aren't working quite right in just aren't working quite right in Clwyd North. I hear it all the time when families are struggling and young people don't feel that they've got a fair chance, it erodes trust in the belief that things can actually start getting
16:26
Gill German Portrait Gill German MP (Clwyd North, Labour)
-
-
better and create a feeling of insecurity. Building up this trust insecurity. Building up this trust starts with clearly defining what we've put in place in our first two we've put in place in our first two years of government, and how our future actions will improve people's lives. I know from speaking to people in the community in rail, in Colwyn Bay, in Abergele, in Denbigh, across Clwyd North, that that it is full of decent people trying to do the right thing day by day.

I want to make sure that these people know that they are heard and that things can and will get better. We must be honest about the challenges, but also focus on what really matters to people. Building something that works better in Wales. This means a relentless focus on building a stronger and fairer future, helping families with the cost of living, living, strengthening our communities through better connections and opportunities, and improving both energy and, crucially, national security.

It's about making sure progress is felt in everyday life, especially in communities that have been historically left behind. And it's about recognising how rich and varied Wales is with our cities, countryside and coast. And that means a tailored approach that reflects these different needs. This government has already delivered significant achievements, passing 50 acts in its first parliamentary session. And behind every piece of legislation are real people and real lives. Among them is the Employment Rights Act, strengthening protections, improving pay and tackling exploitative practices for people across Clwyd North.

The removal of the two child limit is set to benefit around 69,000 children in Wales, including 3100 in Clwyd North. That's not an abstract number, that's families in our town feeling more stability. And when it comes to safety, the Crime and Policing Act responds to local concerns about anti-social behaviour, introducing tougher action to improve our town centres. Madam Deputy Speaker, these changes matter because of the difference they make to everyday life fairer work, stronger families and safer communities here at home.

The need to feel secure is important to us all and in this King's speech, we are taking crucial steps to strengthen security because people deserve to feel safe. The Armed Forces Bill delivers a long overdue boost to defence spending, strengthens reserve forces, improves the service justice system and puts the armed forces covenant into law something my local veterans have said is much needed. Security also means stronger communities and shared purpose. Cutting bureaucracy, increasing police presence and introducing a national digital ID system that will help people feel safer and better supported.

That feeling of security also means tackling the root causes of the high cost of living, not just the symptoms. The Energy Independence Bill will reduce reliance on volatile global markets and deliver more secure, home grown energy to stabilise and lower bills for households in Clwyd North. Changes to commonhold and leasehold will tackle unfair ground rents and rising service charges that I've heard about too often in my constituency and for local businesses. The Commercial Commercial Payments Act will crack down on the scourge of late payments currently leading to the closure of a shocking 38 businesses a day.

Taken together, these changes will ease pressure on families, support local economies and build long term resilience against rising costs. Security means better connections to the Railways Bill will unify, track and train under one body and give the Welsh Government a stronger role, backed by a £14,000,014 billion plan. It will improve connections, support 12000 jobs and make journeys across North Wales more reliable. Madam Deputy Speaker, With an ambitious plan like this set, we need all hands on deck to set it into action.

I promise to play my part in this to make a tangible difference to lives across Clwyd North, delivering real improvements and lasting change for the communities. I am proud to serve.
16:31
Caroline Dinenage Portrait Dame Caroline Dinenage MP (Gosport, Conservative)
-
-
Dame Caroline Dinenage. >> Dame Caroline Dinenage. >> Madam Deputy Speaker Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, you will have been have almost been bored of hearing have almost been bored of hearing me say, as will the Secretary of State, that I represent the Gosport constituency, which has one of the highest proportions of veterans in the UK, but we also have fantastic servicemen and women at sites like HMS Collingwood, HMS Sultan, the Institute of Naval Medicine and across the harbour in Portsmouth Naval Base, as well as thousands more who work in the defence industry.

So as you can tell, we have such a proud history of serving this nation, and yet so many of my constituents already feel so deeply disillusioned and let down by this government. Why? Because quite simply, their failure to deliver in action could quite simply be the strapline for this government. There is a total disparity between what is said and what is done, and defence is a complete example of that. The talk of defence spending. But the Secretary of State knows that every single corner of our armed forces right now, as we speak, is being asked to find cuts.

And where is the defence investment plan, the clear signal that defence companies in my constituency need to make spending decisions to protect jobs and livelihoods. It's nowhere to be seen. This theme of overpromising and under-delivering extends across a whole range of other sectors as well. I want to talk a little bit about the culture, media and sport sector because I chair the Select Committee. It actually contributes 16 times more to the UK economy than defence manufacturing. Take formula one, for example, a global British brand worth £12 million to the UK economy.

Yet our world class major event sector is being held back by gaps in the legislation. And what does the government do? It comes forward with a Sporting Events Bill brilliant. Announced in The King's Speech, but with such a limited scope that it does nothing to move forward the wider needs of the major events industry, which is so valuable to our British economy, particularly cultural and business events, which are hugely vital to our economy, our communities and our international standing. All words, no action.

Then there's the lack of ambition on ticket touts. The Ticket Tout Ban Bill was announced in November. The government promised a ready to go bill. Madam Deputy Speaker that would put fans first. Instead, it's relegated its promise to a mere draft bill, kicking the can into the next parliamentary session at the very earliest. The longer it takes for government to act, the longer touts will be able to rinse fans in my constituency and all those across the country to the tune of an approximate £145 million, the majority of which goes to overseas operators.

Madam Deputy Speaker, all words, no action. And then there's touring in the EU now and the ongoing psychodrama gripping the Labour Party. I note the subject of Brexit is now back on the agenda and the hot topic. But there is so much the government can do for our creative industries to reopen that whole can of worms without having to start renegotiating Brexit. It could revisit its decision to cut orchestral tax relief for EU touring. It could ensure a one forms are processed without delay so artists don't have to pay double Social Security contributions.

It could help with the cost of the Abta khanates, which the Association of British Orchestras said at about £10,000 to an orchestra's Budget. Madam Deputy Speaker, all words, no action. And then, meanwhile, let's look at school and community sport. The King's Speech contained absolutely no new measures to improve physical activity. There's been no resolution of the stand off between the Department of Health and Social Care, the Department of Education and the Department of Culture, Media and Sport over cuts to PE funding.

If we are serious about getting our country more active, we need action, not words. And that needs to begin with legislative changes to increase participation, to increase investment in the facilities and the communities relying on, and the requirement on schools to prioritise physical education alongside academic attainment. The case is clear and more active. Nation is a healthier nation and more productive nation, and ultimately a more prosperous one. Once again, all words, no action. There's nothing in the King's Speech for young people.

The DCMs Secretary of State has made her National Youth Strategy her stated legacy in the department. But as far as I can see, the government have all the government have done is rip up the National Citizen Service, overseeing the exodus of youth workers from the third sector and replace them with nothing but a slogan, she says, somewhere to go, something to do and someone who cares. It's all words. There's no action. Does this government care at all? It must begin to back up words with deeds.

The King's speech doesn't even begin to provide the ambition necessary to maximise the potential of our culture, our media, our sport or our defence backing our veterans, backing those that work so hard in the constituencies like mine, in the service of our nation. And meanwhile the British economy, people's livelihoods and their jobs are suffering.
16:36
Anna Gelderd Portrait Anna Gelderd MP (South East Cornwall, Labour)
-
-
Yes. >> Anna Gelderd Madam. speech. >> Makes clear. changing. >> It is still and will always be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is still and will always be about the strength and professionalism of our armed forces personnel and their families. It is personnel and their families. It is also about energy security and digital capability. New challenges in a new era. The threats that we face are rapidly evolving. Hostile cyber activity, damage to critical infrastructure, global instability and climate pressures increasingly affecting our national security, our economy and our resilience as a country. Defence readiness today is digital as well as physical.

I welcome the measures brought forward in this Bill and the work of the Ministry of Defence team. Labour Ministers, many with first hand experience, who are actively listening and working to implement the changes our military communities have been calling for improved housing, better protections for women and girls, and enshrining enshrining the Armed Forces Covenant fully into law. This is a government of service and delivery, and in South East Cornwall, we understand that deeply. The Strategic Defence Review rightly talks about a whole of society approach to national resilience and war fighting readiness.

That means recognising the defence capability depends not only on the military sites themselves, but on the civilian infrastructure, workers and communities that sustain them each and every day. My constituency has a proud and long standing connection to our nation's defence, with over 6000 households home to at least one veteran. That translates to nearly 15% of households in my constituency, over double the UK average were home to HMS Raleigh in Torpoint, one of the Royal Navy's key training establishments through which thousands of recruits pass each and every year across South East Cornwall, many local families are directly connected to defence through their military service.

Veteran communities, dockyards, supply chains and skilled employment and my community is also closely linked to the nationally significant work that's carried out at Naval Base Devonport and by Babcock International. In fact, 23% of Devonport workers live in south east Cornwall. The long term investment going into Devonport is hugely welcome and important for Britain's future, particularly as we strengthen submarine support and deliver major national defence programmes. But that capability does not stop at the dockyard gates and that is an important point that I want to stress today.

The workforce sustaining nationally significant activity at Devonport comes not just from one side of the Tamar River alone, and we in south east Cornwall are firmly part of the wider defence ecosystem that supports Davenport. Every single day, thousands of workers use the Tamar crossings regularly for employment. I think directly or indirectly to defence, including engineers, apprentices, contractors, dockyard workers and military personnel. We are a proud part of the wider Plymouth Travel to work area, and our connectivity across the Tamar is essential to sustaining that defence workforce and unlocking regional growth.

I have consistently raised the importance of these crossings in this House, and yet the crossings are still sometimes treated as purely local infrastructure, as investment into Davenport and long term defence capability continues to grow, the pressure on those links will only grow too. So as the government rightly invest billions into strengthening Britain's defence capability and long term readiness and South East Cornwall help sustain nationally important defence activity, our local community must feel the benefits of that investment too. We also recognise the reality that energy security is national security.

Recent years have shown the risks of overexposure to volatile international energy markets. Secure Home-grown clean energy, strengthens resilience, supports economic stability and reduces vulnerability to external shocks. Climate resilience rightly forms part of this government's understanding of what defence readiness means to communities like mine. Extreme weather and environmental instability increasingly affect infrastructure, supply chains and operational capability across the world. Preparing for those risks is part of preparing Britain for our future and finally, defence readiness in the modern world must include cyber resilience and digital capabilities.

Protecting critical infrastructure, communication systems and national networks is fundamental to protecting our country itself, because the future of defence will depend not only on ships, submarines and military assets, but also on secure systems, skilled workers, resilient infrastructure and strong communities like south east Cornwall. When we talk about strengthening Britain's defence capability, we recognise the places and the people helping sustain it every day. Because defence readiness begins long before a ship leaves port. It begins with resilient infrastructure, secure energy, strong digital capabilities and communities like mine.

So I welcome this new era of defence readiness. South East Cornwall is proud to play its part in supporting that national effort.
16:41
Adrian Ramsay Portrait Adrian Ramsay MP (Waveney Valley, Green Party)
-
-
Adrian Ramsay thank. >> Adrian Ramsay thank. >> You, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's a pleasure to follow the Member for South East Cornwall. The first duty of any government is to keep the public safe. This duty must shape everything that we do in this House, and it must shape how we think about defence. There's no doubt that Britain today faces profound defence challenges, as we've heard in this debate, from international instability to cyber threats and increasing pressure on our energy and supply chains.

But if we are serious about defence, then we must also recognise that the types of threats that we face are changing. To debate security. We must also look at whether our most vulnerable people are protected from extreme heat, whether our communities can cope with flooding and whether we can secure food, water and energy in an increasingly unstable world. Today, the Climate Change Committee published its report on climate adaptation, and its warnings could not be clearer. We are on a path to two degrees of warming by 2050.

That means that in just a couple of decades or so, 9 in 10 of our homes will be at risk of overheating. Peak river flows may rise by 45%, water supply shortfalls may exceed 5,000,000,000l per day, and 40 degree heat waves will become the new normal across the UK, potentially leading to an additional 10,000 heat related deaths per year. The committee is also clear that without action warming of up to four degrees by the end of this century remains a possibility.

Now four degrees of warming would be catastrophic. Temperatures in the UK nearing 50°C, infrastructure pushed beyond what it was ever designed to withstand, and profound consequences for public health, economic stability and social cohesion. These are not distant projections. Madam Deputy Speaker, my constituents and yours are already having to live with the consequences of climate breakdown. We see in the thousands of deaths caused by the increasingly regular heat waves. We see it in the communities repeatedly devastated by flooding, and we see it in rising food prices, rising insurance costs and growing pressures on the services and systems that people rely on every day.

None of this should come as a surprise. Earlier this year, the government's own Joint Intelligence Committee warned that biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse posed serious risks to national security, threatening food and water supplies, disruption to infrastructure and supply chains, increased flooding, risks to public health and wider economic instability. It also warned of the cascading effects of displacement, conflict and competition for resources. Yet despite the scale and seriousness of warnings by the government's own advisers, and despite repeated calls for parliamentary time, this House has still not been allowed a dedicated opportunity to debate its findings or scrutinise the government's response.

Our children will have to live with the consequences of inaction. It would be a dereliction of duty to let political dramas around by elections and leadership contests distract us from this most fundamental responsibility. The evidence is clear and we're not without options. Today's report sets out practical, costed solutions better cooling for hospitals, schools and care homes so our most vulnerable and are protected during extreme heat. Stronger flood defences and investment in natural flood management for our communities. A serious approach to water security so shortages do not become routine support for British farmers.

So British food production remains viable under changing conditions, retrofitting homes to their fit for a warmer climate and infrastructure built to withstand climate impacts rather than fail under them. And the economics are equally clear. The cost of action is around 11 billion a year. The cost of inaction could rise to between 60 and 260 billion annually. So this must be a turning point. We can no longer treat climate adaptation as a secondary environmental issue. It is a matter of national defence.

It's a matter of economic security. Above all, it's a matter of protecting people. But it needs to be far higher up the agenda for government and for Parliament. That's why I'm calling for a dedicated climate protection unit in number ten, with the sole purpose of working across departments to fund and drive forward the recommendations in this report. I'm also supporting the King's Speech amendment G on the threats that nature collapse poses to national security. Because defence is not responding after disaster strikes.

Defence is about reducing risks before crisis becomes catastrophe. If the first duty of government is to keep people safe, then climate adaptation cannot sit at the margins of the King's speech. It must be placed firmly at its heart. Thank you.
16:46
Tim Roca Portrait Tim Roca MP (Macclesfield, Labour)
-
-
Tim Roca thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I've spoken in this Speaker. I've spoken in this chamber before about defence and the urgency of rearmament at some length, and together with the hon. length, and together with the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells and the Field Marshal, Lord Richards, I was proud to join them in creating the proud to join them in creating the all party parliamentary group on rearmament. But before I turn to what the government is doing around defence readiness, I think it's worth pausing, as we always should, on how we got here, because context always matters.

A century ago, the Member for Epping, one who understood well what it meant to watch a nation sleep while danger gathered, described a period of neglect and lost opportunity in defence as the years the locusts have eaten. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think we can apply the same epitaph to the previous government and coalition government years of stewardship of defence. The locusts were busy. Armed forces pay cut in real terms. In nine out of 14 years, housing forces housing in such a state of disrepair that complaints reached a record 13,000 in a single year, troop numbers fell to the lowest level since the Napoleonic era.

Frigates and destroyers cut by a quarter, minehunters reduced by half and ground based air defence spending slashed by 70% in their final years in office, and a defence industrial strategy that sat on a shelf gathering dust, dust, commitment on paper, but nothing in practice. They certainly were the years the locusts have eaten and that is the inheritance the defence frontbench had to contend with. And I've spoken before about the urgency of rearmament. As I say, I won't repeat myself, but what I will say is I'm incredibly proud of the government defence frontbench.

I believe it has brought coherence, great industry and a genuine patriotic determination to sort out the mess it inherited and it deserves to be recognised. Yeah, I'm glad that the government is investing over £270 billion across defence this Parliament not as an accountancy exercise, but as a genuine strategic commitment to rebuilding our national security from the ground up. And I understand, as we meet our commitments that we made at The Hague NATO conference to reach 3.5% in the future, there will be difficult discussions to be had, just as there were difficult discussions to be had about foreign aid.

But there is no magic bullet when we're talking about increasing defence expenditure and pretending that one thing will solve the issue is simply not realistic. In the two previous periods that this country had to rearm significantly in the 1930s and the 1950s, it was a combination of increased taxation, increased borrowing and difficult choices about public expenditure that did it. So, you know, wishy washy words about just cutting welfare will sort it all out. I am not convinced by, and crucially, something else that this government has understood that the last one never grasped is the defence.

Spending isn't just a cost, it's an investment. It's an engine for growth. We spend £32 billion annually with industry equivalent to £460 for every person living in this country. UK defence supports 463,000 high quality, well-paying jobs one in every 60 jobs across the UK. On that point, I'm very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

happy to give one. I'm very grateful to you for giving way. Would you agree with me giving way. Would you agree with me that where I come from, 96,000 jobs in the South West come related defence. So it's a huge sector for defence. But key in my town to those jobs are SMEs, small sized enterprises. And despite the welcome changes with the office for Promoting Small Business from the Promoting Small Business from the MoD, the portals are still unnavigable by many small businesses.

Does he agree with me that the mod should do more to make these contracts available for our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

small businesses and SMEs? Yeah. Member for his intervention. I was in Bristol recently at the NAD was in Bristol recently at the NAD group, the Re the renamed Defence Equipment and Support group, and I was glad to hear they are doing was glad to hear they are doing more on SMEs and maybe the frontbench will comment more on that later, but it is right to recognise that SMEs are absolutely recognise that SMEs are absolutely crucial and in his area of the country, really, really important.

And these are livelihoods, communities and the kind of good, communities and the kind of good, skilled, unionised jobs that sit that this side of the House has always stood for. I also want to acknowledge the other work the government has done. Last year, £1.5 billion committed to building the factories of the future, including the first energetics factories in two decades, creating over 1000 jobs in our industrial heartlands. The £8 billion deal with Turkey sustaining a 20,000 strong workforce across Scotland, Lancashire and Bristol, and the type 26 frigate selected by Norway.

That was mentioned earlier in the debate. Although I was disappointed to see Sweden choose France over the UK in its frigate decision today, but we'll just leave that to the traditional UK French MoD. But there is a genuine defence dividend measured not in press releases, but in real jobs and real communities. The length and breadth of this country, and turning briefly to something I hope will receive the attention it deserves. The Strategic Defence Review made several important recommendations on strengthening home defence and resilience, and rightly so in the context of a whole of society approach to national security, which several hon.

Friends have talked about today. The threats that we face are not confined to the battlefield. They reach into our infrastructure, our supply chains, our communities and resilience must be built across the whole of society, not just within the wire fences of our military establishments. And with that in mind, I was reassured to hear the Ministers at the beginning of the debate say that Ministers are working hard and that we will, in due course, see a defence readiness Bill, because the legal and institutional framework for defence readiness matters.

And I think we all want to see that bill come forward. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am by temperament an impatient person when it comes to defence, as you'll be impatient for me to finish the speech, but the threats are not waiting for us, and I am a fair person. And it is only fair to say, certainly in my view, that the government is doing serious, sustained work for the renewal and rebuilding of our armed forces, restoring our industrial base and making Britain once again a country capable of defending itself.

And I certainly hope that the years the locusts have eaten are hopefully behind us. Yeah.
16:53
Martin Wrigley Portrait Martin Wrigley MP (Newton Abbot, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Martin Wrigley Deputy Speaker It's been a very interesting set of debates today and interesting speeches from many people. I, too, am fully behind the increased and rapid increase in funds for defence, and I wish to add my thanks to our serving personnel. The defence readiness actually requires a whole society response and sovereign capability, and across a wide range of issues in our technologies, defence, infrastructure, housing regulation. The same pattern keeps appearing. Services and systems that are set up to serve the public gradually drift away from having purpose, to simply extracting rents and our time all wrapped up in a bureaucratic mess.

The overriding demand for quarterly profits and denial of early intervention instead, rationing resources at the point of maximum need have driven perverse outcomes. In strategic change. We are renting our entire economy to ourselves. We are wasting it on our own bureaucracies. Whilst too often the gains are captured elsewhere, we need to move back to something much more fundamental an economy and a set of systems that we build, understand and control. This means having real capability on sovereign technology, on UK business and intellectual property, and a resilient defence and security.

But this is not abstract. It is directly connected to whether this country is affordable, liveable and works for the people in it. Ultimately, this is about the social contract. My constituents need to know that the systems they rely on public services, housing or business using buses and trains have purpose to the people, not just bottom lines to fill that they are designed in their interest and will continue to work for them over time. And I want to use a single example, the Palantir contract with the NHS, because it highlights in one place how we have got it all wrong.

We have a major national system handling highly sensitive personal data procured in a way where the model is subscription based, not delivery based, where the intellectual property wrapped up in know how much of which is built does not sit clearly with the public. Where we become dependent on a single supplier over time. That is not just a procurement question, it's a question of control, resilience, and long term cost. From a systems perspective, it creates lock in from an economic perspective, it allows value to flow out rather than being built here.

And from a national perspective, it raises the question, what happens if that capability is withdrawn, restricted, or simply becomes too expensive to change? We have British firms, British engineers and a strong open source capability who could deliver these systems. So the issue is not capability, it is choice. We cannot make the same mistake with the new single patient record specified in the forthcoming health bill in the King's Speech. That should be transformational, allowing access to patients, patients details wherever they originate and must be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

a sovereign capability. Yeah. The same principle applies to businesses more broadly. Markets businesses more broadly. Markets should reward value creation, but too often now the incentive cause too often now the incentive cause causes value to be extracted instead, whether through monopoly positions, weak regulation, or positions, weak regulation, or misaligned incentives. This is where the government has a role not to replace markets, but to make them work properly again. In sector after sector, we see systems that continue to function but no longer serve the people they were designed for, and it applies equally to defence and security.

Resilience is not just about spending levels, it's about design. It's about ensuring that we do not build national capability on systems that can fail at a single point, whether that's a supply chain, a digital platform, or a dependency on external actors. Sovereign capability is not an abstract concept. It's the practical ability to continue operating when conditions are difficult. It's the ability to serve our country, our constituents, through thick and thin, whatever the weather. Madam Deputy Speaker, what links? All of this is simple when incentives drift, when cost control is lost, when systems become extractive, the societal contract begins to fail.

We have talent in this country. We have the capability. The question is whether we choose to use it, because in the end, I want to see systems that work, and I want to see a social contract that people can trust. The King's Speech does not not address sufficiently sovereign capability, and it lacks the ambition and the government needs to go further and faster for us to truly be defence ready.
16:58
Richard Baker Portrait Richard Baker MP (Glenrothes and Mid Fife, Labour)
-
-
Richard Baker thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Earlier this month, Deputy Speaker. Earlier this month, I joined the workers, the apprentices and management at the metal yard in my constituency, where they christened the seahorse barge 85m long, 25m wide, weighing approximately 1400 tonnes. Seahorse is an impressive achievement and will play a critical role in enabling the construction of the Royal Navy's three fleet solid support ships. The sun was shining on metal that day. The fourth was sparkling and it was fantastic to join with the workers who are rightly proud of delivering this project on time, on Budget and particularly to hear from the apprentices at the yard about the skills and experience they gained from being involved and now their hopes for the future as well.

A day of pride and joy for the workers. And what a contrast to my first visit at the yard. Only a few days after I was elected to this place, then Harland and Wolff had fallen into administration. The future of the yard and its skilled workforce was under very real threat. But it was Labour Ministers who stepped in and worked with the UK to save metal and three other yards across the United Kingdom, and methyl had reaped the rewards.

Where there was once a bleak future for the yard. Now we see investment and opportunity in a community where too many people and too many families are still struggling. And since acquiring methyl Navantia has grown the workforce from 180 to 260, it's now on a recruitment drive to fill a further 110 roles. This includes recruiting 50 more apprentices to join the existing 50 apprentices at the yard. Brilliant opportunities for young people from the local area for the future. And the UK has invested £27 million in upgrading the yard and its facilities.

This investment has turned around the fortunes of the yard, which has now won a further two contracts for marine infrastructure, which the workforce will deliver in the coming months, and the transformation of the yard means it is ready to play a key role in the defence, in the delivery of defence contracts for the future. Methyl is a living example of what can be achieved through defence investment as an engine for growth and of course, growth. Growing our economy is at the heart of this King's speech yesterday.

I was delighted to hear my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary set out the measure of this ambition in his speech to the Good Growth Foundation. He has made it clear our increased defence spending will bring investment into the British defence sector. Scotland shows the difference which. This can make a £10 billion deal with Norway for frigates to be built on the Clyde, supporting 2000 jobs until the end of the next decade, and a further 2000 jobs in the supply chain.

How often we talked about nostalgia for the great days of the Clyde and fearing for its future. This government delivering contracts, which makes that future bright for Fife, with the yards at methyl and also at a recital which my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and a doughty champion for, as Ministers know, the Defence Investment Plan will be vital for the future of our local area and our defence businesses, and I am as impatient as anybody for the plan's publication.

But I also understand how important it is to get the plan right and to make sure it's ready with the right strategy when it is published. And my hon. My hon. Friend the the Secretary of State is aware of my view that a key part of getting that plan right is securing work for methyl and for Belfast through programme Usedom to deliver new dry docks for Faslane. Because. Madam Deputy Speaker, my experience of working with the workforce, with the management and with the unions at methyl.

Is that the case for investment in British yards, in British businesses and in our workers is not only for the benefits that brings to our economies and our communities. It is because the skills, the capabilities and the experience in our defence industry is second to none across the world. This is why it is the right strategy for our economy, for our armed forces. And at a time when we face so much global uncertainty for our national security as well, to take forward this strategy, and I hope it's one that the government will continue and pursue.
17:03
Rebecca Smith Portrait Rebecca Smith MP (South West Devon, Conservative)
-
-
Rebecca Smith thank you, speaker. afternoon about the lack of a defence readiness bill in this King's speech, and we've heard lots about the yawning delay of the Defence Investment Plan, which has been rehearsed over and over again. But I just want to remind Ministers of why this is important. It's important because SMEs right across this country are waiting for this detail to be set out so that they can plan for the future, to provide the skills and jobs that this country needs.

Now, we've heard already from the Ministers that there have been contracts awarded since this government came into place, but it's just not good enough because it's not providing that reassurance and security to particularly these SMEs. And whether that is constituents of mine working in Portsmouth or whether it's constituency businesses in my South West Devon constituency who are telling me that they are waiting with bated breath for the dip. It is something that is incredibly serious. However, what I want to focus on this afternoon is the two things Regulating for Growth Bill and also the challenge manufacturing is facing around the steel industry now.

The King's Speech included the Regulating for Growth Bill, you might argue. Madam Deputy Speaker, that's actually quite a misnomer. Usually regulations have the opposite effect and stifle growth. However, I appreciate what is trying to be done here, and it's something that I have long been calling for. With Plymouth named the centre for Marine Autonomy by the government, which is a welcome designation. This means nothing if we can't change the regulations that enable these businesses to do what they are setting out to do and deliver for our defence industry.

Now, I've raised this issue time and time again in here. I've met with key stakeholders, local businesses, industry experts, the Marine Maritime Organisation and spoken with relevant Ministers, and I know they have been aware of this issue for a considerable amount of time. But I have to say I am disappointed with the speed at which things have moved because at the end of the day, marine autonomy waits for no man. It is progressing fastly down the river, so to speak, and we are not doing them any favours with the amount of time this is taking.

It requires primary legislation, which is why this bill is welcome. But considering that the government was able to push through the two child benefit cap being removed, which was never programmed into government, I think it highlights their priorities. That's why I tabled a Marine Autonomous Maritime Vessels Regulation bill in March this year, because I was keen to force this conversation, which seems to have had the desired effect. So I have to say, I'm going to take some credit for this. Regulating for Growth Bill Madam Deputy Speaker Now, I'm pleased to see that within the government's write up of the Bill, as it stands already, there are illustrations from overseas.

When I was recently at Oceanology at the Excel Centre, I met with Canadians from Nova Scotia who already have these regulations that we need here and which are enabling equivalent marine autonomy businesses to literally about six weeks. It takes them to get the right permissions to test and develop and put this development of these new vessels into practice. Similarly, I met recently with an American company whose ambition for manufacture of unmanned ships would not yet be deliverable in this country purely because of our out-of-date regulations.

Now, local businesses, many of whom I know, the Secretary of State even is familiar with M0USV, a Q ocean, all cutting edge and all desperately needing this legislation to fully deliver on their ambitious potential. Now, a part of this is the developing of test sites. I believe that the coast off of Plymouth is the perfect place to pilot this. I don't think we need to wait until it's something that's ready for everyone to have at the first time, and at the same time, I know that Tony Wolf and the team behind Team Plymouth are keen to get going, and I would be delighted for us to be that pilot if that were helpful.

So in terms of this bill, I simply call on the government to make it a priority. Let's see the Second Reading soon after the Whitsun recess so we can get moving on this. And please, let's keep it agile and flexible in its drafting to avoid a repeat situation where regulations can't keep up with technology. Let's make sure this legislation is as good as it needs to be for the future. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, tomorrow sees the debate on the steel nationalisation bill. But before that bill even begins, we have another steel related issue that has the potential to significantly damage manufacturing in the UK and by association, our defence readiness.

The new UK steel regime kicks in on the 1st of July. Now Plymouth is the home to the Plymouth Manufacturing Group, a cluster of manufacturing businesses ranging from Alderman's tooling, Lang and Potter, Olympus and Plessey, Rittal, CSM and Kawasaki Precision Machinery. Now, all of those businesses have been part of a system in Plymouth of manufacturing that was set up after the war, when the dockyard was seeing a decline. Naturally, we've got this hub here, but ultimately this this new regime that is coming in on the 1st of July is already seeing costs into the hundreds of thousands for these businesses.

And in the case of one of these businesses, at least £2 million additional costs a year simply because of these steel quotas. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think you will agree with me that whilst I understand what the government is trying to do to promote British industry, if we are inadvertently because I'm sure this isn't deliberate impacting British manufacturing, where their supply chain can't always be bought with, you know, purely British Steel, we are ultimately hindering the aims, which I know the government has to see growth and to see jobs and to see skills and manufacturing, particularly around the industrial strategy.

So I would just, again, urge the Ministers here today to listen to manufacturers. Letters have gone to the Secretary of State about this issue, but it's vitally important that we don't stick another hand behind the backs of these manufacturing industry professionals who want to help, who want to make this difference, who are passionate about what they do. But if we start giving them these additional costs on top of the challenges they've had around employment, we're going to see the end of manufacturing in this country.

And I'm sure that is not what anybody in this chamber today wants to see.
17:08
Sam Carling Portrait Sam Carling MP (North West Cambridgeshire, Labour)
-
-
Sam Carling thank. >> You, Madam Deputy Speaker. Today's debate theme is defence readiness, and I'm pleased that in His Majesty's speech, we heard the His Majesty's speech, we heard the government's clear commitment to a sustained increase in defence spending. I also welcome the announcement of several bills aimed at boosting national security, notably, the Tackling State Threats Bill intended to create a tougher operating environment for foreign intelligence services and their proxies. I also welcome the National security Bill to target those inciting terrorism, be it Islamist, another religion, extreme right wing or any other form an extreme violence online.

We know many of those threats are arising from overseas, and their prevention is a key part of our defence and the establishment of a defence housing service, as laid out in the Armed Forces Bill, will be of huge benefit to the many military families in my constituency. We have to look after the people who devote their lives to serving our country. On housing more broadly, I'm pleased to see the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill. Leasehold tenancies are a huge problem for so many in my area, and I look forward to a fairer system that limits ground rent, as well as protecting my constituents from being exploited by poor managing agents.

We need greater transparency over service charges and more powers for residents to challenge them. I've also had constituents approach me who have been victims of domestic abuse and have been unable to remove their abuser from their joint social tenancy due to a gap in legislation. I am therefore delighted that the government has listened to representations on this and have set out plans for the Social Housing Bill to address that issue. That will be a real change for my constituents who have had to live in fear and uncertainty, and it ties into the government's ambitions to tackle violence against women and girls.

And on that note, there was a serious issue I raised during the debate on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act last year around taxi and private hire vehicles, where the ability of many private hire vehicles to be licensed in any authority in the country yet operate far away from the authority which licenses them, is creating an environment which allows shopping around for lower standards affecting passenger safety, as well as driver security, and penalising those drivers who do the right thing and register where they actually work.

We've started to tackle this issue through the national minimum standards being brought in through that act, and I'm pleased to now see in this King's speech measures to go further, the taxi and private hire vehicle Bill announced in His Majesty's speech will specifically deliver on the recommendations of the Casey Report on child sexual exploitation and abuse, such as clear licensing requirements and stronger, more consistent enforcement powers. That will be a real positive for both passengers and drivers. I'm going to focus the remainder of my speech on the Regulating for Growth Bill, something I hope will have significant potential to support British business and innovation and make us much more competitive on the international stage, including in defence.

I'm pleased to see the government explicitly referenced this bill being used to enable better testing of next generation defence technology. Having a background in life sciences, I'm keenly aware of the ever faster progress our researchers are making in developing new drugs, therapies and medical technologies to fight disease. British science is often world leading and for good reason. But translating conceptual research into clinical trials and eventually into products and services is too difficult. That problem is going to increase as we move further into the world of personalised medicine, where we're using genetic data to create hyper specific therapies that will specifically target individual patients cancers.

This government led world first regulations last July to make access to these therapies easier once approved, allowing them to be manufactured closer to patients so they can be delivered far faster and save more lives. So the appetite is there, but the regulatory environment does need an overhaul. That's not an attack on regulators either. In my capacity as chair of the all party group known as the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee, the oldest APPG set up in 1939. I regularly engage with research scientists and professional bodies.

We had a very well attended discussion meeting as early as recently as Monday this week, and they often express a lot of support for our life sciences regulators, most of which get it fully back on the agenda and very much want to be facilitators rather than blockers. But there's too much fragmentation for that to work effectively, to name just a few regulators, we have the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulation Authority looking at safety and efficacy. The National Institute of Care Excellence examining cost effectiveness, the Health and Safety Executive examining hazardous substances and genetically modified organisms.

The Human Tissue Authority regulating human tissue use the Health Regulation Agency making assessments around ethics, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, which needs to sign off on some stem cell research projects, and the projects which require animal studies, need to go to the Animals in Science Regulation unit in the Home Office. That's not an exhaustive list, and I haven't even touched on the plethora of NHS bodies that have to give approval for data sharing and usage. Should research studies need that, as many do, these are all looking at different and important features.

But this is a crazy number of regulators. It isn't that we need to deregulate. Rather, we need to bring together regulators to streamline decisions without compromising on standards. And I do hope the government uses this bill to do that. The individual regulators usually have reasonable decision making timelines, though some are prone to delays. But in totality, having to get so many decisions slows down research and innovation enormously, particularly when researchers have to apply for clearance from them sequentially. In most cases, though, this government has taken the first steps to reduce that through a new combined pathway between Nice and MHRA.

Regulators often also ask for very similar information in slightly different formats and timetables. That's wasting time and money across industry and academia, from knowledgeable people who want to be cracking on actually doing their research. So why can't we have a single front door for approvals? There could be a unified approvals application process which collects all the relevant information in one go, so researchers can submit one application and then have the regulators work out which of them need to make decisions, ideally doing so in tandem rather than each waiting for the previous one.

We could, of course, also look to merge some of the regulators, and I would not object to that either, provided we can keep their expertise. So I'll be closely following how that legislation progresses.
17:14
Claire Young Portrait Claire Young MP (Thornbury and Yate, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Claire Young you, Madam Deputy >> Claire Young you, Madam Deputy Speaker, it's a privilege to speak. >> In this debate on defence and readiness. Like others, I'm disappointed with this government's delay in bringing forward the long promised Defence Readiness Bill, both because of what that means for the security of our nation and the implications for the hundreds of my constituents who work in the defence sector. I want to talk, however, about readiness more widely. The government is right that energy security is national Wilbur.

I remind Ministers, as I have done in previous debates, that any honest list of that Golden Age must include Oldbury. Oldbury sits in my constituency. It has a community that knows nuclear and a site ready for the next generation. But nuclear on the horizon does not help the constituents struggling with their bill. Today, energy prices are crippling households and the businesses that employ people. In the past two years, my. We've seen the loss of hundreds of manufacturing jobs in my constituency with the closure of the factory and Billington steelworks.

Remaining businesses tell me our energy prices are deterring them from expanding. Decisions taken in last session have made running a business harder, not easier, and there is little sign in the bills proposed of the government changing that you cannot build resilience in defence or in anything else. If you're hollowed out the industrial base that sustains it. Without local supply chains will be vulnerable to interference in our energy grid and other forms of parallel warfare. More needs to be done to ensure that we have a skilled workforce to support that industry.

Thornbury and Yate has no dedicated technical further education provision. Young people who want to train as electricians, welders, nuclear technicians, wind turbine engineers. It's a further education. College must travel out of the area, often by buses that do not run when they need them, and the South West Aerospace and Defence cluster on our doorstep, employing tens of thousands in skilled, well-paid jobs, stands ready to absorb local talent. We are not yet training the constituency that sits between a nuclear site, a tidal estuary and one of the country's largest aerospace and defence clusters, should be exactly the right place for fresh technical skills provision.

Put the clean energy jobs of the future in young people's hands and let them tackle the challenge from their own community. Industry needs infrastructure to support it too, whether that's investing in a permanent solution for the Severn, the old Severn Bridge, which which at the moment is not allowing HGVs over it, having a massive impact on hauliers, or whether that's investing in redevelopment of Yate station. In what is a closing window of opportunity as the adjacent land has become available.

I've raised this with the Prime Minister and I raise it again today, and I would welcome a meeting with the Prime Minister. And we also need resilience in our public services like education and health. I've spoken a lot in this House about issues, so I'll just I'll just say now on health, on NHS, my constituents are not waiting for structural reform. They are waiting for a GP appointment for an NHS dentist, taking new patients, and for elective procedures that would let them go back to work.

Structural reform is necessary, but it is not by itself sufficient. I urge Ministers to direct the savings visibly to our constituents. I will judge this government by results in my constituency. Can a young adult get a bus to a technical college and change a train for a clean energy job? Can a local business afford the energy bills, business rates and the tax costs to hire people? Can a constituent access to medical care they need when they need it? And can Oldbury be part of the Golden Age? This government has promised? Sadly, the government's proposals in the King's Speech represent more incrementalism at a moment that calls for seriousness, more fiddling around the edges with consequences not just for this government's reputation for my constituents, living standards and the security of the country.

We're all sent here to defend.
17:19
Amanda Martin Portrait Amanda Martin MP (Portsmouth North, Labour)
-
-
Amanda Martin. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. >> It's always a privilege to stand in this House and represent the people of Portsmouth, a proud naval city built on service, innovation and hard work. And as Portsmouth marks 100 years of city status and a city that is bidding to become the first or the next and first ever southern UK city of culture, there is a real sense of pride and ambition and resilience. Defence readiness isn't just about the hard, shiny stuff, it's about everything.

In Portsmouth, defence is not abstract Westminster debate. It's a part of our identity. It's in our dockyards, it's in our naval bases, our engineering firms, our supply chains, our communities and our homes. Generations of people in my city have helped defend this country and continue to do so today. But people in Portsmouth also know what happens when governments fail to back British industry properly. Under the Conservatives, Britain and Portsmouth, shipbuilding capacity was absolutely hollowed out, skills were lost and opportunities were missed, and too many communities like Portsmouth were left behind.

Despite the enormous contribution that they have made and can make to our national community. This. This decline does not happen overnight and reversing it will require long term commitment and serious investment. And. Madam Deputy Speaker. Tangible actions. That is why the second King's Speech of this Labour government matters. Yes, we have delivered real and lasting change for our armed forces community in the first two years, with the largest pay rises for armed forces in 22 years, with 9 billion investment to upgrade thousands of forces homes to make them fit for service personnel and their families.

Change. I've seen at first hand, and this, Madam Deputy Speaker, alongside a housing officer, every service family to improve the processes for repairs and updated rules that allow families to decorate how they wish and keep pets without seeking permission, go some way to giving back. We have established the Independent Armed Forces Commissioner with powers to investigate general service welfare matters. We've given new targeted retention measures to keep those with valuable experience in the forces, and we've expanded the early years childcare funding overseas to match the offer available in England.

We've invested in cadets and we continue to support specialist mental health and homelessness services, veterans and proudly. Madam Deputy Speaker, through my persistence, I've secured an Operation Valour Centre in my city. A lot has been done, but so much more is to do so. Madam Deputy Speaker Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hon. Lady, for a very, very strong speech and for for being a strong spokesperson for for the Navy and for the forces in particular, the hon. Lady referred to cadets in Northern Ireland. We have a very, very strong cadets, have a very, very strong cadets, and all they're really needing is a bit of extra money to ensure they bit of extra money to ensure they can recruit the extra cadets into the forces. For Northern Ireland, most of the work that those who.

The officers who are in charge, The officers who are in charge, they do things for a small fee or they do for a volunteer capacity. Does she agree that perhaps when it comes to the cadet forces, a lot more can be done for a lot less. And, but, but the the benefits and the dividends are incredibly great.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hon. Gentleman makes some valuable Points. Madam Deputy Speaker. This second King's Speech provides an second King's Speech provides an opportunity to go further, to continue to renew our contract and commitment to our armed forces, to strengthen British industry and ensure that defence investment delivers real benefits to communities like mine. Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome the comments Speaker, I welcome the comments from the Dunfermline and Dollar and the members as they outline Natos the members as they outline Natos necessity and the threats, both visible and invisible, we face as a country.

Because at a time when the world feels more uncertain and dangerous, working together, strengthening our armed forces and national resilience is not optional, and our commitment to NATO and closer working with our allies is crucial, and is the need for a public conversation about these threats and our priorities so that, like our Nordic allies, we can have these reasoned and sensible conversations in households, in schools and in community spaces. And we do not leave the internet in the right wing press to Scaremonger.

Madam Deputy Speaker, Portsmouth has a huge strength in defence, aerospace, maritime engineering and advanced manufacturing companies such as Portsmouth Aviation Accuracy International, Harwin and Griffin Marine are already delivering world class expertise and highly skilled jobs alongside Prime such as Airbus and BA systems. They demonstrate the depth and talent that exists in our city. I particularly welcome the new partnership with Airbus and Solent Growth Partnership, a collaboration to create the UKs first ever space and defence apprenticeship matching programme.

This new initiative ensures talented young people who narrowly miss out on the highly competitive Airbus. Apprenticeships are supported into alternative quality opportunities with local SMEs and in just two months, this has already begun to support 50 young people helping these young people gain the advanced skills needed for brilliant careers in defence. This is exactly the kind of workforce development we need more of, but if Britain is serious about defence readiness, then we must invest not only in equipment but in people, skills and industry.

Madam Deputy Speaker, Portsmouth has not always received the level investment it deserves, meaning that after decades of neglect, many local businesses want to see clearer signs that opportunity is coming their way. As a government, much work has been done to unlock defence, investment and opportunities for finance. But as my local businesses tell me, more needs to be done. We must have the defence investment plan we need, and we also need other opportunities for partnership and finance so that our SMEs can be agile and innovative in their resourcing, research and development and manufacturing.

And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I look forward to enabling and working with the Department and the Treasury to unlock this investment. Madam Deputy Speaker, I was really disappointed to see that none of the government's defence, manufacturing, construction colleges were awarded to Portsmouth or our surrounding area because our city has the industrial, heritage skills and base and defence experts to play leading roles in this. And I would like to explore with the department how we can access this opportunity further and close this gap. Portsmouth businesses do not want special treatment.

Portsmouth people do not want special treatment, just a fair chance to survive. And as a proud naval city, Portsmouth understands the sacrifices made by our armed forces, veterans and military families better than most. We also understand the enormous contribution made every day by the workers, engineers, apprenticeships and small businesses that help keep our country safe. Because one of the greatest strengths of Portsmouth is its people, and the way the people from all faiths and backgrounds stand together at a time when many faiths and communities have felt under attack or targeted by division and hatred.

We must continue to work together to protect tolerance, respect and community cohesion across my city and this country. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, as we begin this new session of Parliament, my focus remains solidly where it has always been working hard for Portsmouth North, championing local businesses and making sure our city plays a full and leading role in building a fairer, stronger and more secure United Kingdom. And as the Member of Parliament, I am going to pull every lever possible within this government to ensure that these are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not just words on a page, but tangible actions. Shockat Adam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shockat Adam. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to follow on from the very powerful speech by the the very powerful speech by the Member for Portsmouth North. I want to use my time to today to address to use my time to today to address the issues that matter to the defence of our country and its future from a very domestic perspective and touch upon, if I have time on the historical waste in the defence industry. Following on from what the former Health Secretary said, that sadly, around 50% of young people today say they will not defend our country.

The question is why? Is it because we do not? Is it because we do not
17:26
Shockat Adam Portrait Shockat Adam MP (Leicester South, Independent)
-
-
build a strong country by making poor people poorer, and we do not build a strong army from an unhealthy, undereducated, economically broken population? The economically broken population? The two things are not in competition. They are connected. There is an argument that has been made today argument that has been made today that we must sacrifice welfare for warfare, that strip the safety net to fund the military. But my to fund the military. But my argument is this the things that make people feel safe at home are exactly what makes us worth defending.

We talk endlessly about threats abroad, but the things that lead to instability like poverty, inequality, failed public services, communities left behind. Those are right here. Just this weekend, on Saturday at the allegedly Unite the Kingdom march, we saw rhetoric vile, Islamophobic shouts of organisers and speakers on stage calling for Muslims to be deported from this country and calling for Muslims from deported from this place where we sit, members of either party across the board were openly told to go back home despite being born and brought up here.

These are the things that are going to destroy our nation. These are the things that we really need to worry about. And also, before I proceed to address the other issues, I would like to also highlight the colossal waste of money in previous defence projects, because many people jump on the fact that defence must be spent again, as I mentioned at the at the sacrifice of our welfare, because that is such a waste of money. So I would just like to mention the Ajax armoured vehicle programme costing £5.5 billion.

It's still not ready and is running over a decade late. The Bowman Radio cost £2.5 billion 25 years late and still doesn't work properly, and the type 45 daring class destroyers are £1.5 billion over Budget and the majority are now maintained in a dock less than 15 years old. So I would like to speak about the economy and more specifically, with the businesses that sit at its heart. Small and medium sized enterprises are the backbone Madam Deputy Speaker of British prosperity.

In my constituency of Leicester South and as in constituencies across this country, the employers, the innovators, the anchor institutions of our high streets and industrial estates are being hammered with increased cost of living, whether that's energy and business rates, rises, increased costs to staffing budgets or national insurance contributions. Last year alone, the OBR found that National Insurance contributions caused a 2% hike in payroll costs for employers. While CEOs confidence has fallen more in recent years than during a pandemic. When this government talks a defence in its spending.

It must come from the bottom up. We must be investing in its future rather than piling costs onto our own businesses and thus allowing corporations to run riot. That's why it's been very pleasing to hear many members speak about apprenticeships, which are a perfect example of this, and I welcome any ambition to expand opportunities for young people. But warm words must be followed by structural change. University was once the most favoured destination for economic growth, but that is economically out of reach for many.

Still, the journey of apprenticeship is a renewed ticket to economic growth and to the skilled defence workforce this country urgently needs, including engineers, manufacturers and technicians. You cannot build frigates or maintain fighter jets with a generation left behind. I quickly want to turn now to an example that illustrates precisely what backing businesses ought to look like in practice, and where government procurement could fit in if it chooses to, to make a transformative difference. I've spoken to local textile business owners in Leicester, Madam Deputy Speaker, the city that used to clothe the world, the second richest country in Europe, at one stage because of its industry.

Unfortunately, it's on its knees now because contracts, instead of being given to young, hard working British entrepreneurs, are now given to foreign companies such as those in China, awarding defence uniform contracts to Chinese manufacturers in. Is not simply an economic error, but a strategic one. It creates a supply chain dependency on foreign nations. At the precise moment when the government is asking us to take defence seriously. Leicester's textile sector exists. The capability exists. The security case for buying British has never been stronger.

The NHS again is the largest employer in the country and one of the largest procurers of textiles. From uniforms to bedding and surgical gowns to staff clothing. The potential is enormous. A targeted commitment to NHS procurement from UK manufacturers and from Leicester. Manufacturers in particular, would not only support local jobs and local supply chains, it would reduce carbon emission from long distance shipping, strengthen our supply chain resilience and build exactly the kind of productive, skilled employment base that the government says it wants to create.

Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Doctor Peter Prinsley. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm very grateful to be making a contribution for a debate on the King's Speech. It touches on what, in my view, is the core foundation of the nation's future, which is defensive readiness. Now, I want to focus my remarks on what is a real focus my remarks on what is a real part of our national defence, and that is the defence of our democracy and the defence of our communities from hostile foreign influence.

Now, you might be forgiven for thinking that defence defensive readiness is about the quality of ships and aircraft and cyber systems and military capabilities, but it is also whether our elections are secure. Whether our public debate is protected, and whether communities in this country can live free from
17:32
Peter Prinsley Portrait Peter Prinsley MP (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket, Labour)
-
-
hatred and fear. Now, make no doubt that foreign interference is a threat. The Rycroft review made it threat. The Rycroft review made it clear that this country faces a persistent problem of foreign interests, seeking to exert interests, seeking to exert influence on, and to interfere in our politics. This should be a concern to every member of this House. Now, our elections are the foundations of our democracy. If foundations of our democracy. If hostile states can use online disinformation and covert influence to shape our political debate, they're attacking the public's right to decide the future of this country freely and fairly.

Now, I am proud that this government is right to strengthen political finance rules, including tighter requirements on company donations and measures aimed at preventing foreign actors using companies to influence UK politics. Some of this is well known. Millions of pounds from Thailand and the curious friendship between the Member for Great Yarmouth and the world's Great Yarmouth and the world's richest man. The CST, the Community Security Trust records anti-Semitic activity. This is now at record levels, and I did really welcome the eloquent speeches from the Member for Hemel Hempstead and the Member for Morley, who neither of whom are any longer in their seat.

Now, not every anti-Semitic incident is foreign directed, and it is clear that hostile foreign actors amplify hatred online and use this to further divide our society. And that is why the threat from Iran and the IRGC matters so much. The security Ministers stated that the UK has responded to 20 Iran backed plots since the start of 2022, presenting potentially lethal threats to British citizens and to UK residents. This clearly presents a foreign policy and domestic security issue, which I strongly believe this government must tackle head on.

So what can we do to ensure defensive readiness? We must ensure strong election security, strong action against foreign online interference and indeed robust protection for Jewish communities facing real and sustained threats. My constituents and communities across the country rightly expect the democracy to be protected and all their neighbours to be safe, and there is certainly. I thank my hon. Friend for taking

**** Possible New Speaker ****

intervention. He's making a trademark. Excellent and. Well thought out speech, which is what we come to expect from in this place. I wonder if he would take a moment, as I know he's a real champion of the BBC World real champion of the BBC World Service, just to mention the importance of the BBC World Service and the BBC monitoring service play in that soft power. That and the defence of our nation. I welcome defence of our nation. I welcome the Member for Harlow.

For his. I welcome his intervention and I do agree that the BBC World Service is almost the best example of our soft power in this country, and I welcome the extra investment that has been promised by this government to support the work of the world. I would very much like it to be much greater, and we will do all we can to support the World Service going forward. So what I have to say is that this duty that we have to protect democracy is an absolute sacred duty of this House.

And I don't think that this is this is a simple wish. I'm sure that this is something that we can all do. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sarah. Thank you. Deputy Speaker. I would like to extend my condolences to the family, friends and colleagues of Lance Bombardier, Ciara O'Sullivan, who Bombardier, Ciara O'Sullivan, who sadly died on Friday following an incident at the Royal Windsor Horse incident at the Royal Windsor Horse Show. Madam Deputy Speaker, it's a pleasure to follow the hon. Member pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Saint Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket and for his powerful speech, and I'm delighted to speak in this debate on the Gracious Speech.

Madam Deputy Speaker, rural Britain is home to nearly 10 million people. It produces our food and it is critical to delivering net zero and it's host to much of the infrastructure our defence depends on, from naval air stations and training estates, to sonar manufacturers and helicopter production lines, to the farms and energy networks that keep the country running. Rural Britain is not a backdrop to national defence, it is the backbone of it. Yet the
17:37
Sarah Dyke Portrait Sarah Dyke MP (Glastonbury and Somerton, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
rural economy is nearly 20% less productive than the national average. That gap is not and should average. That gap is not and should not remain inevitable. It is a product of policy choices, and those choices matter for defence readiness as much as they matter for growth. Madam Deputy Speaker Glastonbury and Somerton sits at the heart of Britain's defence industrial base. RNAs Yeovilton HMS Heron is home to the Fleet Air Heron is home to the Fleet Air ARM's wildcat and commando helicopter force in ten Tallis Designs and manufacturers, designs and manufacturers.

The sonar systems that are the eyes and ears of the Royal Navy's submarine fleet, and was awarded a 1.85 billion contract to contract two years ago to keep doing so for another 15 years. The constituency is also home to companies important to the defence supply chain like needles and pins. Aerospace Aerospace, based in Somerton that provides precision textile engineering for aviation and defence. And just over the border, of course, in the constituency of my right and my hon. Friend, the Member for Yeovil.

Leonardo Helicopters employs around 3300 people, many of whom live in my constituency. Now, Leonardo is the UK's only end to end rotary wing manufacturer, and I welcome the new medium helicopter contract that was finally awarded in March. But the path to that decision should worry every member of this House. This is no way to run a defence industrial strategy. The Defence Investment Plan was promised in autumn 2025. It's now May 2026 and the delay has created a credibility issue with industry and with our allies.

Madam Deputy Speaker, releasing a plan is not the same as funding or delivering one. The Liberal Democrats have been clear this government must commit to 3% of GDP on defence by 2030, and we have called for cross-party talks to agree the route to get there. We have also proposed a £20 billion defence bond programme to kick start investment in the capital intensive assets. The Strategic Defence Review, identified because the IFS itself, suggests that borrowing to invest in defence can support economic growth, particularly when spending is investment heavy and we must restart negotiations to rejoin the EU's 150 billion safe re-armament programme.

So British defence firms, including those in Somerset and the southwest, can compete for European contracts and the UK can play its full part in collective European rearmament. Defence readiness also depends on how we treat those who serve as chair of the Women in Defence APPG. I believe it is crucial that we see at least 30% female representation across the defence enterprise by 2030. Last night we held our summer reception, which was well attended by hon. Members and armed forces in our Armed Forces and the wider defence community.

Now, in conversation with the Managing Director of MP aerospace, I was shocked to learn that women are 7% more vulnerable than their male counterparts on the front line, simply because they are wearing body armour that doesn't fit. The Ministry of Defence has said they could deliver new armour plates from 2029, but Madam Deputy Speaker this can't come soon enough. Yeah, we are increasingly at risk to international and geopolitical shocks, rising prices and food chain disruption. The obvious solution is to incentivise farmers to grow enough food here at home, you would think.

But yet England is the only country in Europe that doesn't financially support farmers to produce food Simon Hoare food production and innovation in the food and drink sector. The admission of a good food bill is a massive missed opportunity to back British farmers, improve public health. I won't. I'm afraid due to time and give our food system the long term framework. It badly needs. A national food strategy is needed now more than ever. Ignoring the largest British business sector is simply shortsighted and the rural economy cannot grow, whilst its largest sector is left without a plan.

So to conclude, Madam Deputy Speaker, defence readiness is not just about the front line, it's about whether the country behind the front line is resilient. Rural England is not a backdrop to national defence, it is a backbone. So if this government is serious about defence readiness, it must be serious about backing rural Britain, about backing British industry,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

about backing the men and women who serve our country. Here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here. Melanie Ward thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to speak in this debate in support of His Majesty's speech. I rise to to call for our government to take bolder action on many of the challenges that our country and indeed our world faces, the global instability world faces, the global instability that we are living through is of a scale not seen for decades. The power shifts are real now more than at any time since World War Two.

We must stand up and defend our values on the international stage. To do that, we need more hard power. Yes, much more. But we should protect and wield our soft power as well.
17:43
Melanie Ward Portrait Melanie Ward MP (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy, Labour)
-
-
After 14 years of Tory neglect, our government's commitment to defence investment is vital not only to our national security but also to communities like mine. In Fife, communities like mine. In Fife, from £340 million invested in Rosyth Dockyard to support for Rosyth Dockyard to support for methyl based Navantia. Now with 120 new jobs and 20 new apprenticeships, this investment is creating skilled this investment is creating skilled jobs and driving the local economy. It comes alongside a new government support package for defence sector SMEs such as Viper Applied Sciences in Aberdeen and Power Photonics in Dalgety Bay.

UK government backing is helping to strengthen our local economy for the future and after two decades of wilful neglect by the SNP on defence skills, Fife and Kirkcaldy in particular, also stands ready to play our part in rapidly scaling up the next generation of workers in the defence industry. We must heed warnings on the Defence Investment Plan and rapidly make this a reality, and I am sure the Defence Secretary will agree with that. And as we strengthen our nation's ability to protect our people, we must work with our allies and form new relationships, including stronger relations with our European allies and friends.

Our collective defence is a cause of utmost urgency, but so is the defence of our common values democracy, rule of law and human rights. Make no mistake, they are under attack. We must act faster to build the UK's national resilience to our country, and our people are not yet ready to face the kinds of turbulence and crises, even conflict, that may lie in our future. Comparable European nations are well ahead of us in building their resilience, and it is time to put this work on turbocharge here in the UK, as we build our hard power and our own resilience, it would be a mistake to allow our soft power to fall away.

Dartford, a proud achievement of the last Labour government is a body that we miss today. Amid so much conflict and global health crises, like the latest Ebola outbreak. As defence chief said this week, recent cuts to the aid Budget are a source of deep pain to many of us, but no one more so than the children going to bed hungry because of them. In north east Nigeria, where I once served as an aid worker, more than 1 million people affected by the conflict, with Boko Haram risk being cut off from food and nutrition support because of cuts to the World Food Programme.

What happens when the world cuts aid? At the time of more global conflict than any other time since World War Two, already displaced people will be further displaced. That is what they will migrate in search of survival.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will she give? I thank my colleague for giving way. She's making an informed and very well made speech. Does she agree with me made speech. Does she agree with me that as we we need to seek to look to how we can expand international aid to deliver for the world's aid to deliver for the world's poorest, but also to regain moral leadership and a crucial part, as was made by my hon. Friend and my friend from Harlow, that the BBC World Service, where those those frequencies have been taken over by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Russian and other anti-democratic nations, must be a key part in supporting that, not just in the future, but right now. My honourable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friend makes an excellent point about the importance of soft power and why it's such an important and why it's such an important complement to hard power. Madam Deputy Speaker, it has become common to say that the rules based common to say that the rules based order is dead or dying, but we must stand with our allies to preserve and defend all that was built to and defend all that was built to protect humanity from evil. In the ashes of two world wars and the ashes of two world wars and the Cold War, data shows that since 2012, there has been an increase in the number of countries where mass atrocity crimes are occurring and action is needed.

Let us remind ourselves that we are talking about genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. From Sudan to Sinjar, the most heinous crimes that exist, mass identity based violence. Where is the UK government's strategy to work with like minded countries to prevent this? There isn't one. We need to change that and fast. And doing so would be an obvious complement to the important work that the Foreign Secretary is doing on women and girls in Sudan, the United Nations and the International Criminal Court, two imperfect but vital institutions designed to protect and respond to humanity at its worst are under enormous pressure, not least from the US government, whose sanctions are designed to hobble the ICC.

Our government is supporting the UN and the ICC, but we should be making the case for them loudly and globally, and working with like minded allies to protect and defend their very existence. And it's time to act at the pace required by global events. The time for incremental micro-steps is over. We must act at a scale appropriate to the urgency of the moment we are in. On Iran, the government is doing the right thing on Ukraine. The government is doing the right thing.

But in Palestine and Lebanon, the world can see for itself what is happening. World experts say there has been genocide in Gaza. Israel continues to bomb and kill doctors, hospitals and aid workers in Gaza and Lebanon. Israeli settlers in the West Bank are trying to ethnically cleanse Palestinians

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with the support of their government. I will. Madam Deputy Speaker, my hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, my hon. Friend is making a really thought provoking contribution, and I also thank her for her leadership in this area of international aid this area of international aid before she came to this place. And now, while she is in it, will she agree with me that with Gaza agree with me that with Gaza specifically in mind, as the cameras have turned away, that we cannot. And as a British and UK cannot. And as a British and UK Labour government, we have a moral responsibility to continue to provide whatever medical assistance

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and expertise is required in that area. My hon. Friend is absolutely

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and as a doctor himself, I know how much he understands and feels this and the need for the world to do better and make change in this area, and stop just talking about making change. It is time for about making change. It is time for a much bolder action from our government to stand against what is happening and to influence events. Not more words, but more action. Comprehensive sanctions on Israeli officials who are responsible for human rights violations and denial of aid, a ban on settlement trade and outlawing British charities from funnelling money to settlements.

To start with, it is not good enough to say that it is difficult to do these things. Civilians need us to act and both history and the public are judging us now. Madam Deputy Speaker, incremental change does not cut it. In this time of massive global shifts, we must be bold in our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

global action, just as we must be here at home. Here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here. Paul Kohler Madam Speaker, and can I congratulate the Member for Cowdenbeath on her passionate and compassionate speech? There is much in the King's Speech I can support in the King's Speech I can support in principle, and we on these benches will engage constructively but not uncritically with its but not uncritically with its proposals. Too often, however, this government's instinct has been to prevaricate rather than to lead, and nowhere is that more apparent than its dithering over our relationship with Europe.

Any measure that rebuilds even a fraction of what the Member for Clacton undermined and the Conservatives demolished deserve support. And on those narrow terms, I welcome the European Partnership Bill. But let us be candid. The government is not proposing an
17:51
Paul Kohler Portrait Mr Paul Kohler MP (Wimbledon, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
ambitious reset. This is, at best tinkering, not the full bodied re-engagement that our economy desperately needs. And the public are demanding. The debate on this issue is too often conducted as issue is too often conducted as though opinion froze a decade ago, but the country has moved on, with two thirds of the public now two thirds of the public now favouring proper re-engagement with the EU. Sadly, the current Prime Minister has tied himself down with red lines that make that impossible, whilst the leading contender to take over from him has already U-turned on his EU commitments, along with his U-turns on proportional representation and the fiscal rules, Andy Burnham doesn't just turn and U-turn, he spins the National Bureau of Economic Research estimates that Brexit has reduced UK GDP by at least 6%, with business investment running nearly 20% lower than comparable economies and both employment and productivity down roughly 4%.

That is why I'm urging every Labour MP who wants to grow our economy and properly fund our armed services to vote for our amendment, which simply calls on their government to begin negotiating a new customs union with the EU. The world today bears little resemblance to the one in which Brexit was conceived. Putin's Russia is four years into a land war in Europe, has sent warships into British waters and poisoned British citizens on British soil. Whilst NATO is under threat from an American president who treats collective security as a transaction rather than a commitment.

The case for building our European partnerships, rather than forsaking them, has never been stronger. The new UK, EU Security and Defence Partnership is consequently welcome, but aspiration must be matched with urgent commitment. The threats gathering on our continent will not wait until Labour indulges in another psychodrama, like the ones that plagued the previous Tory government. The proposal to deepen cooperation with Europol, Frontex and the European Migration Network to combat people smuggling are overdue and welcome, while sharing biometric data, criminal records and intelligence on people smuggling gangs should never have ended, notwithstanding Brexit.

But we need to go further. The EU is transitioning to a new migration asylum pact and we, like other non-EU countries including Norway and Switzerland, should be involved in that arrangement. As my party's Northern Ireland spokesperson, I welcome the bill's provisions on simplifying food and plant movements between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. But let us not pretend the Windsor framework is delivered. The frictionless utopia that was promised despite the purported benefits of the green lane, nearly nearly 60% of businesses report challenges, and one 1 in 3 have ceased trading with the GB entirely.

The tensions come from the fact that Northern Ireland has advantage of access to EU single market or the rest of the UK does not, of course, and the only durable way to manage the complications that arise is to bring the rest of the UK into closer alignment with the EU. Finally, I'd like to turn to the conservative amendment. Whilst we support the need to increase defence spending and join them in calling for urgent publication of the delayed Defence Investment Plan, their cynical attempt amendment fails to reference the Tories own responsibility for the hollowing out of the armed forces, whilst their call to abandon the remedial order remedying defects in the Tories flawed Legacy Act disingenuously implies that veterans who served in Northern Ireland are currently protected, protected from prosecution, despite the fact the provisions in that act purport to confer such immunity were never brought into force and was subsequently declared unlawful by the UK courts.

So an ending can I ask the House to please vote for our amendment, but not the conservative one? Thank you.
17:55
Victoria Collins Portrait Victoria Collins MP (Harpenden and Berkhamsted, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Victoria Collins thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. During the last King's Speech, I delivered my maiden speech. In the two years since then, the world has changed dramatically. The global insecurity we face was always real. But now that insecurity has come to our shores, it's felt in our economy, in our homes, in our everyday lives, living in a global tinderbox. And the voters have spoken the local elections, they sent a clear message that they don't trust the current government to defend their interests, to create that resilience, stability and growth, which is key to our defence as a nation in Harpenden, Berkhamstead, Tring and our villages, families feel that instability every day, with many struggling to pay the bills, wondering how they're going to pay the fluctuating mortgage or the rent.

They see the high cost of childcare and worry about their children getting the right education or staying safe online, all while costs continue to rise, with parents like Louisa from Wheathampstead worried about getting their kids into the right school, her child has already been through failed placements with specific Sen needs, and she said it's only the specialist school where they feel safe, settled and able to learn. And then the younger generation look at this broken system and no wonder they question whether it's even pay into it.

Hannah, a sixth former from Harpenden, says I've never considered living here in the future because it's too expensive to buy a place to live, and the new build homes are nowhere near being genuinely affordable. At over half a million by even by the official definition, the older generation worked hard and they paid into the system have not got back what they were promised. One of my local constituents said I started work at 15, and the deal was that I would end at finish working at 60.

But then another said I've struggled with poverty and exhaustion and been told to carry on working until I was 66. I've been plagued with health issues ever since, and then the young and middle aged professionals are squeezed in the middle. The path laid out before them has shifted beneath their feet. They were told by the house, have kids. If you want to work in the job that you love, and you'd have more wealth and freedom than your parents did. But each generation now faces less wealth, less freedom, fewer opportunities.

And no wonder politics is being turned on its head, all while they scroll through a picture perfect world that falls apart at every news headline that comes out. The businesses in our communities, the backbone of our economy, are finding it harder, more expensive, and more challenging. Darren, who runs fair at 190 in Berkhamsted, a serial entrepreneur who knows what he's doing, is finding the costs and burdens unsustainable. He says that the continuing rise in staff costs is killing this sector, and goes on to say the government is driving experienced entrepreneurs away, quietly draining the UK of the people most likely to build higher and invest again.

Our communities feel again and again that they are done too, not worked with. And there's no greater example than the top down development plans that are completely undemocratic and bypass local communities. They understand the need for housing, but not on the scale that the infrastructure locally cannot handle. Lucy, from Tring, like many, share a genuine alert on the impact of our communities and our landscapes. Liz, from Redbourn says the legacy of this Labour government will see the death of our villages, the effect of wildlife on wildlife and chalk streams will be immense.

So for our communities, for our country, the time for action is now. This King's Speech could have been an opportunity to reset the direction of this country. Although I welcome tackling energy costs and sewage and ending the unfair residential leaseholds, they don't go far enough. Where is the urgent action to end the social care crisis? Where is the Good Food bill to back British farmers? Where's the commitment to spending 3% of GDP on defence by 2030? That vital part to keep our borders safe? Where is this digital sovereign strategy? Where is the Defence Readiness Bill and where is the ambitious EU reset Bill? We need desperately to grow our economy something to empower our communities, make us richer and safer.

This country is at a crossroads. Our current government isn't delivering. The two old parties are finished. The populists and extremists want to burn things down. Millions of people want change. That is about building things up. And this is the kind of positive change that the Liberal Democrats are offering. Change that brings people, communities and our country together, ready to face that international insecurity that rocks our borders. We believe in better, stronger trade, defence and defence relationship with Europe, one that truly delivers for Britain.

I believe in collaborative sovereignty, that values our resilience through prosperity, production and partnership. Backing British domestic strength while working with our allies to be stronger, whether through military sovereignty, digital sovereignty, energy sovereignty and food sovereignty, but being stronger as a nation to be stronger partners internationally. As politicians, we must turn again and again. We have to turn up in the messiness, but be honest about what needs to be done. And with that comes hope. Hope for a better future for growth and prosperity.

And so the time is now. The moment for us to be radically reasonable is now. It's time that the system worked for local people. And just as I closed in my maiden speech, I shared that my mother came to this country in search of opportunity. And through everything that I do here, I want to ensure that same opportunity is available for all who seek it. And so, Madam Deputy Speaker, that means a bolder vision for our Great Britain. And that needs to start now.
18:00
Steff Aquarone Portrait Steff Aquarone MP (North Norfolk, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Thank you. dedication to public service of all those who serve or have served, or support those in our armed forces and our wider defence industry? There are opportunities, as well as glaring omissions from what the government has put forward for this session. I'm certainly glad to see new legislation coming forwards in two of the biggest issues facing us in North Norfolk, getting our NHS back on its feet and getting sewage out of our rivers and seas. I hope the forthcoming health Bill will be another step towards rebuilding our NHS.

After the appalling damage done by successive conservative governments. I'm keen to see how the Bill can tackle some of the rural inequalities we face in North Norfolk, though, which aren't just about health access, they're also about health outcomes, and it's one reason we will not back down over Benjamin Court, a vital rehabilitation resource for people leaving hospital that was closed down by Norfolk County Council under the Conservatives. Elsewhere. I'm pleased that the clean Water Bill will be coming forward, but I do have serious worries that it will be yet another piece of weak, watered down legislation that doesn't place proper pain on water companies when they behave badly.

I've been delighted that our years of campaigning have helped secure £83 million of investment from Anglian Water, which has already brought down sewage spills by 95% in some parts of north Norfolk. But there is still much to do and I won't rest until sewage spills are a thing of the past. The government should also ensure that it takes steps to make our chalk streams, Unesco Natural Heritage sites and recognise and protect the unique character of chalk streams like the Glaven, the Stiffkey and the Bura in North Norfolk.

Moving on, the forthcoming education for All Bill will be cautiously welcomed by parents of children with SEND in Our area. It recognises that the system is broken and that it's failing schools, local authorities, parents and, most significantly, children. But many parents have told me they're worried about how the rights of their children will be affected and how access to adequate support will be guaranteed for them. The bill also needs to make sure that reform of the Send system ensures equal access for the whole country, and ends the continuing postcode lottery.

I've heard concerns from constituents about how underserved some of our coastal communities are, and how far young people have to travel just to get to a setting that suits their needs. I've also spoken to parents with primary school children who are worried about what's happening for them. Right now in our overstretched schools, they worry that these reforms will be too late for hundreds of Sen children who need help. Now. I'm also awaiting the Digital Access to Services bill with interest. The government missed a lot of opportunities, in my view, with last year's data bill, to legislate for a more data driven government, a government that's better at doing things digitally.

Part of this is actually about ensuring people who don't do things digitally can still access those services. And yet, just weeks after assuring me on the bill committee that existing legislation would cover this, they announced their ill fated digital ID pet project. So despite believing that digital transformation is a key ingredient to fixing what's broken in our country, I will be pushing them again, as I did last year, to enshrine in law a right to non-digital ID to protect the elderly and vulnerable people in North Norfolk, or those who simply don't want to use it.

There are still, frustratingly, some important omissions from the 35 bills put before us on defence readiness. I'm disappointed to see no concrete action on financial transparency in the overseas territories. Madam Deputy Speaker offshore tax havens are simply hiding places for dirty money, oligarch wealth, rogue states and corporations dodging their responsibilities while ordinary people pick up the bill. We know these gaps can be closed, so why isn't the government prepared to bring forward legislation to close them once and for all? Meanwhile, many young people are worried about how their careers will be impacted by I by AI and older, vulnerable people are worried about how criminals can misuse AI to defraud and scam them.

We have to keep up with the times. We have to ensure that AI is providing benefits to all, not just concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few select tech Barons and foreign states. The economy used to be powered mainly by people. Increasingly, it's being powered by software, and therefore it's increasingly regrettable that The King's Speech didn't make provision to begin to adapt the tax base to accommodate the hyper concentration of ownership of tech firms, starting with the digital services tax Madam Deputy Speaker.

It was clear to me from the thousands of doors I knocked on over the course of the local elections and the many, many emails I'm receiving every day, that change is not coming fast enough. People feel the government is dragging its feet, that the machinery of the state has little interest in actually delivering the radical change this country needs. There are green shoots in the programme from this government, but little more. I and my Liberal

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Democrat colleagues look forward to scrutinising, pushing and challenging the government to do session. Hear, hear.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hear, hear. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. Today we've been talking about defence readiness, and I commend those members of the armed forces and members of the armed forces and indeed, veterans who live or in based in my constituency of Melksham and advises. But, Madam Melksham and advises. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, our defence comes in various forms. Farming and food security were not mentioned in the King's speech, and this was surely a major omission. Madam Deputy Speaker, today I'm wearing a WaterAid tie that I was given 35 years ago when I started working with them in Tanzania.

Aid is a major part of our soft power. It not only helps to save lives and helps people withstand climate change, it allows us to stand tall for all the good things that we do around the world. And I'd be grateful if the Ministers can confirm that the UK aid will not be cut further to just 0.1% of GNI, this is doubly important now that the spectre of Ebola is haunting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Africa. Thank you. Which brings us to the front bench. Contribution. Shadow

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Ministers David Reed. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's an honour to wind up the final an honour to wind up the final debate on the King's Speech for His Majesty's loyal opposition. We have heard many sterling contributions from members across this House, and I will turn to some of those shortly. But I want to first pose once more the central question of this debate and ask every member to
18:07
David Reed Portrait David Reed MP (Exmouth and Exeter East, Conservative)
-
-
answer it honestly. Is our national answer it honestly. Is our national defence truly ready? Madam Deputy Speaker, my honest assessment is no, Speaker, my honest assessment is no, no it is not. War is no longer a matter of history. The international order which we have international order which we have all lived under is fracturing. War has broken out across multiple continents and rapid technological continents and rapid technological advancement and the accelerating consequences of climate change are compounding an already dangerous volatility.

The world is not as it was, and we cannot afford to govern as though it is now. While it's encouraging that so many members are engaging with this epoch defining issue, it is equally clear that there is a corrosive complacency at the heart of this government. And those are not my words, Madam Deputy Speaker. They belong to Lord Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary and former NATO secretary general and one of the most distinguished voices in this country's defence establishments. He did not use them lightly, and he directed them squarely at this Prime Minister and this Chancellor.

When a man of that stature speaks in those terms about his own party's governments, this House would do well to listen. More than that, Madam Deputy Speaker, there should be no politics in acknowledging the reality that stares us plainly in the face. Where the politics begins legitimately is in the harder questions, where the money comes from and how and what we choose to spend it on. Turning to the contributions that we've had, opening the batting was the chair of the Defence Select Committee, and I think we can all agree that he made quite a brave and powerful speech and laid bare the holes in the government's approach to defence in a constructive way, and I've seen him do that repeatedly as his work as chair, and it was good to see him wearing his rcds tie as well.

The right. My right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green, as to be expected, made a excellent speech and touched on the supply chain issues that we're seeing and reliance on China. Points that I'll come back to later in my remarks. The right hon. Member for Ilford North. He is no longer here, but it was quite intimidating looking before and seeing the Praetorian Guard in full force. He articulated the weighty issues we face as a country, and I seriously do hope that defence issues are front and centre of his coup d'état attempts.

My right hon. Friend the Member for South for South West Wiltshire illustrated lessons from World War Two and what we need to learn and act on without delay. Points that were reinforced by my right hon. Friend for New Forest, the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne. I think again, we can all agree that she's doing a fantastic job as trade envoy to Italy called out some of the supply chains that she's seeing in her work at the moment with Italy around GCap, and pointed out the government's dither regarding the slow release of the Defence investment plan.

We've also had other strong contributions from the hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby for Tunbridge Wells, for Southend East and Rochford, my right hon. Friend for Wetherby and Easingwold, for The Wrekin and for Gosport. The hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead. For Wolverhampton West. For Cheltenham. For Leeds South West and Morley Dunfermline and Dollar and my hon. Friends for South Shropshire and South West Devon. Many more contributions. Too many to mention, Madam Deputy Speaker, but it was great to see so many of my constituency neighbours from the South West and as the Ministers opposite has championed repeatedly, it is a region that will play a decisive role in our defence readiness going forward.

Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, like many in this House, I am utterly tired, if not bored, of asking when the Defence Investment plan will be published and I'm not even going to bother asking about the planned Defence readiness Bill. The government set their own deadline last autumn and ten months on, it's still nowhere to be seen now for the large prime contractors, those too big to fail. The calculation is simple they leverage their workforce and industrial base to force the government's hand.

But for smaller companies in the supply chain, the picture is far bleaker, with a meagre number of contracts being awarded. They are being starved of work and if they haven't already gone out of business, many are reaching the same conclusion. If you want to grow, you have to go and go. They will. Madam Deputy Speaker, the United States and European defence markets are rising to the moment, and companies and finance will follow the business. The government's indecision and delay is placing British defence at the back of the queue, at precisely the moment when the queue has never mattered more.

This leads me to challenge a phrase used too freely by defence Ministers sovereign capability. For many of the areas that we most want to excel. True sovereignty is a myth. Take artificial intelligence. The best AI needs the best chips. We do not own the means to production. Our options are either our American allies or China. Our. Madam Deputy Speaker, I know which one I choose. Take drones. The government talks a good game, but most small aerial drones systems depend on neodymium magnets, and China controls over 90% of global supply.

That's not a supply chain problem. It's a strategic vulnerability. What's truly in our national interest is to identify these dependencies, a point reinforced by the chair of the Defence Select Committee. I know this is work that his committee is looking at and swiftly partner with allies who can help help address them. I do not see that joined up work happening across government. That leads me to the structure of our public defence establishments. We have roughly 55,000 Ministry of Defence civil servants, and yet we recently struggled to deploy a single partially functional destroyer to protect our sovereign base area in Cyprus, a point that was expanded on by the Member for Tunbridge Wells.

Now, there are many fantastic civil servants in the Ministry of Defence, and I've had the privilege personally to work alongside a number of them. But I cannot believe that I'm alone in seeing the imbalance in that equation. Lastly, Madam Deputy Speaker, I turn to our service personnel and veterans at every UK training establishment. The law of armed conflict is rigorously instilled into every recruit and officer cadets, and that legal framework underpins a service person's conduct throughout their career and on operations.

And I speak with a lived experience as a former Royal Marine, where someone transgresses from those rules, they are investigated and if found guilty, the full weight of the law is brought to bear, and rightly so. However, the government must confront an uncomfortable truth by dragging veterans through the courts decades after the events, as will likely occur under the Government's Northern Ireland Troubles legislation, the process becomes the punishment indefinite legal jeopardy, with no discernible end cause a profound and lasting mental anguish.

And when we apply that same logic to serving personnel operating in unimaginably violent environments, hesitation in the heat of battle born of legal fear rather than military judgements, can cost lives. For most of us in this House, it's impossible to truly comprehend what that means. But we must try, and we owe it to the people that placed themselves in harm's way on our behalf to give them the assurance that this House has their back. Madam Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I want to extend the hand of cooperation to the government's and olive branch offered by the Leader of the Opposition and carelessly dismissed by the Prime Minister.

In this new era of geopolitical instability, we on this side of the House want to support the government in delivering the defence readiness this country deserves. Now, my hon. Friend the Shadow Secretary of State for defence has set out conservative proposals clearly, and we will continue to work on that, and I hope the government will receive them in the spirit in which they are intended. Madam Deputy Speaker, our country needs politicians who can rise to the moment. This is that moment.

And with that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish the government Godspeed in this new session, for it is not their party's fortune that depends on it, but our nation's security.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hear, hear. Before I call the Secretary of State and I appreciate I am State and I appreciate I am preaching to the choir because every member present is indeed present. But perhaps the message present. But perhaps the message could go back to colleagues who are not that. Page four of the Guide to not that. Page four of the Guide to Chamber Courtesies indicates that. Have you. If you have contributed to the debate, you must return for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to the debate, you must return for wind ups. Secretary of State. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can I begin by paying tribute to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I begin by paying tribute to Lance Bombardier? Chiara Sullivan of the King's Troop Royal Horse Artillery, who tragically died at Artillery, who tragically died at the Windsor Horse Show. She was a brilliant young soldier, and her brilliant young soldier, and her commanding officer described her as a fearless and gifted horsewoman. And I know the thoughts of the And I know the thoughts of the whole house will be with her family and her comrades as they come to terms with her loss.

Can I also start by paying tribute to our armed Forces personnel for their professionalism, their dedication? Because right now we have servicemen and women keeping us safe 24 over seven in the most difficult circumstances at home, under the sea and around the world. under the sea and around the world. In over 30 operations. Can I offer them our profound respect and our gratitude? Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a privilege to close Speaker. It's a privilege to close this gracious speech on behalf of the government
18:17
John Healey Portrait Rt Hon John Healey MP, The Secretary of State for Defence (Rawmarsh and Conisbrough, Labour)
-
-
Introduced at the special.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister. Set out. A legislative agenda to strengthen British Britain's economic, energy and national security. A decisive break from the security. A decisive break from the failed past. We are a government that will cut bills back. Workers that will cut bills back. Workers lift children out of poverty, reform the NHS, control borders, rebuild ties with Europe, rebuild ties with Europe, accelerate clean energy and invest in defence. Madam Deputy Speaker, over the five days of this King's Speech debate, we have had speeches from 297 members, 37 backbenchers in this debate this afternoon, and I had the privilege of opening this debate 22 months ago.

The last King's Speech debate I quoted then what the chief, the then chief of the Defence Staff said to me on my first day in this job when he said, you are taking on this role at the most extraordinary time in my 32, 35 years of service and events since have only reinforced that judgement. Putins aggression is growing across Europe, escalating his attacks in Ukraine, increasing air incursions into NATO airspace, reopening Cold War bases in the High North.

And only today I have revealed details of the dangerous interference with the RAF Rivet joint surveillance aircraft by two Russian jets over the Black Sea, an unarmed surveillance aircraft. And we have demolished the Russians over this totally unacceptable act. We have war in the Middle East. Madam Deputy Speaker, With Iranian airstrikes threatening British lives, British interests, British partner nations across the region and here at home, we have defended ourselves from Russian spy ships, subs in our wider waters.

And we do so daily in the face of cyber attacks. My hon. Friend the Member for Slough, who chairs the Defence Select Committee, said Russia is already operating in the grey zone. The right hon. Member for Chingford and Wood Green, the hon. Member for Wetherby and Easingwold, both said and I quote people do not know what threats we face. This world the Honourable right hon. Member said, is more dangerous now than it was in the Cold War. At the same time, of course, Madam Deputy Speaker, the US has rightly challenged European nations to step up to take on more responsibility for European security.

We are. We will further. And this, therefore, is an undeniable new era of threat that requires a new era for defence and. In the coming years we will ask more of our Armed Forces personnel and. It's only right that they expect more of their government and their nation. And we were elected on a promise to renew the nation's commitment to renew the nation's contract with those who serve and the families who support them. And through that bill, we are in part, delivering on that promise.

Extending the Armed Forces Covenant into full legal force, delivering better defence housing, providing better protections for those who serve through the reforms of the service justice system. And through this bill, we will bolster our readiness by bringing in new legal powers to bring down unidentified drones over UK military bases, and we will expand the pool of our British reserves. This was a forgive me. This was a point that my hon. Friend the Member for Southend and Rochford made so strongly a.

Reserve himself said the focus must be more fully on our reserves, and that is why we have made a commitment to grow our reserves by 20%. I give way to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Gentleman. I speak as a former member of the reserve, a reserve part time the reserve, a reserve part time soldier for 14.5 years back in the 70s through to the late 80s, and 70s through to the late 80s, and that time we were able to recruit plenty of reserves. Today, there seems to be a problem with recruiting reserves. I'm reminded recruiting reserves. I'm reminded of that 60 song. I'm old enough to remember the times they are changing, and we understand that what can be done more to ensure what can be done more to ensure that the reserves can get, can and do their role as a reserve soldier at the same time hold their jobs because that's really important to have your job and be able to do

**** Possible New Speaker ****

your reserve role as well. It is indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker, and the hon. Gentleman is Speaker, and the hon. Gentleman is right. We should pay tribute, we should support and we should welcome those employers that make it possible for their staff and it possible for their staff and their employees to serve as reservists. We do so in the civil service. There are many very good service. There are many very good commercial firms that do the same. We need more to do that.

We need more to serve as reservists, and we need to change the terms on which our reservists serve, which is why we are making the amendments in the Armed Forces Bill. Madam Deputy Speaker, Members from both sides, it is fair to say, urged on me questions about the publication of the Defence Investment Plan. The chair of the AC, DC, the Select Committee, did so. The member who spoke from the despatch box for the wind up for the opposition, the Member for Exmouth and Exeter East did so, as well as the shadow Defence Secretary.

I would say everybody wanted the dip published sooner, including me. The Prime Minister knows its importance. He's been clear to the liaison Committee that it is a personal priority. But I just say to the chamber, both sides, but particularly to the frontbench opposite, we have to get this right. The equipment programme, the procurement plan that we took on was over committed. It was underfunded. It was unsuited to the changing threats and battlefield conditions and defence.

Defence has not done a line by line assessment of the way it spends taxpayers money for nearly 20 years, and the last government made tens of billions of commitments that were not funded like the well, the shadow Defence Secretary is chuntering there. Let me let me use an example that he himself used a £10 billion munitions strategy, he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

announced, never developed, never published, never funded. No. And announced, of course, just

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And announced, of course, just weeks before the election. And of course, I'll give way. But these are the problems that we've got to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

are the problems that we've got to sort out. I'm very grateful that. One of the most critical. Issues in. Defence at the moment is the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Defence at the moment is the munitions position. Obviously, we didn't publish it, we weren't allowed to. It is a highly allowed to. It is a highly sensitive document. I cannot state what the figures were. We had a general election and we became the opposition. However, Madam Speaker, I'm being intervened on as I intervene. But just to be clear on the 14 years point, and I hope they agree on the other side, we gave a vast amount of munitions to Ukraine.

We did that to protect Europe so that we didn't end up with a situation where Russia conquered Ukraine early. It was the right thing to do, but it left massive gaps in the inventory, which we were filling. But we did. If we'd have become the government, we had a plan ready to go. It was funded by cutting the civil service. That's why they didn't like it. The way we were going to pay for it is something no Labour Party could

**** Possible New Speaker ****

agree with. Well, he's really admitted the House. Exactly what I was saying. House. Exactly what I was saying. This is a munitions strategy he announced weeks before the election. It was never developed. I tell you, It was never developed. I tell you, it was never funded. And you cannot defend the country with unfunded

**** Possible New Speaker ****

commitments and a big way. I'm very grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way. On the Defence Investment Plan in particular. I heard something this morning, Madam Deputy Speaker, which I could scarcely believe. And so I'd like the Secretary of State, if he could, to confirm or deny. And it is that neither the armed Forces Ministers nor the Veterans Ministers, notably the two military veterans on the MoD's ministerial team have actually seen the Defence

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Investment Plan. Would the. Secretary of State be able to confirm or deny that that is the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

case? Madam Deputy Speaker? I'm really proud to have the Ministers for proud to have the Ministers for veterans and people very proud to have the Ministers of Armed Forces as part of our defence team. We play different roles across the department and they make an extraordinary contribution to the defence of this nation. There there are briefings in the department. They play an exceptionally important part in the defence of our country. The defence team of this nation, and I'm proud that they are part of it.

And the Defence Investment Plan will be published shortly as we can settle it within government. There are critical, critical parts of the defence that feed into the defence plan. But Madam Deputy Speaker, I give one way and then I'll I'll make some progress.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank the Secretary of State for giving way on the Defence Investment Plan, if it's your priority. So here's priority. The Prime Minister's priority is it completed and just waiting for the financial sign off, or is there a gap in capability in being able to complete it?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

complete it? Madam Speaker, I'm not. This is a personal priority for the Prime a personal priority for the Prime Minister. We are working flat out to complete it. We will complete it and publish it soon. The whole of the defence team are making a contribution to its development. The contribution of the defence team stretches right across the defence effort. And I just say to the hon. Gentleman, this has not stopped us getting on with the job of government.

This has not stopped us letting more than 1200 major contracts since the election. Nearly 9 in 10 going to British based firms, creating British based jobs, and nearly 70% of these jobs, these investments, these contracts are beyond London and the south east. This is defence driving economic growth, lifting parts of the country right across the UK. And I say just in the last seven days, we've invested in and announced over £100 million in the new hybrid Navy to help with our deployment of the multinational mission to the Middle East to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, £1 billion contract for new mobile artillery for the Army, with steel made in Sheffield, artillery barrels made in Telford rapidly procured rapidly procured weapons for our typhoons so they can shoot down drones at lower cost.

And just yesterday I announced 13 contracts each of up to £4 million for small British defence tech firms, all of whom have the potential to become Britain's next defence unicorns. I will give. I'll give way to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

right hon. Gentleman, and then I will make some progress. I'm grateful to the right hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. He knows I have a huge regard for him. We go back quite a long way and therefore, what I'm long way and therefore, what I'm going to say to him now is, I hope, helpful to him and his defence team. Half of Poland is planning to spend Half of Poland is planning to spend 9% of GDP on defence. They're approaching 5% today from a standing start. Everybody in this House with an ounce of common sense wants the right hon.

Gentleman and his team to succeed and to get the money they require to increase our defences. But we're behind the curve. I'm not blaming him. I'm blaming other elements in government. So would he just use the opportunity to say to the government, here is the message. The House requires that we get the money, we publish the plan and we get on with making defence successful. The chairman of the committee said. So we all, on all sides want him to have it.

Please take this back to the Chancellor

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and say enough is enough. We have to do this for our security. Will he now do that? Well.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well. This we. Have to do this for our security. We will do this for our security. We will do this for our security. And in the meantime, we're getting on and doing what's necessary for Britain's security. I'm going to Britain's security. I'm going to I'm going to turn to I'm going to turn to some of the contributions in what was a very. I said 37 in what was a very. I said 37 backbenchers have spoken. I'm going to turn to some of the contributions now.

I'm going to start with the hon. Gentleman for South West Wiltshire, if I may. He urged us to reprovision our nuclear programme, and I just say to him, in this Parliament alone we are now putting in £15 billion into the warhead programme, £6 billion this Parliament into upgrading Barrow to produce submarines that we need. To my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle under. Upon Tyne in North. She talked rightly about the impact that defence skills have across the economy.

She talked also about the skills gaps that need to be filled, which is a central part of the Defence Excellence colleges, the defence growth deals and also the Defence Universities Alliance that we're putting in place. To my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby. He spoke really passionately about the work he's doing on the Food Security Commission. The testimony that he gave us from workers and from parents about the pressure they're under and the problems that creates, was really moving.

And we look forward to the commission's report. My hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd North. She also talked more widely than defence on the pressure on families. The action the government is now taking on rising costs, and she talked about the importance of the King's speech and legislation on railways and on housing for the future. My hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton West talked about the importance of resilience that runs through every aspect of our defence programme. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley and also for Hemel Hempstead both spoke very movingly and for the House on the scourge of antisemitism.

The need to stamp that out wherever it is, the threat of Iran and also the edge of threat that the EU poses to this country, as well as to their own people. My hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar. He asked for comments on Cobra and Estonia, and I say to him, I shall be out there in Estonia with our forward land force tomorrow, and perhaps he will forgive me. I'm probably going to give him a more up to date and informed comment.

If you'd like to wait until I come back, rather than I do the Dispatch Box today. The hon. Member, my friend from South East Cornwall. She talked about the important fact that our armed forces depend on the strength of the innovators, the strength of the industry that stands behind them. That's a lesson that we can draw from Ukraine, that when a country is under threat or forced to fight, it is its industry. It's its innovators and its wider society that must stand behind to give it the strength.

And she quite rightly. Forgive me for just finish this point. She quite rightly paid tribute to and reminded us about the civilian workforce that supports our uniformed personnel. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way. I'm grateful to the right hon. Gentleman on the point about Ukraine. We learned today about a delay to a ban on jet fuel and diesel made from Russian crude oil diesel made from Russian crude oil and refined in places like India and Turkey. Does he accept that the British people don't want to British people don't want to contribute one more rouble to the Kremlin for use in its war machine

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Kremlin for use in its war machine against the Ukrainian people? Yes. Madam Deputy Speaker, I rather regret giving way to him because he's not been in during the debate, and I clearly wasn't in for the statement either, when it was very clear. New new sanctions to clamp down on Russian oil and revenues and the licensing regime as a way of bringing those new sanctions in. And I would just urge him I would urge him to consult the record.

Now, I'm going to I'm going to I'm going to proceed. My hon. Friend for Macclesfield, and I pay tribute to his work and those of other members from different parties for their all party group on rearmament. He talked about the way that the locusts were busy on UK defence during those 14 conservative years, when they were hollowed out and underfunded, and the extent of the legacy that we now are recovering. And he quite rightly reminded us that defence isn't just a cost.

A spending for government defence is an investment. It's an engine for growth across the country. My hon. Friend the Member for Glenrothes and Mid Fife. He gave us a direct example of this with his metal shipyard. The fact that Labour, defence, investment and export wins have led to a transformation from what he described when he first became an MP as a bleak future to one that's been replaced now by a recruitment drive. That was a point that was echoed also by my hon.

Friend from Cowdenbeath and Cocody, and she quite rightly took the Scottish Nationalists to task for their repeated failure to be willing to invest in defence skills, skills that benefit our security skills, that benefit Scottish workers, skills that give opportunities to Scottish young people. My hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire, who's in his place there. He talked about the many military families in his area. He said quite rightly, we have to look after those who look after us.

And just as an aside, I've been campaigning for over a decade for exactly like his has a stronger licensing for taxi and private hire vehicles, and I welcome comments that he made entirely irrelevant to defence. Nevertheless, in this important debate, my hon. Friend for Portsmouth North spoke as the proud parent of a young forces member. She was quite right to say at the heart of our government commitment is the nation's commitment to those who serve, and I'm delighted to hear that she's been successful in Portsmouth in helping win part of the funding.

The £50 million behind the new network of veterans centres. My hon. Friend for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket quite rightly said, look, election security is linked to our national security. We're right to toughen up the rules over political funding. And then finally, just to say to the hon. Member for Wimbledon. I have to say where I live in Rotherham, no one's talking about the European Union. People have put Brexit behind them. Nevertheless, I welcome his welcome for the European Partnership, the European Partnership Bill.

But the last thing that people want is for us to set aside the manifesto they elected us on, and to plunge back into detailed institutional negotiations with the European Union. Can I come? I'll give way to him, and then I will make some

**** Possible New Speaker ****

progress. I thank you. For the Defence Secretary giving way. One of the defining features way. One of the defining features of this country's support for Ukraine has been cross party support. But where it's right to do so, I think it is right for His Majesty's opposition to call out Majesty's opposition to call out the government where we think they've got it wrong over the last 24 hours. I think the government 24 hours. I think the government has got it right and wrong.

I support the government in the new sanctions regime around third countries, where I do not support the government is in allowing temporary licences for the import of Russian jet fuel and diesel. Today in Ukraine, the bombs and missiles are falling. This country

**** Possible New Speaker ****

should have no part in funding any part of Putin's war machine. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, as the hon. Friend mentioned in the response to the urgent question, response to the urgent question, and I said earlier, these are steps to further sanctions, tightening sanctions and screwing down further sanctions and screwing down further Putin's ability to fund his illegal war in Ukraine. I'm going to turn war in Ukraine. I'm going to turn now to the question of spending on defence, mentioned, as he always does, by the right hon. Member for New Forest East, also by South Shropshire and by the hon.

Member for Lewes, from the Liberal Democrat frontbench. In that last debate on the King's Speech that I spoke at in 2024, I reaffirmed then this government's pledge in our manifesto to reach 2.5% of GDP on defence spending, 2.5% on defence spending by 2030 was urged on me then in that debate, throughout that debate, 16 times by the shadow Defence Secretary, we've done that. We've done that three years earlier than anyone expected. We put in place the biggest increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War.

We will spend more. We know we must. And I just say to the hon. Gentleman, the defence Budget this year is more than £11 billion greater than it was in the final year of his government. And in this debate, in this debate before Madam Deputy Speaker, I promise then the first of its kind strategic defence review, which we published as a vision for defending Britain, making it safer and more secure at home. I told the House then that we would step up our support for Ukraine.

We have provided more military assistance than ever before. We took on the leadership of Ukraine Defence Contact Group to support the fight. Today we have established and lead the coalition of the willing for Ukraine to secure the peace. Tomorrow. I pledged a new UK Germany defence agreement. Less than four months later. I signed that with Defence Ministers Pistorius in the Trinity House agreement and went on to sign deals with France, with Norway, with Turkey. And in that debate, I raised the scourge of dreadful military housing.

We went on within months to bring back into public ownership 36,000 homes that our military families live in. We have upgraded the worst 1000 before last Christmas, and already done another 250 since. And I said the morale of our service personnel then was at a record low. We since then awarded them the biggest pay rise for nearly two decades. Extended free childcare legislated for the first ever armed Forces commissioner to improve service life. And I say to my right hon.

Friend the Member for Ilford North. I missed him at Cabinet this week. He gave us a reflective speech. He's rightly proud of the government's record on rebuilding and reforming the NHS, but I trust he'll agree like he would argue in defence in in the NHS. I trust he would agree that in defence we have certainly not been treading water. Let me close, Madam Deputy Speaker, with the opening words of His Majesty the King last week an increasingly dangerous and volatile world threatens the UK.

Every element of the nation's energy, defence and economic security will be tested. Madam Deputy Speaker, every member of this House recognises that truth. We are a government committed to a decade of rising defence spending. We are a government committed to the readiness of our armed forces. We are a government committed to backing Britain's industry and its innovators. A government committed to making Britain safer, more secure at home and stronger abroad.
18:43
None Portrait Division
-

Yeah. >> The question is that the amendment be made, as many as are of that opinion say aye. Of the The question is that the amendment be made. As many as of that opinion say, are of the contrary. No, no. The tellers. For the eyes are Rebecca Smith and Lincoln Jopp. The Tellers for the noes, Stephen

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As As soon

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As soon as As soon as the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order! The eyes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The eyes. To the right 104. The Noes to the left 317.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right were. 104

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right were. 104 the noes to the left. 317 so the noes have it. The noes have it noes have it. The noes have it unlock. I call James MacCleary to unlock. I call James MacCleary to move. Amendment L formally. The question is that the amendment be made. As many as of that opinion say aye. I of the contrary. No, no. The question is that the amendment be made.

As many as of that opinion, say aye. Of the contrary. No, no. The tellers. For the eyes are Will Forster and Tessa Munt. The Tellers for the noes Stephen Morgan and Order, Order, order!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Ayes to the right 78.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Noes to the left 408.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Noes to the left 408. The ayes to the right were 78.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right were 78. The noes to the left 408 so the noes have it the noes have it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes have it the noes have it unlock. So don't go back. Please don't go back. The tissues.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The tissues. I call Richard Tice to move amendment P formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Move formally. The question is that the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the amendment be made as many as are of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary, no. no. Division. Clear The The question The question is The question is that The question is that the amendment be made. As many as are of that opinion, say I. Of the contrary. No, no. The tellers. For the eyes of James McMurdock and Sarah Pochin, the Tellers for the noes Stephen Morgan and Gregor

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. The ayes to the right. 104. The Noes to the left 316.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Noes to the left 316. The ayes to the right were. 104. The noes to the left 316. So the noes have it. The noes have it unlock.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lincoln are you telling on the next one?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is the original question that an Humble Address be presented to His Majesty as on the presented to His Majesty as on the Order Paper. As many as are of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary, The question is the original question that an Humble Address be presented to His Majesty as on the Order Paper. As many as are of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary, no. no. The tellers.

For the eyes are Gregor Poynton and Stephen Morgan. The Tellers for the noes Lincoln Jopp and Rebecca Smith.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order! The ayes to the right 307. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

nose, the left 171. The ayes to the right were. 307.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right were. 307. The noes to the left 171 so the ayes have it. The ayes have it ayes have it. The ayes have it unlock. Point of order Adnan Hussain.
19:37
Adnan Hussain Portrait Mr Adnan Hussain MP (Blackburn, Independent)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. On a point of order, videos are emerging of civilians, including British nationals, blindfolded, British nationals, blindfolded, bound, forced to the ground and crying out in what appears to be agony after Israel's interception of the global summer flotilla in international waters. Madam Deputy Speaker, these were ordinary people, ordinary people carrying aid to the starving and besieged population of Gaza, their crime refusing to sit back while the world watches genocide unfold live on our screens.

I met members of this flotilla team here in Parliament before they sailed. They were sincere, courageous people, driven to act because governments would not move by images of genocide. They chose

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to act. All 14 British nationals on board the order. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would get to the point of his point of order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

order. Adnan Hussain Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask I ask whether the government will summon the Israeli ambassador. Will it demand the ambassador. Will it demand the immediate release of those detained, including British nationals, and will it speak out in the face of such barbaric breaches of international law? So I ask you, Madam Deputy Speaker, what recourse is available to secure immediate answers from the government on the detention of British nationals and the action being taken to secure

**** Possible New Speaker ****

their release? Can I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point of order? As he will for his point of order? As he will know, this is not a matter for the chair, and he might have opportunity tomorrow to raise it opportunity tomorrow to raise it with the Leader of the House in business. Questions. But the government frontbench will have government frontbench will have heard his question, and I think it's best this evening that we move

**** Possible New Speaker ****

on. Point one. Point of order, Ayoub Khan.
19:39
19:40
19:41
None Portrait PETITIONS
-

>> Thank you, madam South Shropshire is the only county in Shropshire is the only county in England without a direct train service connecting us to London. I stand here today alongside my stand here today alongside my neighbours from Wrexham, Ruabon, Wolverhampton, South Shropshire, The Wrekin and Nuneaton who share The Wrekin and Nuneaton who share my request to reinstate the line that connects six underserved trains towns back to the capital. trains towns back to the capital. In total, over 10,000 people have signed this petition, 1436 on paper and 8741 signing a similar one online, demonstrating the strong public demand for the service.

As these are 10,000 fare paying passengers asking for a train. The petitioner, therefore, request that the House of Commons urges the government to support the proposal for a Wrexham Shropshire and Midlands Railway by encouraging the Office of Rail and Road and Network Rail to work constructively with the operator to enable the establishment of a new direct service between London, North Wales,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shropshire and the Midlands. Petition. Wrexham, Shropshire

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and Midlands Railway. Petition Charlie Dewhirst. Madam Deputy Speaker. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker. The proposed and rushed closure of the care unit at Bridlington Hospital in my constituency is deeply concerning and must not go ahead. It provides vital short stay rehabilitation close to home, especially for elderly residents, avoiding unnecessary travel to Scarborough or York for care or for relatives to visit. 5784 local residents have signed my petition in person and online against this closure. In light of Bridlington's rapidly growing population, especially the over 65 seconds, the petitioners request that the House of Commons urge the government to urgently instruct the Humber and North Yorkshire Integrated Care Board, and York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals Foundation Trust not to close the Bridlington Care Unit and further urge the government to work with the various health providers and the Bridlington Health Forum to, in fact, actively expand the range of services available at Bridlington.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah. Petition Yeah, yeah. Petition Bridlington Care Unit.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Care Unit. I beg to move that this House do now adjourn. The question is that this House
19:43
19:44
Graham Leadbitter Portrait Graham Leadbitter MP (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, Scottish National Party)
-
-
Number of members into a B. aware at the start, I'm going to say that I'm aware that there are around 15 members have asked to intervene on me in the course of this debate, which is quite a high number for an adjournment debate. There may be more who am unaware of. The Ministers has very kindly indicated that she is also very happy to take interventions. So if you feel like spreading the love, when you think I've had enough, then that would be very much

**** Possible New Speaker ****

appreciated. On that point.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On that point. First of all, can I commend the hon. Gentleman from West and Nairn and Strathspey for bringing this forward? I spoke to him beforehand forward? I spoke to him beforehand and I thought it'd be important to put on record. I've had 11 banks in my constituency of Strangford, and seeing the decline of banks in rural areas has been excessively worrying and frustrating. And whilst every bank has pulled out of a peninsula in Ards and has promised working hubs, the reality is that a member of staff in a room without even the facility to print the bank statement off a client is not accessible.

So does the hon. Member not agree that a hub must have a banking facility, as well as a post office, and make sure that there's not just a member of staff

**** Possible New Speaker ****

week. Yeah. Thank the hon. Member for that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank the hon. Member for that intervention. It's absolutely I agree with that. It's important that there are hubs that are open that there are hubs that are open for a reasonable period of time and accessible at different points of the day to, to different people with different needs. And this with different needs. And this important subject of banking hub criteria has been raised many times in this place and in Westminster Hall, and it is an issue that I have campaigned on since I was elected and during my time as a councillor and council leader in 2015, Moray West and Strathspey had 22 bank branches.

Just 11 years later, that has dropped to just six in the latest data from January this year, a 77% reduction. Six banks were almost 100 000 people living in the fifth largest constituency by geographical area in the UK, a constituency that takes around 2.5 hours to drive into end. The following bank branches have closed since 2020 in forest, the Bank of Scotland and TSB closed their branches in 2022 and The Wrekin Strathspey, the Bank of Scotland, closed the branch in Aviemore in 2024 and in Granton Spey, both the Bank of Scotland and the TSB closed branches in 2020 and 2021, whilst in Nairn, the TSB closed a branch in 2021 and most recently they lost their last bank in the town.

Link, the organisation, who monitor bank closures and who are tasked with determining where new shared services should be reported. The total number of bank closures across the UK as being 2237 closures since 2022. For the same period, 276 banking hubs have been recommended by link. In this modern age, with digital banking and websites and through apps, and where, frankly, fewer and fewer people are using physical bank branches. It is not a surprise to see these closures, but it is how we respond.

It is important there remain many vulnerable people and indeed certain types of businesses who still rely heavily on cash banking, and we cannot allow the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

them. The hon. Member. I am very grateful to him. In particular for for securing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In particular for for securing this debate and choosing this this topic, because he's so right that there are older people, vulnerable there are older people, vulnerable people who aren't able to get access to banking services as well as access to cash given high street as access to cash given high street bank closures. So does he share my view that with the government having introduced today a financial having introduced today a financial Services and Markets Bill in the other place, that this is a great opportunity for the government to consider how, in rural areas, those banking services can be provided, as well as access to cash.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank the hon. Member for his intervention. Absolutely agree with that, and I'm very pleased to see that Bill coming forward, as it will provide potential opportunities to to make progress opportunities to to make progress on this important issue. There is also the vital question of community sustainability. The loss community sustainability. The loss of banking services in rural communities makes it harder to attract people to live and work there. It also means that the loss there. It also means that the loss of local banking jobs that have long provided access to respected professional jobs, and the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

potential of a career in financial services. And in giving way. And he's rightly talking in his own constituency, in rural areas about the lack of banking access. But one of the things I noticed in my urban of the things I noticed in my urban constituency in Glasgow, particularly in areas like Castlemilk and Carnwadric, is that there is now a lack of banking there is now a lack of banking access even there. So it is particularly bad because some of those people don't have access to a car.

So I wonder if you'd agree

**** Possible New Speaker ****

car. So I wonder if you'd agree with me that banking hubs in urban areas are also important where those services aren't provided. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, certainly. And absolutely there are some areas where in particular, whether, you know, large estates in, in, in urban large estates in, in, in urban areas where you can see services disappearing simply because of how disappearing simply because of how people live their lives. And it's important that the state takes action to, you know, to try and protect those critical services protect those critical services that people access. I was a student in Glasgow, and, you know, I see lots of places where there are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

lots of places where there are banks that I used as a student that simply don't exist anymore. Yeah. Thank you sir.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the member. For giving way. I know it's an issue that he cares about very issue that he cares about very passionately. I am sure he and I have had issues of people who fear have had issues of people who fear they've been scammed and elderly people. And, you know, it's all very well going, going online and very well going, going online and saying, can we sort this out? But there's nothing like a face to face meeting. And somebody can say from meeting.

And somebody can say from the Bank of Scotland, Clydesdale Bank, know you're OK, or this is what we do. And that reassurance is not there. With all due respect online. And that is why I personally believe that face to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

face advice is hugely important. Yeah. Thank you for that. And yeah,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for that. And yeah, absolutely agree that that face to face, it's particularly for vulnerable people, but also for vulnerable people, but also for businesses who are maybe somebody who's maybe thinking about starting up in business, being able to talk to a community banker who can give to a community banker who can give them a little bit of advice about access to basic business services is really helpful. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is really helpful. Yeah. Thank you. Madam Speaker. The honourable. Gentleman has been very, very generous with his time and interventions and all these interventions. Does he agree with me that part of this is about fairness? Because without the access to the professional advice that you would get with the face to face banking, some businesses may not succeed as much as they should have done or be able to do so. In my own constituency, South West Hertfordshire, we've seen high streets being closed, but we've not yet been successful in getting a banking hub in an area like Abbots Langley, despite being a community

**** Possible New Speaker ****

demand for it, and I would argue, a need for it. Thank you again. A fantastic point and something that I'll come point and something that I'll come on to later in my remarks. It would be, hon. Gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be, hon. Gentleman. We'll leave him in peace. Then for a while. But for nine months I've been trying to get a banking hub in Ammanford, which is banking hub in Ammanford, which is a post-industrial town. Link have turned us down. We went to appeal. They turned us down again. But as They turned us down again. But as the hon. Gentleman agree that we need consistency in applying FCA guidance when all the elements seem to qualify that town for a banking hub.

But yet again they turn us down. There seems to be a lack of consistency on in applying in, in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in applying the rules. Really? Yeah. Thank you. Absolutely. That is consistency is absolutely That is consistency is absolutely vital. But actually flexibility within the criteria is also vital. And I'll come on to that as well. And I'll come on to that as well. It's frankly hard to stomach. I'll make a little bit of progress. It is frankly hard to stomach that. is frankly hard to stomach that. The big high street banks use the argument of increased digital banking to justify local bank closures, whilst building large, closures, whilst building large, centralised banking centres in our cities.

Surely the same argument can be applied to push workforce and management out to existing bank branches in local communities, and enable local workforce to carry out tasks on national functions such as mortgage services and business banking. Using the very same digital technology.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Member for giving way on that point that my hon. Member made in terms of the assessment from May by link, under under statute. Does he agree with me that the three mile radius that's been that's being used by link is totally inadequate when

**** Possible New Speaker ****

looking at rural areas like mine in Pembrokeshire? Yeah. Thank the hon. Member for that. And, you know, go back to the that. And, you know, go back to the point that I made that we're down to six bank branches in an area that takes 2.5 hours to drive around. That is that is simply just impossible to, to access those areas.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would you give way on that point? Yes, I thank him for giving way. And I think it's really interesting hearing about the sort of rural urban split. My constituency is very much urban fringe, and yet we very much urban fringe, and yet we are really struggling. We've been trying to get branches in Chertsey, Addlestone. We've had more in common, which just recently closed common, which just recently closed down. So just to say, I think this sounds like an issue which affects everyone in respect of Rurality, and thank him for taking forward

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this debate. Thank you. Thank you. After the election, the government said that it was working closely with industry to roll out 350 banking hubs, which is very welcome across the UK. And the banking sector has committed to deliver these hubs by the end of this Parliament. But that is not far off, just one for every two constituencies. And I think we need more and much better targets than that. What the hon. Gentleman give way. I am grateful to the hon.

Gentleman. Banking and cash hubs in Hornsea, Withernsea and now Hedon in my constituency are fantastic and really work well. But is the hon. Gentleman aware that Lloyds is the only major bank that doesn't allow the deposit of cheques at post offices and cash and banking hubs, and that that is damaging to the most vulnerable in our society and to their customers. And would he join me in calling on Lloyds to look at that again, to make sure that people can deposit those cheques, because apps and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

other approaches don't always meet the needs, particularly of elderly people. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. I would.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would. Consider that to be. Basic services that people should be able to access and be able to, to do so as close to their own community as they possibly can. I was perplexed to read in response I was perplexed to read in response to that question from November last year, that the government does not hold bank closure data at all, despite the figures that have despite the figures that have Tooting from link. That is concerning when it is considered alongside the policy of 350 banking hubs, as neither the government nor we who provide scrutiny can determine definitively how many closures have occurred and, by extension, how much damage requires to be mitigated.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I thank the hon. Gentleman for for giving me. We successfully for for giving me. We successfully managed to apply for an interim banking hub, a banking hub in banking hub, a banking hub in Kilsyth, where the interim banking hub opened opened only four weeks hub opened opened only four weeks ago. But what. And I've now ago. But what. And I've now completely lost. Lost the train of thought on that. But what. One of the grounds for having those those hubs was the closure of the Santander branch in.

In Cumbernauld. There was a push then to to say the nearest alternative is Santander branch in Kirkintilloch, six months after the Santander branch in Cumbernauld closed, notification was given that the Kirkintilloch branch would also close with the nearest. With the nearest facility being in Glasgow 25 miles away.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I think this gets to the heart of it. There's not really an understanding. It feels. It feels understanding. It feels. It feels to me, by either the regulators or by the banks themselves, of the impact that those closures and communities that are that would view themselves as being neighbours with each other and view themselves as being part of a wider community,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

as being part of a wider community, that the cumulative impact of that is really significant. Yes. We're talking about the rules. We know that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We know that. The banks have withdrawn from our communities. My market towns are Fakenham and Aylsham have had all the banks go apart from one nationwide. They say their answer to that is link. And yet the rules seem to say that market towns with that huge hinterland that they also serve are no are not sufficient to allow for banking services to be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

provided by our hubs. Does he agree with me that if those are the rules, those rules need to change? Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. And if we can turn to the the inadequacies of the current framework, and I'll try and make framework, and I'll try and make some progress here. Current criteria includes the number of remaining branches, the population size, the retail centre size, which size, the retail centre size, which is frankly ridiculous when some communities can be compact, whilst others can have a narrow spread over a greater distance, often over a greater distance, often constrained by physical landscape and infrastructure features such as rivers, railway lines, roads and, in some cases, in my own constituency at the foot of a mountain range.

Transport distance, public transport links, population vulnerability and existing cash services are also considered by link. It is, however, the lack of flexibility of those criteria that is the problem and the lack of cognisance of the wider geographic and population context, especially in areas like the north of Scotland. Whilst not in my constituency, friends in Kinross and Perthshire have noted that one of the criteria in their community failed on was the retail centre requirements, which they failed to meet because they are sandwiched between a walk and a motorway, meaning that the town can only realistically expand in two directions, resulting in smaller retail hubs rather than a bigger central area.

Surely the answer is not reclaiming the lock or moving the motorway to get support for banking facilities. Equally, the lack of progress on potential banking hubs in Granton, Lossiemouth, Nairn and Aviemore in one constituency tell me that the current criteria is simply not good enough for my constituents. Current population criteria ignores the needs of smaller hub towns in rural areas, bus and train services to even relatively close alternatives still require significant journey planning and indeed cost for people who had previously been able to access facilities within free walking distance.

What may seem like a relatively short distance can see a bus going off the most direct route into other communities en route to the destination, and the return journey certainly is not always available immediately, and concluding banking transactions in inclement weather, this process is even less appealing and in mid winter is frankly, deeply concerning that elderly people may be waiting for buses in temperatures well below zero. And this is very common through the winter months in the Cairngorms area, where several of these communities are located.

Just looking at some specific examples, the lack of banking facilities in Lossiemouth means that many businesses have to rely on services in Elgin, which is 5 to 6 miles away. While this may not sound like a significant distance travel times, paid parking and the impact of those repeat journeys to Elgin on smaller businesses workforces poses severe problems for Lossiemouth based customers. For the towns of Newton, Woking UK and Avonmore, the banks have all closed. The closest is in Inverness, which is up to an hour's drive away across a distance of 30 to 45 miles.

This is especially concerning as Aviemore is the UK's principal ski resort, but locals and visitors alike do not have a bank to use. A banking hub would be a great way to boost local economy, which is very reliant on tourism and hospitality. Traditionally a more cash reliant part of the economy for granting a market town. The nearest post office banking service is now a 30 minute drive away in forest, a road with snow gates and snow poles. And I can assure members that that they are very necessary.

On numerous occasions over the winter. Banking hub would reduce journey times, costs and banking uncertainty for residents. And in another busy town, with significant tourism and approaching a ten 000 population much higher than the summer tourism population added there are no more banks in the town. Alternatives are Dan Norris in Inverness and neither of which can be reasonably travelled there and back on public transport, plus transacting banking business in under two hours. Finally, I would like to point to an area not related to access to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

cash, but instead the other critical services offered by banks to banking hubs. I thank the honourable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable. Member, is being incredibly generous with his time, and I share his frustration that from the northern parts of Scotland to the northern parts of Scotland to the south coast of Southampton, the criteria is completely inadequate. criteria is completely inadequate. In fact, link put in its assessment for the bittern application bus for the bittern application bus times, which simply didn't exist on any timetable anywhere. So would you agree with me that when banks have been removed, an assessment of access to cash is entirely the wrong answer to the question? Does he welcome, as I do, the government's review, and does he share my hope that what will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

actually get to is an adequate, effective tool to assess the lack of banking services? Yeah, absolutely.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, absolutely. And I'm just moving on to the critical services offered by banks through banking hubs, which kind of deals with that point. Community bankers located within banking hubs can offer much needed savings, loan can offer much needed savings, loan and mortgage advice. Recently, a local community leader in Granton made the very strong point that basic business support collecting change, depositing, withdrawing cash, transferring money between business accounts, making payments, managing cards, fraud support and money advice, and even offering simple advice on how to open a business bank account can be the difference between a business thriving and a business failing in a rural community, paying utility bills, depositing checks and for local charitable groups, even depositing the proceeds from a coffee morning or a raffle stall at a Highland games can make the difference between succeeding or struggling.

The golden thread in all this is that without banking hubs in the areas that need them, current policy is making it harder for people to buy their own homes, to run their own businesses, and even to simply to access cash. I am pleased to acknowledge the government's announcement last week of an independent Access to Cash review, which will report on October 2026. I would have liked to have been done in by now, but now it is in place. I do not want to be churlish or grumpy about it.

I know that those engaged in that review will be paying close attention to debates like this, and I am sure that they will have noted, in particular, the number of cross-party representatives that are contributing to this debate and making their views and the views of their communities known on this important issue. It is important that the regulators hear that breadth of opinion. It is important that the independent reviewer hears that breadth of opinion, and that informs the response to the review.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. For one further example, giving way. For one further example, that I hope the review will consider. Lloyds Bank will next consider. Lloyds Bank will next month close the last existing bank in Kingswinford and South Staffordshire, leaving all of my Staffordshire, leaving all of my constituents, whether urban or rural, without a proper bank. But rural, without a proper bank. But all of those villages are not eligible for banking hubs because of the presence of building societies, sometimes part part time building sites within the villages.

Torsten Bell gentlemen agree with me that whilst our building societies do a fantastic service, they don't provide the range of services that my constituents and particularly small businesses need.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

They could be offered through a banking hub. Yeah, absolutely. And again, I go back to that point I made about the community leader that made the point about the, the, the business services, basic business advice without them having to travel literally dozens of miles to try and access that when setting up a and access that when setting up a business is hard at the best of times. And, you know, having simple access to have simple questions access to have simple questions answered is really, really important.

In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, in this 12 minute speech that's now lasted 20 banking hubs would make a massive difference to communities like Lossiemouth, Granton, Aviemore and Nairn and many other communities that members across the House have mentioned in this debate, and I trust the Ministers will recognise the firm but constructive approach that myself and other members have taken on this important issue.
20:03
Rachel Blake Portrait Rachel Blake MP, The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Cities of London and Westminster, Labour )
-
-
Ministers Rachel Blake. and I am grateful to the hon. Member for Moray, West, Nairn and Strathspey for securing this debate and setting out the concerns of not just his constituents, but also, as he has made so clear, the number of people who are in the chamber this evening who want to talk about this topic. I congratulate him on gathering people from across the country and across all different political persuasions to talk about access to banking services. This is an important issue, and I know how much it matters to people that they can get these access to banking services.

I'd like to start by acknowledging the important work of my predecessor, the hon. Member for Northampton North, on this issue, particularly in relation to the announcement of the independent review on access to banking services and the Financial Services and Markets Bill, which was introduced yesterday, and which I will return to later in my speech. In fact, I will probably be referring most interventions to the access to banking services review.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. Interventions. Can I can I thank the Ministers? Can I also congratulate her and welcome her to congratulate her and welcome her to her place as well? I welcome this government's commitment to ensuring that people up and down the country that people up and down the country have access to banking services. In my constituency of Beckenham and Penge, Mr. Jignesh Patel has made Penge, Mr. Jignesh Patel has made an excellent application to open a banking hub in his post office in Anerley, with the support of local Labour councillors Crystal Palace Labour councillors Crystal Palace and Anna Turley and residents with an experienced team already handling sensitive financial transactions daily and existing infrastructure already in place, his post Office is fully equipped to deliver a banking hub with minimal disruption.

Does the Ministers agree with me that the application process must ensure that the merits of excellent applications, like Mr. Patel's are fully considered, giving him and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

others the best chance of success? I thank my hon. Friend for his

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for his thoughtful intervention, and I very much wish local businesses in his constituency all the best. These constituency all the best. These are decisions made by link, and the government does keep a very close eye on the assessment criteria. And

**** Possible New Speaker ****

eye on the assessment criteria. And I want to. The Ministers. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I just wanted to bring a little bit of good news to to the House on this point. I last month had the honour of cutting the ribbon on a new banking hub on Oxford Street in Ripley. It's a very important facility for my constituents, but it's actually the first of its kind in that it is run by Cash Access UK. It didn't go through it didn't go through the proceed through link. It was identified by Cash Access UK as being a site for it, and it's staffed entirely by Cash Access UK.

So there's a continuing continuing team involved there. So would the Ministers recognise the great achievement that Cash Access UK have done in my town, and recognise the importance of of banking hubs like that across the country? Hopefully.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I absolutely recognise the importance of banking hubs, as you have described, and I think the. have described, and I think the. She has described and I'm very grateful for her to her for grateful for her to her for highlighting the different models that are available. And I very much that are available. And I very much hope that she will submit some of that evidence and that case study in the access to Banking Services in the access to Banking Services review.

I was particularly struck by the reflections of hon. Members around the importance of banking services for those who are vulnerable, the importance of banking services in urban and rural communities, and how those services have been lost.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Ministers for giving way and I welcome her to her new role. So on criteria, I've pushed role. So on criteria, I've pushed for a banking hub in in Budleigh Salterton for a great deal of time. It was pushed back because of there It was pushed back because of there being a post office in the town. The post office was closed for ten weeks last year, and rural surrounding villages, places like East Budleigh, Otterton and Collison Crawley were starved of cash.

So will she meet with me to look at the criteria that Lincoln puts in place around post offices?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Suitability, see if we can get that overturned. I'd absolutely be happy to meet

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'd absolutely be happy to meet with him to to talk about this. And I hope to be meeting with members across the House about the access across the House about the access to banking services review. I just

**** Possible New Speaker ****

want to acknowledge to focus on. And thank I thank the Ministers for giving way, and I welcome her for giving way, and I welcome her to her place. My constituency was one of the lucky ones to be awarded a banking hub two years ago, and I worked with Access to Cash UK to secure a temporary place in the council library. Two years on, they have failed to secure an accessible permanent site and are refusing to to to to engage with myself.

Will the review also look into the delivery of these commitments by access access to cash? UK Ministers.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for this for your contribution. I hope that we can discuss it during the review.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we can discuss it during the review. I just again. I thank. The Ministers for giving way. I've had the pleasure of opening two banking hubs in Ruddington and Thorne. I've seen the success that they've brought to the area. But I they've brought to the area. But I also have the Isle of Axholme, which is a rural, rural area. And I think it's really, really important think it's really, really important that we have access to cash for financial inclusion, local businesses and the resilience of our rural communities.

Will the will the the piece of work that's going on take that into account.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He makes a number of really important points about access to banking services across a number of banking services across a number of different areas, and I'm grateful to him, and I hope that we can continue to discuss this. So I do continue to discuss this. So I do think we've got very little time

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now. So I just wanted to go. I'm grateful to the Ministers for giving way. Could she give my Pitlochry constituents some comfort that after the review, where I'm certain the review will find that the current criterion set out for like by the FCA is deeply flawed. It exists in a random form of abstract that bears no resemblance to the circumstances of local people. Will places like Pitlochry be able to revisit the flawed decisions of Lincoln the FCA?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I disagree, I think that he makes. He goes too far in his criticism of the criteria. I think criticism of the criteria. I think it is important that the government continues to monitor how these banking hubs are assessed and the need for them. I would just like to close by talking about I'm going to close by talking about I'm going to make a little bit of progress now because we haven't got much time. So despite the really important progress that we have heard earlier this evening about the number of banking hubs that have come forward, a commitment for 275 with 235 already delivered, it would be far too premature to conclude that all people and communities are receiving the support that they, in relation to their banking needs.

The decisions that are made to close bank branches are ultimately commercial decisions taken by banks and building societies, and reflect some of the changes in the way people choose to bank. So these shoes I got to finish now. So I would like to welcome the commitments from firms in maintaining or improving their existing branches, recognising just how important they are to their customers. For those firms changing their branch network, there are already some rules and obligations which I know they must take very seriously, but all members must know that those decisions must be taken with regard to the impact on customers and communities.

Let me just really underline that banks and building societies are expected to put appropriate alternatives in place ahead of closure, and where they fall short of those expectations, the FCA can and will ask for closures to be paused. I fully support these powers. I'm not going to give way and expect them to be used by the FCA where necessary. However, the government is concerned that although firms have been reshaping their branch networks in response to the customer demand, this may be creating particular challenges and that is why we have brought forward the review.

The government recognises how important it is that communities, such as those represented by the hon. Member for Moray, West, Nairn and Strathspey and many other members from all parts of the country, have sufficient access to cash and banking services. They are banks and building societies are a core part of the everyday economy. It is critical that communities have such sufficient access to these important services, and I'm sure that many members across the House agree, and I look forward to working with you on the access to Banking Services Review.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. The question is that this House

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this House do now adjourn as many as are of that opinion, say I the ayes have
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page