Lord Mandelson

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

Let me start by putting on record my horror at the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein, as so many hon. Members have done today. This man was a paedophile and a perpetrator of evil acts. The pain of the victims and their families is unimaginable. I wish to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Natalie Fleet) for her incredibly brave and powerful speech. My words cannot match hers, and I urge all colleagues who were not in the Chamber to take a look at that speech.

It is clear that the House is united in disdain for the actions of Lord Mandelson. It was always my intention to speak briefly this afternoon, and it was always my intention to talk about this as being an opportunity for the House to come together. It is unmistakeably the case that when we talk to our constituents, they often say, “Why don’t you talk to each other like human beings?”, “Why don’t you respect each other?”, “Why is this place so often a pantomime?” But that is not always the case, and today it absolutely has not been the case. We do respect each other. I have been here for 18 months, and I have the humility to say that I have much to learn about this place. I admire many people from all parts of the House. I will call out a few of them who have made speeches this afternoon: the hon. Member for North Dorset (Simon Hoare); the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry); the former Deputy Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner), who made an important intervention that I shall come to a little later; and the hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns), who made a number of interventions.

It is not just today that we have listened to each other. Indeed, we should listen to each other. Members who know me will know that I am a passionate pro-European. I define myself as a social democrat and an internationalist. Some will cheer, but others will not. One who probably would not—he is not in his place today—is the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith). There is not a huge amount on which we agree, but whenever he speaks on international affairs, I do my utmost to listen to him because of his experience in this House. Another Member who I am very surprised not to see in his place today is the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon).

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

He is in Westminster Hall.

[Andrew Lewin]

The only thing that matches his number of interventions in Westminster Hall is his decency as a man and a parliamentarian.

The focus today has rightly been on Mandelson. There is unity in contempt for his actions: his scandalous and brazen leaking of Government information, and the way in which he undermined the Government and his colleagues seemingly at every turn. His actions will offend every British citizen, every public servant and every Member of this House. That is why decisive action was needed, and it is why this afternoon’s debate is so important.

I wholeheartedly welcome the Government’s proposal to allow the Intelligence and Security Committee to determine which documents are to be released. I commend the courage not only of those who made that argument earlier today, not knowing whether they would be successful, but of the Government who accepted those recommendations.

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend has articulated very eloquently how we have come together in this House both to roundly condemn the role that Mandelson played in the corrupt web around Jeffrey Epstein and to say together that the full facts must be laid bare. I hope that he will join me in congratulating the Government on tabling a manuscript amendment proposing independent scrutiny by the ISC, so that it will oversee the disclosure of the appropriate documents.

[Andrew Lewin]

I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend. That is why I began my remarks by saying that this has been an important day for the House. I sincerely believe that we are collectively in a much better place now than when we started the debate.

[Gregory Stafford]

I thank the hon. Member for the tone of his speech. I agree with him about the need to use moderate language and be representatives of our constituents, but in addition to that, we are elected to this place—I would hope—because of our judgment and the trust of our electorate. Whatever the outcome of this debate and of these documents, we already know that the public knew, the media knew and our constituents knew—we all knew, and we discovered at about 12 o’clock today that the Prime Minister also knew —that Lord Mandelson had a close personal relationship with a convicted paedophile. Does the hon. Member think that the Prime Minister can still command the trust of this House and the public?

[Andrew Lewin]

There are unquestionably things that we did not know. I listened incredibly carefully to the Prime Minister during PMQs today, and he was clear. He made a personal statement that he has felt lied to at every single stage of the process. The precise reason why every Member of this House wants to see every single document published that possibly can be is to get to the bottom of that, but I believe the Prime Minister.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Andrew Lewin]

I will make some progress.

All of us in this House deserve the truth. Everyone in this country deserves the truth. Most importantly of all, so does every victim. Mandelson’s time in public life was a very dark chapter. It is the duty of this House to shine a light on it and to give the public the answers that they absolutely deserve.

US Department of Justice Release of Files

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

As I have repeatedly said, neither the Labour party nor this Government seek to defend Peter Mandelson, as the right hon. Lady implies. The Leader of the Opposition has herself called for Michelle Mone’s peerage to be removed. The point I make is that that cannot happen either, because the processes are not up to date in the House of Lords. It would be better to bring forward changes to ensure that the rules can be applied to all Members of the House of Lords in these circumstances, whether Peter Mandelson or Michelle Mone, and we stand ready to do so.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

I thank the Chief Secretary for coming to Parliament at the first opportunity to address this issue. Epstein’s crimes were vile, and I cannot begin to imagine how these latest revelations must have compounded the pain for all the women and girls who were victims. Many in this House have already spoken powerfully about our collective alarm at the revelations in the last few days of Government information being passed to Epstein in 2009. I fully support the decision to have an investigation, but, for public trust, will the Chief Secretary reassure me that the Cabinet Secretary will be given everything he needs so that his investigation may move at pace?

[Darren Jones]

I agree with my hon. Friend and again reiterate that if any Minister were found to be forwarding Government information in that way, they would be quickly removed from post under the rules that we have today and could be made subject to a recall petition in their constituencies by the House authorities. In respect of the Cabinet Secretary’s work, officials from the propriety and ethics team and elsewhere in the Cabinet Office are of course supporting his investigations in reviewing what documents are available in the archive, because the Prime Minister has made it very clear that he wishes the Cabinet Secretary to report back to him as a matter of urgency.

UK-EU Common Understanding Negotiations

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

The hon. Gentleman is very welcome to continue debating. While he is doing that, I will correct the iniquities in the previous deal every working day.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

It was Christmas eve five years ago when Boris Johnson signed his fateful deal, which took away opportunities for young people and kicked us out of Erasmus. I thank the Minister for exorcising that ghost of Christmas past. Does he agree that the message we have heard in the Chamber today is that the Conservative party wants to keep opportunities locked away from young people, that Reform cares so little it has not even shown up, and that those who want to extend opportunities for our young people need to back a Labour Government?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

One hundred per cent. It is this Labour Government who are delivering for our young people.

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Thursday 30th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

My hon. Friend is entirely correct. We will have a consultation and introduce a transparency mechanism, but we will also look very seriously at the recommendations that Tyrone Urch has made. We need to ensure that the speed of payments continues to increase, but also, as my hon. Friend says, that feedback from victims is at the heart of the process.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

In one of the first contributions I had the privilege of making in the House, I raised the case of the Blake family. Their son Stuart was infected aged six, and he died at the age of 27, back in 2006. I have been in regular contact with the family, and it was my privilege to show them around this place just a few weeks ago. I am sure the Minister and the House will understand that this has consumed their family for four decades, and they are still seeking reassurance about the urgency with which the Government are bringing forward payments, and about whether they will be made as quickly as possible. I am really encouraged by the statement. The family are eligible for the second interim payment, but I would be grateful if the Minister confirmed his personal commitment to bringing such cases to resolution as soon as possible.

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

My hon. Friend has previously spoken to me movingly about the experience of the Blake family, and it is exactly families with such experiences who are at the forefront of all our minds across the House as we drive this forward. I can of course give him a personal commitment that I will continue to do all I can to quicken even further the pace of the compensation payments.

UK-EU Summit

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

What is astonishing is that the Conservatives do not want to co-operate with the EU, India or the US. In fact, the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to diplomacy is to accuse the Indian Government of “fake news”. That is not a good basis for a relationship through which to negotiate a better outcome.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

We have learned a lot about trade policy in the House today. The Conservative party is still desperately defending its failed deal, and as for Reform, we had a no-show from the leader of the party of no deal. Labour is the only party that is serious about getting a good deal with the European Union. I congratulate the Prime Minister. Having campaigned for a youth mobility deal, I thank him for the agreement in principle, but ask him to go as fast as possible to ensure that our young people have the opportunity to travel and work in the European Union.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend. We will move at pace on all fronts. It is important that young people have those opportunities.

UK-EU Summit

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Tuesday 13th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

As this is a debate in the name of His Majesty’s Opposition, it is only right that I share some personal reflections on the record of the Conservative party when it was in government. I am feeling generous, Madam Deputy Speaker: I am sure the House will be pleased to know that this will be a brief speech. But I am also feeling generous because I want to begin with three simple and constructive suggestions for the Conservative party on its future approach to the European Union.

First, a good place to start would be by accepting that the Brexit deal signed in 2020 has done substantial damage to our economy. Fundamentally, it was a deal that put up barriers to trade. As the Office for Budget Responsibility concluded, the UK economy will be 4% smaller than previously expected. That means the country is on course to be £100 billion poorer than it otherwise would have been.

[Danny Kruger (East Wiltshire) (Con)]

It is not the first time that the 4% figure has been referenced. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it was based on the assumption that UK-EU trade would fall and there would therefore be a hit to our productivity? In fact, EU-UK trade has risen since Brexit, so the whole basis of that assumption is wrong. Will he please acknowledge that?

[Andrew Lewin]

It is curious, is it not? I have seen Conservative Front Benchers talking up the OBR when it is convenient, but in this case, when they do not agree with it, they decry it and say we must not listen to it.

Step one: it is time to accept that it was a deal that made the country poorer and it must be looked at again.

My second tip would be to apologise to the business community. He is no longer a Member of this House, so perhaps it is time to fully disown the former Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip. As well as saying sorry for his language towards the business community, it might be time to say sorry to the 60% of companies that told the British chambers of commerce that it has become harder for them to trade as a direct consequence of the deal that was signed.

The highlight of the shadow Minister’s speech was his reference to “Quantum Leap”. He talked fondly of it, but I think it is time to jump back into the present. My third piece of advice is, therefore, that the Conservative party should listen to more podcasts. I know for a fact that the shadow Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Central Devon (Sir Mel Stride) and the former Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash (Sir Jeremy Hunt) listen to a certain weekly political podcast featuring former Chancellor George Osborne. I know they listen to it, because I have heard the voice notes they submitted as questions in recent weeks and months. It is an excellent podcast, but I fear that while Conservative MPs are tuning in, they are not really listening. George Osborne could not be more clear: the European Union is our single biggest trading partner and if we are serious about growing the economy, it is time for a new and more ambitious deal. On this, he and his co-host Ed Balls are united, and they are absolutely right.

I am a pro-European and an internationalist. In my short time in this place, I have already had the opportunity to speak at greater length in other debates on why now is the time for a substantial reset in the relationship with our largest trading partner. Today, I will not revisit those arguments at length. But we are less than a week away from the UK-EU summit and I am very hopeful that we will see a comprehensive deal that makes progress on security, trade and a visa-based youth mobility scheme.

This is not 2016 or 2020. While the Conservative party in Parliament may want to replay the old debates, public opinion in the country has moved on. In an uncertain and volatile world, there is no more important relationship for the UK than the one with our closest neighbour and biggest trading partner. People want to see progress. They want to see a deal that makes a material difference to their lives. I am confident that is exactly what this Labour Government will deliver, starting with the summit next week.

Trade Negotiations

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Tuesday 6th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

May I add my congratulations to the Minister and everybody involved in getting this significant trade deal with what will soon be the biggest economy in the world over the line? In Welwyn Hatfield, we have a vibrant Indian diaspora, including my friend Councillor Pankit Shah, who, just over 20 years after moving to the UK, became our first ever British-Indian mayor of Welwyn Hatfield. He has served with distinction. Our close connection is principally due to the University of Hertfordshire in Hatfield, where thousands of students from India have studied, and continue to do so. Does my right hon. Friend agree that while today is a fantastic moment for trade, it is vital that we continue to have visa schemes that encourage Indian students to come and study in our country?

[Mr Alexander]

Let me echo my hon. Friend’s generous tribute to Councillor Pankit Shah, and many like him who have made an immense contribution to the United Kingdom, making us what we are today. That reflects the human bridge formed by 1.9 million people, and the human dynamic here, and students play a significant, valued role in that.

EU Trading Relationship

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Thursday 24th April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab) [R]]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the trading relationship with the EU.

I declare an interest as the chair of the UK Trade and Business Commission. I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate, and to colleagues on both sides of the House who supported the application.

It has never been so timely to talk trade, but before we look forward, we need to look back at how we arrived here. It has been 4,744 days since Prime Minister David Cameron promised the country a referendum on our future relationship with the European Union: in his words, a

“simple in or out choice”.

Ever since, the UK’s relationship with the European Union has been anything but simple.

In the decade that followed Cameron’s speech, successive Conservative Governments did everything in their power to distance the UK from our largest trading partner. In 2020, the trade and co-operation agreement was signed with an ideological zeal to diverge as much as possible from the EU. Agreed by the Conservatives and cheered on by Reform, it is a choice that we are all paying for. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, the barriers to trade that were put up by leaving the EU have set the UK economy on course to lose more than £100 billion over the medium term. The London School of Economics has found that the increased barriers to trade have left the average person paying £250 more every year on their food shop.

Repairing the UK’s trading relationship with the EU is all the more important given the dramatic change in the position of the United States. Our Government deserve praise for their calm and measured response to tariffs, but none of us can presume to know what the position of the White House will be in six days, let alone in six months. By contrast, it is certain that the EU will remain the UK’s largest trading partner. The EU accounts for 42% of UK exports and 52% of imports. That is our most essential trading partnership.

I welcome all that the Labour Government have done in our first nine months to begin to repair and reset that relationship. Ours was the first Chancellor to attend a Eurogroup meeting since Brexit, and the Prime Minister has been in lockstep with fellow European leaders in shared support of Ukraine. The leadership of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor has established the opportunity for a substantive change in UK-EU relations, but it is vital that we seize that opportunity. I want to see the most ambitious trading deal possible and will focus my remarks on three points: first, the importance of a deal that includes mutual recognition of conformity assessments; secondly, the case for deep alignment between the UK and EU on goods and services; and thirdly, a bespoke visa-based youth mobility deal.

One of the failings of the trade and co-operation agreement was the lack of a mutual recognition agreement on conformity assessments, which are used to determine whether a product meets a country’s regulations for goods and to ensure safety, performance and compliance with legislative requirements. Conformity markings include the UK conformity assessed mark and the EU’s CE mark. With a mutual recognition agreement, countries that recognise each other’s conformity assessment bodies and procedures avoid duplication of testing and certification for goods. Without such an agreement, products made in the UK and intended for the EU cannot be tested here, and vice versa. The EU has conformity assessment MRAs in place with countries including Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Canada. The UK has them with the USA, Switzerland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Last month, a coalition of 19 business groups, including the Confederation of British Industry, Make UK and techUK, called for a UK-EU mutual recognition agreement and said that it would support export-led growth, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. I look forward to hearing the practical steps that the Minister is taking to help make that a reality.

My second point is about alignment with the EU on goods and services. When the Conservatives signed the TCA, the winners were the ideologues who advocated for the UK to become a version of Singapore-on-Thames. The losers were our businesses, especially those exporting goods. The last Government made an active choice to diverge from European Union regulations and standards. If we listen to business, it does not take long to see the impact. The British Chambers of Commerce surveyed its members on how they had been affected by the TCA: they listed challenges for business from red tape, bureaucracy, paperwork and delays in goods flowing through customs. Recently, the Chartered Institute of Export and International Trade has found that that has caused a staggering 2 billion extra pieces of paperwork for businesses since we left the EU.

Part of the answer must now come from closer alignment on goods and services once again. Earlier this year, Best for Britain commissioned Frontier Economics to model a scenario with

“an expansive approach to mutual recognition, in which the UK and the EU take active steps to minimise regulatory divergence and commit to recognising the equivalence of each other’s regulations.”

[Catherine Fookes (Monmouthshire) (Lab)]

At my recent business roundtable in Monmouthshire, I spoke to Tri-Wall, a business that exports to the EU. Instead of sending one lorryload of its goods to different countries all across the EU, it now has to send a different lorry to every country, which really increases its costs. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need closer alignment to avoid that kind of problem?

[Andrew Lewin]

I agree entirely. I have heard far too many stories exactly like that in communities across the country.

[Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman is making a very good point. I have given up days of my life to helping to free up fish exporters from Shetland from red tape, but the truth is that although we have put friction into those exports, the standards are still broadly the same. It would not be that difficult, at this point in history, to get the necessary alignment, especially through a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement, for example. We are looking at a market that is important to us and in which we have similar standards—unlike across the Atlantic, where there are very different standards for food products.

[Andrew Lewin]

I defer to the right hon. Member’s expertise on the fishing sector, but he is absolutely right about the need for an SPS deal. I am proud that that was in the Labour manifesto on which I was elected and that we are actively seeking to pursue it.

According to the important work commissioned by Best for Britain, if we get a deep alignment, the modelled impact is a boost in UK GDP of 1% to 1.5%. If in parallel we pursue deep alignment in the services sector, the combined benefit could be more than 2% of UK GDP. To put that in context, every 1% of UK GDP is worth approximately £26 billion, so the potential prize is a £50 billion boost to the economy.

Finally, on youth mobility, hon. Members may have seen that 70 Labour parliamentarians put their names to a letter yesterday calling for a new, bespoke youth visa scheme for UK and EU citizens under 30. As with all the UK’s existing schemes, we believe that it should be time-limited and subject to a cap on numbers, but a bespoke scheme would extend new cultural, educational and economic opportunities to young people in the UK and the European Union.

[Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making a fantastic speech. I declare an interest as a UK citizen under 30. Does he agree that the upcoming EU-UK summit on 19 May provides an ideal opportunity for the Government to look at proposals such as a youth mobility scheme, which would surely provide a better opportunity for young people in the United Kingdom to explore, learn and find opportunities across borders?

[Andrew Lewin]

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend and remain jealous of both his wisdom and his youth.

For a clear majority of people in this country, extending opportunities for young people matters. It is a move that will unlock further opportunities for trade and co-operation and will strengthen our bonds with the European Union in future. It is also vital to underline why it is materially different from freedom of movement. Under a visa scheme, people will have to apply in advance, numbers can and will be monitored, and any deal will follow a similar shape to the ones that this country already has in place with countries such as Australia, Canada and even Uruguay.

After so much damage done by the Conservatives, the Government deserve huge credit for all that they have done to repair relations with the European Union. It is our largest and most important trading relationship and so much is at stake. I hope that we can be as ambitious as possible for the reset. I look forward to hearing from colleagues and from the Minister.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

Ukraine

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Monday 3rd March 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

Nobody wanted to see what we saw on Friday—I do not think there is any dissent from that—but it is important that we pragmatically work forward to what matters most, which is lasting peace in Europe. That is what conditions the approach that I have taken to this throughout the past few days.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his leadership and particularly for the difficult but decisive decision to have that immediate increase in defence spending. He said earlier from the Dispatch Box that the tough choices were not done, and he is absolutely right. With a view to the future, is he able to say a little more about this idea of a rearmament bank? While I appreciate that it is at only a conceptual stage, could we do that together with our European allies and our friends in the Commonwealth as well?

Youth Mobility Scheme: EU

Andrew Lewin Excerpts

Wednesday 29th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

I think it is so important to reflect on the fact that we now have a Government who are actively saying that we want a stronger and closer relationship with the European Union. That is the context for this debate. I am personally very sympathetic to the idea of a youth mobility scheme with the European Union. We inherited from the last Government a lot that makes little sense, including the fact that we have relationships on youth mobility with Uruguay and Taiwan but not with our closest neighbours, the European Union. The reset will take time, however, and I completely respect the fact that this Government cannot give away every part of their negotiating strategy in public at this stage. I congratulate the hon. Member on this important debate, but I also completely understand why we cannot have all the details right now.

[Sarah Olney]

I am glad to hear these words about the Labour Government’s commitment to improving our relationships with the European Union, but what the Liberal Democrats would like to see is some action. We think introducing a youth mobility scheme is a valuable and necessary first step and there is no reason why we cannot crack on and do that now.

The Government have made it clear that their No. 1 priority is economic growth—if anyone was in any doubt about that, the Chancellor has been making a speech on it this very morning—but any proposal that might involve our European neighbours in contributing to boosting growth is dismissed. A youth mobility scheme is a pragmatic and mutually beneficial proposal that would benefit the UK economy and labour market in the long term.