Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Bill

Jim Shannon Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 17th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

What a pleasure it is to speak in this debate. Speaking in a debate where there is no time limit attached to the speeches made is a rarity and an opportunity that we should all relish and take advantage of.

I must confess that when I saw the title of this Bill, the radical in me was excited. I thought that the Government were going to do something bold, visionary and different, but sadly that opportunity to do something different seems to have passed them by. Instead of listening to what the Chancellor has said about some of the great challenges that this country faces in balancing the books and ensuring that we have the ability to pay our way and make savings in government all the way from the top to the bottom, the Cabinet Office seems to have gone on a little jolly of its own. It has decided to do something completely different and expand the cost of doing government. That is not quite what the British public are asking for.

Before this debate, I thought I had best check my emails, because I was wondering when I last had a deluge of emails—or even one email—calling for more Cabinet Ministers, more Ministers of State or more Parliamentary Under-Secretaries of State. I searched my emails over the past month, and I could not find one. I searched over the past year, and I could not find one. I went all the way back over 16 years, desperately searching for an email calling for more Cabinet Ministers, more Ministers of State and more Parliamentary Under-Secretaries of State, and I found none whatsoever.

I am concerned for the health of this Government, who are having a few difficulties. Are they doing things that the public do not want? I do not think there is a great demand for more Ministers. I urge the Minister to look again at this legislation. I agree with one element of the Bill—that if a person is being asked to do a job, they should get a wage for it—but why not bring down the number of people who can be Ministers? Why not turn this Bill into a saving for the Government and the Treasury? That will earn the Minister great plaudits from No. 11. He will probably be hailed; he will probably be earmarked for promotion, so that he can get one of the reduced number of Secretary of State positions.

I question why, at this time, the Government are bringing forward legislation enabling them to expand the Government payroll. I remember that when I was Chief Whip, I would often be confronted with Members of Parliament who were quite willing to do a job without any pay as long as they were going to be called “Minister”. Admittedly, that was many years ago—maybe things have changed—but I worry about sending the message that we have found the time to pass legislation to pay more people to be Ministers. What the public want to hear is that the Government and this House are tackling the issues that impact their lives. They want to hear that this House is tackling the issues that will make a difference to their living standards, not those of Members of Parliament and Ministers.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

The right hon. Gentleman is waxing lyrical about the Bill, but the fact of the matter is that my constituents are facing an oil cost of over $100 a barrel, are paying more tax and having less money to spend, and are wondering how having more Ministers will make an ineffective Government more effective. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this only adds to the disconnect felt by people in the street—the ones telling me what is happening, what is going on and how we can make it better?

[Sir Gavin Williamson]

I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman. There is a disconnect between all the priorities and all the issues around the world and our wanting to pass legislation to create more ministerial offices.

I also understand and appreciate the challenges that the Prime Minister will face. I am sympathetic to his position, because he will be constantly badgered to make more Ministers, with more people wanting patronage and elevation. As my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) has pointed out, there is no upper limit to the number of Ministers, so if we are in this House in 10 years’ time, we will be having a debate about how there are another 15 Ministers who are unpaid. The Government Minister will be at the Dispatch Box, possibly trying to defend the idea of paying even more Ministers. We will have a creep, creep, creep of patronage, with ever more people going on to the Government payroll. I feel, and I fear, that that may weaken this House.

Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Monday 16th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

I can confirm to the House my previous answer about the process for his appointment, agrément, and the security vetting that then took place. For particular details, I will need to refer the hon. Member to the Foreign Office.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister for making himself available on every occasion that the House asks him to come along and answer questions. As each week passes, the attention on this matter is not diverted but intensified, and with each seeming redirection, the British public become even more dejected and less confident in the Government structures that are in place to hold staff and Ministers to the highest possible standard. Will the Chief Secretary outline what additional steps can be put in place to assure Members of this House and the British public that the current job application route has been completely shut down, and that political persuasion will cease to be the top qualifying criterion in Government employment shortlists?

[Darren Jones]

As I think I have said to the House before, the vast majority of people who apply to public service do so to serve the public and are honourable people who acknowledge and live the Nolan principles in every day of their work. What the Peter Mandelson example has shown—there have been others in the past—is that for all the rules in place that serve the majority well, there are still too many opportunities for those who wish to get around the rules. That is why the work that the Ethics and Integrity Commission is now doing will be vital in trying to prevent that from happening again.

Defending Democracy Taskforce

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 12th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

I am very sorry to hear about what happened to my hon. Friend. She is right to refer to the work that we are doing. We are strengthening the law in order to provide additional protections for Members and elected representatives. She makes a good point and poses a good challenge, and I know it will have been heard and agreed with across the House.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for his statement, and the Speaker’s Conference for bringing forward recommendations—they are really important. Operation Ford, which is mentioned on page 2 of the statement, will cover England, Scotland and Wales. Will he clarify why Northern Ireland is not included? Perhaps something else is in place, but I want to check.

During election campaigns, Members and their staff are often required to undertake extensive public-facing activities, including constituency events, door-to-door canvassing and campaigning, which can expose them to additional harassment or intimidation. What assessment has been made of the adequacy of the security arrangements and guidance to Members and their staff during election periods, and what role will the taskforce play in co-ordinating measures to mitigate the risks?

[Dan Jarvis]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, as I always am, and I am also grateful to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland for their attendance at the taskforce yesterday. With regard to Operation Ford, the devolved arrangements are slightly different in Northern Ireland, but I gave an assurance at yesterday’s meeting that where we can provide additional support to Northern Ireland, we would be happy to do so.

Public Body Data Collection: Sikh and Jewish Ethnicity

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Preet Kaur Gill (Birmingham Edgbaston) (Lab/Co-op)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Sikh and Jewish ethnicity data collection by public bodies.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I welcome my hon. Friend the Minister to her role. For more than 40 years, Sikhs and Jews have been recognised in law as both ethnic and religious groups. That is long-established; it was confirmed by the 1983 Mandla v. Dowell-Lee judgment and reaffirmed by the Equality Act 2010. Yet, in practice, our systems still fail to acknowledge what the law clearly states.

Nearly six decades after racial discrimination laws were introduced, public bodies still do not collect ethnicity data on Sikhs and Jews. This is not a technical oversight; it is a structural problem with the way public bodies and our Government collect ethnicity data—one that prevents us from understanding inequality, recognising discrimination and properly protecting communities the law says we must protect.

In December 2024, I introduced my ten-minute rule Bill, the Public Body Ethnicity Data (Inclusion of Jewish and Sikh Categories) Bill. The Bill provides that where a public body collects data about ethnicity for the purpose of delivering public services, it must include specific Sikh and Jewish categories as options for a person’s ethnic group. This is about how the United Kingdom delivers its public services; it is not a theological discussion, as the Office for National Statistics has told all public bodies that they can use only—this is really important—the current ethnicity data categories for service delivery.

Time and again, national reviews have shown that Sikhs and Jews are missing from the datasets that shape decisions about public services. In 2018, the Women and Equalities Committee heard that the Government’s race disparity audit had identified around 340 datasets across Government, yet not one included data on Sikhs. My own written parliamentary questions have revealed that Government Departments do not collect ethnicity data on Sikhs and Jews.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady on all that she does on behalf of the Sikh community. I am very happy that we have developed a friendship over the years through freedom of religious belief and that we are able to stand together for each other, and that is something that always encourages me.

Does the hon. Lady agree that although Sikh and Jewish people are legally recognised as ethnic groups under the Equality Act 2010, current public data collection often reduces them solely to a religion, which is wrong? Does she agree that Jewish and Sikh people, and other minority communities, face both subtle and overt forms of discrimination, and that it is therefore imperative that public bodies collect accurate ethnicity data? That would send a clear message that Sikh and Jewish people, and others, are valued, visible and protected in every part of this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right. We recognise the disproportionate financial strain on families with disabled children, who often face significantly higher costs for essentials. We heard that during the development of the child poverty strategy, through many of the children’s rights groups and other organisations that contributed to that work. Our child poverty strategy sets out a plan to lift over half a million children out of poverty by the end of this Parliament. Alongside that, we are taking specific steps to support children with additional needs, providing £200 million of investment to ensure that every Best Start family hub has a dedicated practitioner for children with special educational needs and disabilities.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for her answers, her positivity, and her commitment to making the necessary changes. When it comes to inequalities in the home, cases of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, and behavioural issues, are so much higher in number than they ever were in my day when I was a youngster—and that was not yesterday, by the way. Given the pressures of the lives we live today, what will be done to help those categories of children in particular?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising this area. It is why, through our SEND consultation that will cover England, we want to make sure that support is available to children much more quickly. Of course, formal diagnosis will continue to have an important role and families will seek that, but we should not be waiting for diagnosis to put in place the support that children need. That is why, through the big investment we are delivering in SEND—an extra £4 billion—we will make sure that children get the support when they need it and where they need it.

Digital ID: Public Consultation

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 10th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

It is not for me to advise other Members on how to please their constituents, but if the hon. Gentleman asked his constituents, “Would you like better public services that are easier to use?”, they would probably say, “Yes.”

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

There is a clear and growing concern across the United Kingdom, including with myself and my constituents, regarding digital ID. The general public seek firm assurances about their personal autonomy. The Chief Secretary is a very honourable man and very much liked in this Chamber, but he will know—as you know, Mr Speaker—that Revelation in the Holy Bible refers to the mark of the beast and 666. Is it the mark of the beast that we are looking at, or is it George Orwell’s 1984? I ask that question because 1.5 million people in Northern Ireland—74% of its population—have said that they do not want digital ID. If we do not want it and the people of the United Kingdom do not want it, for goodness’ sake do away with it.

[Mr Speaker]

Mr Shannon, you kept saying “you”. Am I the devil, or is it the Chief Secretary? [Laughter.]

Extreme Climate and Weather Events: National Resilience

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 10th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

I am a Cornish MP, and we are a people on the edge. With sea on three sides and cut off from England by a river and a precarious train line, we have become used to being at the centre of a world that is a long way from everyone else. That has made us resilient, independent and proud. But being at the edge of the country has meant that we are often at the sharp edge of climate change. We are closer to its effects, and the weather often hits us slap in the face, even on a normal day.

We know that extreme weather events are becoming more frequent, and 2025 was the warmest year on record. Four of the five warmest years since 1884 have occurred in the past five years, and the record for the highest UK annual mean temperature has been broken six times since 2000. Last year, the Met Office warned that the likelihood of experiencing temperatures above 40° is now 20 times greater than it was in just the 1960s. In the summer, hosepipe bans are now common, and we had one in Cornwall, despite our copious rainfall, that went on for months and into the autumn of 2023. This winter was also the duchy’s wettest since records began in 1836. Cardinham had 55 consecutive wet days, and we were battered by three storms in quick succession: Goretti, Ingrid and Chandra.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I congratulate the hon. Lady on bringing forward the debate. She is right to refer to the terrible weather we have had. Before Christmas, I think we had 43 days in Northern Ireland when there was no sunshine. Flooding incidents are not just happening in her constituency; they are also happening across Northern Ireland, in Fermanagh, Down and Armagh. Defences and embankments are under strain, and some areas remain vulnerable despite ongoing monitoring and mitigation. Some watercourses, such as the Newry canal and the Shimna river, have even burst their banks in times of extreme storms and rainfall. Does she agree that we must prioritise investment in river embankments and flood defences and ensure that high-risk areas receive immediate attention—the very thing that she and all of us in this Chamber want?

[Jayne Kirkham]

I agree with the hon. Member. We must prioritise flooding, which is becoming more and more of a risk. Every week when I get on the train—which has often been a bus—from Cornwall to London, I see what looks like a lake or sea, but it is in fact the Somerset levels submerged under floodwater.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 5th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

Yes, absolutely. Historical perspective improves the work of Government—100%. The programme began in 1908. It was concentrated then on naval and military matters. It was expanded by Harold Wilson in 1966 to look at peacetime matters as well. I certainly will update the House on the commissioning of new works.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

When we go to get tickets on a Wednesday for PMQs, we see the story of the suffragette movement on the walls. What assessment has the Minister made of the importance of teaching the women’s suffrage movement as a compulsory component of the Official History Programme, particularly given its role in advancing democratic participation and strengthening pupils’ understanding of civic rights and responsibilities, such as voting?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman on the importance of teaching the campaign for women’s suffrage. I should also update him, seeing as he has asked the question, that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is overseeing a significant history project akin to the Official History Programme covering the period of the troubles.

China: Foreign Interference Arrests

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 4th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

On the hon. Gentleman’s first point, he will understand that membership of a Select Committee is not a matter for the Government, but Mr Speaker will have heard the point he raised, as have I. On his second point, he will understand that we are dealing with events that took place a couple of hours ago. I have not seen what is being reported online, because I have obviously been here, but I will give consideration to the matter he has raised.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his answers. Nobody in this House doubts his commitment to finding answers to ensure that the truth is out and justice is done—I thank him for that; everybody respects it. I highlighted when my constituents raised surveillance by the Chinese Communist party in my constituency, and when the website of the all-party group for international freedom of religion or belief, which I chair, was hacked, and information that highlighted human rights abuses and persecution in China was removed. The Minister has outlined clearly what will happen on the mainland, but Northern Ireland has a porous border with the Republic of Ireland. CCP authorities regularly cross the border going north and south with little or no checks, and its activities in the Republic of Ireland must be watched. What discussions has the Minister had to ensure that the Government of the Republic of Ireland, and the Garda Síochána, work collectively to thwart the CCP wherever it is, especially in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland?

[Dan Jarvis]

I am grateful to the hon. Member, as always, for his words about our commitment to these matters. I know he shares that commitment, and he has been a tireless champion for the freedom of people to practise their religion. He has raised some important points, and he will understand if I want to reflect on them more closely. We have a close working relationship with the Republic of Ireland, but I will look carefully at what he said and get back to him.

Middle East

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Monday 2nd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I have set out the decisions I made over the weekend and the reasons for them. My first duty is to protect British nationals; it is the most important duty that I have, and I will continue to discharge it.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement. Ayatollah Khamenei and his regime have denied religious minorities their freedom of religious belief for years—Christians, Sunnis, Shia’s and Baha’is. They killed 30,000 protesters in January 2026. Girls are abused and victimised regularly. Today the ayatollah is deservedly dead and burns in hell, and I for one put a shovel of coals on his head and hope his damnation will be a long one. The IRGC and the Basij paramilitary groups have the guns while the protesters have none, so what discussions has the Prime Minister had with the USA and Israel to destroy the murderous IRGC? And what discussions has he had with Madam Rajavi and the national Iranian Government in exile on their 10-point plan for a solution and a transparent way forward?

[The Prime Minister]

There are many discussions going on, as the hon. Gentleman will appreciate, and I understand his level of concern, particularly in relation to religious freedom. We are working with colleagues on those issues and I will update the House accordingly.