Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment

Andrew Rosindell Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)]

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for calling me to speak in this summer Adjournment debate, fittingly named after my dear friend and colleague, the late Sir David Amess. However, it is with regret and sadness that I feel the need to draw to the attention of the House the way in which Sir David’s family has been continuously mistreated. As I have said time and again, including at Prime Minister’s questions, there must be a statutory public inquiry into what happened to David.

Last March, the Amess family met the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary at No. 10 Downing Street, supported by their former MP Anna Firth, who continues to do commendable work for the family and their campaign for justice. As many have noted, particularly my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), the family were petitioned to work within Lord Anderson’s process. Again they tried to do the right thing; again they tried to comply with the Government’s approach; and again, as it turns out, that was a grave mistake.

The Prime Minister, the Home Secretary and, indeed, Lord Anderson, promised to keep the grieving Amess family front and centre of the process. The family were meant to have a guiding—indeed, a leading—role, but that did not happen. Instead, they were kept to the sidelines, and were not treated as being in a unique position; and the media received information before they did. The treatment of the Amess family has been simply outrageous. The process should have been followed more diligently, and the Amess family should have been treated with significantly greater dignity.

Having lost their father and husband, who was a wonderful friend to us all, the Amess family should have been first, not last, in the pecking order. His Majesty’s Government should show some more respect for the memory of our late dear colleague, and as I have said before, there must now be a full public inquiry, not only matching the Government’s words with appropriate action, but ensuring that lessons are learned. From the Government, we must see an urgent effort to establish the full facts, learn the full lessons from the failings of Prevent, and determine what will be done in future to avoid a repeat of such a crime against this House and, indeed, democracy.

The hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) referred a few moments ago to the late Member for Eastbourne, Ian Gow, a dear friend of mine who was also murdered. He was murdered by an IRA bomb on 30 July 1990, 35 years ago. Ian was the Parliamentary Private Secretary to Margaret Thatcher, and he first introduced me to Mrs Thatcher in 1982. He was cruelly murdered by the IRA in 1990. In the 35th year since his murder, let us remember him as well. He was a great man and a bulldog of a politician—a great British bulldog. We still miss him today.

As Members will know, I am proud of being from the county of Essex, as indeed was Sir David Amess, and if I may, I will take a few moments to say this: Romford is Essex and Havering is Essex, but we have been denied the right to play any part in the discussions about Essex devolution. Essex is our county. It is our historic county. Romford and Havering are geographically tied to the people of Essex, yet we are forced against our wishes to be under the artificial construct called Greater London. I hope that, even at this late stage, the Government will relook at this and give the people of Romford and Havering a chance to have a different form of local government so that we can focus on what is best for our borough of Havering and rekindle the links to our historic county of Essex. I ask all Members to look at the wonderful historic county flags on display in Parliament Square. What a wonderful display it is of the fantastic historic counties of the United Kingdom, in which the Essex flag is the most prominent.