Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Wednesday 8th July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a real pleasure to speak in this debate. I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) for securing it, and I agree with many of his remarks and those made by other speakers. I particularly agree with his remarks about the New Contract initiative.

The UK’s AI sector has grown 23 times faster than the rest of our economy. We must ensure continued investment and the realisation of productivity gains from appropriate use, but we must also secure greater domestic control and resilience, and mitigate near and later-term risks from inappropriate use, if we are truly to become an innovation nation. I believe that we must change our approach to AI, and I want to spend the time that I have setting out the case for doing that.

Above all, we must seek sovereignty as if we actually mean it. Supporting UK niches, such as photonics and quantum, is key to sovereignty and to boosting growth from Southampton to Sheffield and from Belfast to Birmingham, but we must recognise how crucial access to frontier models is to our sovereignty. The recent debacle with Fable 5 and Mythos 5 only serves to underline that. The sovereign AI fund needs a clearer rationale. It should be developing UK companies and partnerships, and public stakes should genuinely put our people and our places first.

We must also work more concertedly with allies to develop joint sovereign capability. AI development needs to be part of an economic security reset with the EU, and we need to be able to participate in the Scaleup Europe Fund. Interestingly, Mistral AI’s chief executive recently claimed that the EU has at most two years to build its own AI or become permanently structurally dependent on the US or China. The UK must be included in that EU-level debate before it is too late.

Delivering stronger sovereign control and resilience also means the Government putting their money where their mouths are and supporting UK AI and UK partnership AI in procurement. All Departments should be assessed publicly on that, and the Competition and Markets Authority should be engaged on how to ensure more advanced market commitments to support our sovereignty. We can learn from other countries on that. Look at France, which recently dropped Palantir from its intelligence services. Of course I realise that changes cause disruption, but we cannot work purely on the basis of cost or short-term capability any more. We have to make assessments on the basis of control and resilience, given their significance for our national interest.

In public services, we must move beyond no, low and performative adoption to appropriate and transparent adoption that puts people and places first. It is critical that the UK can deploy sufficient compute to support those aspirations. I hope that the AI Energy Council can develop plans for a line delivery of renewable energy and data centre projects, as well as fixing difficult issues such as demand modulation to unblock additional capacity. There can genuinely be a win-win here, but for that and greater adoption to be achieved, I agree with what others have said: we have to face up to public concern about the risks. We need only look at what is happening in Scotland right now to see that.

First, on unemployment, half of all UK workers feel that they will lose their job to AI. From what I can see, there is very mixed evidence about that so far, beyond the field of software development. Pleased as I was to see the Early Careers Jobs Alliance and the AI adoption insights agreement from the Government, we must go further. Lessons should be learned from the consultation on the social media ban, “Growing up in the online world: a national consultation”.

I would like to see the Government launch a consultation on starting work in a world of AI, so that we can involve young people who are worried about that, gather their good ideas and show that the Government are engaging with that crucial issue. We should be doing far more in our schools and colleges to prepare our children.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

AI is increasingly being used to make cutting-edge assistive technology for people with special educational needs and disabilities, but the industry is a bit of a wild west, and access for young people in areas such as Yeovil is uneven. Will the hon. Member join me in urging the Government to publish guidance for schools on best practices for AI assistive technology for SEND?

--- Later in debate ---

[Anneliese Dodds]

The hon. Member raises a really important point, and it is part of a broader picture. My understanding is that something like only half of all schools have an appropriate AI policy. Simply saying to students, “Don’t use AI”, having an unorganised approach to it, or just taking a company’s word for it without a broader set of guidance and frameworks for deployment is not supporting our children and young people. Saying, “Just don’t use AI”, when we know children and young people are using it, is not fair to them, and will do a disservice to our economy in the future.

Our children and young people need to understand how AI works, as well as the risks of cognitive offloading and the negative impacts on social interaction from inappropriate use. I also want to see us encouraging international discussion in the OECD and the United Nations about taxation—taxation of permanent establishment, capital gains and the cost of human labour compared with tokens. That does not need to have an immediate impact; we could set a threshold of employment impact to trigger a token tax, for example. However, we cannot run away from this debate, especially given how much services dominate our economy.

Secondly, we have to engage with concerns about the safety of frontier models. As I said many months ago alongside the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, just regulating applications after harm has been done is unacceptable. Grok should not have been able to produce 3 million non-consensual nudified images in the first place. New York, California, Illinois and the EU have moved towards approaches requiring mandatory assessment of frontier models, and we should too. We should place the AI Security Institute on a statutory footing as a first step, and we should use our presidency of the G20 next year to reinvigorate global attempts at co-ordination, which started with the Bletchley conference but have effectively stalled since. We can work with EU countries to do that as well as with nations from India to Brazil.

Thirdly, and finally, although AI can release huge productivity gains, we have to recognise that unscrupulous and inappropriate use is already imposing huge costs too.

[Sir John Hayes]

I am interested in the right hon. Lady’s comment on productivity, because it is one of the prevailing macroeconomic challenges facing this Government and previous Governments, as the stalling of productivity has been a problem across western economies for a while. It is true that AI might help, but it could also harm. Equipping people with skills is critical to building productivity, and dependence on AI may actually undermine people’s confidence and their skills over time.

[Anneliese Dodds]

I absolutely agree. That phenomenon of so-called cognitive offloading and the lack of scaffolding in skills is a genuine concern. Equally, we see how rapidly and accurately AI can assess tumour scans, for example, working with human beings to deliver the highest possible quality of healthcare. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) about the potential there. We need to have a sensible approach to this issue.

I also want to mention some additional harms. We are now seeing ubiquitous slop on the internet, AI-enabled fraud and cyber-attacks, and the impact of AI summaries on local media use as well, so I want to see the CMA using its powers for competition-focused action on strategic market status services. I want the Government to adopt a maximalist approach to the “Watch this Space” White Paper, and I want us to stop treating bots as separate, because AI is increasingly going to be integral to our interface with the internet, as well as to so much else, so we need to adopt a safety-by-design approach to online regulation, and that needs to recognise the increasing ubiquity of AI.

Israel: E1 Zone Expansion

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I have tried to be as explicit as I can be about the potential consequences, while abiding to the long-standing position on sanctions.

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

I will not ask the Minister to comment on future sanctions designations—I understand he cannot do that. I want to ask him about something different: the scope of the multilateral statement. He will be well aware that the statement did not specify just one type of firm—for example, construction firms; it talks about involvement. Can he confirm that it is the UK Government’s view that the scope of that statement, following its wording, is not restricted to construction firms, but could cover, for example, firms financing this? Can he confirm that there is no prima facie restriction within that statement?

[Mr Falconer]

The statement was signed by 11 countries. We all have different arrangements and different tools at our disposal. The British Government’s position is that we oppose any involvement of any kind in the E1 settlement. Given the magnitude of the consequences of the E1 settlement, we would consider that in a broad way, not a narrow way.

Sudan

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Thursday 25th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris Elmore]

In relation to additional funding and support, and the ask of the shadow Foreign Secretary on turning words into action, that is what the Government are doing. We are protecting funding for humanitarian support for Sudan. We are additionally putting in money for emergency response rooms in El Obeid. We are actively working at every level to bring about a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

I anticipated that the Foreign Secretary would raise the claims made yesterday in the IDC; I am sure that other Members will as well. I have to tell the House that we completely reject those claims. The UK acted swiftly, including on 13 June 2024, when the previous Government were in office. We penned the UN Security Council resolution. We demanded that the RSF halt the siege in the city. As part of further work in November 2024, we attempted a follow-up UN resolution. We have also issued further sanctions across the piece. Of course, there are lessons learned in any response to international conflict, but I have to tell the House that we do not accept the conditions in what was set out yesterday in the IDC.

On the wider response, the shadow Foreign Secretary will know that the Foreign Secretary has raised this matter at the highest levels, including when we chaired the Security Council in February. She has worked with partners across the Quad and the United States, and even this Tuesday was raising with the UN Secretary-General the need for further international intervention on a multilateral basis to bring about a peaceful resolution. On conflict resolution and a response to the people who are committing the atrocities, yesterday I was in calls with counterparts in Angola on working to build the international coalition on atrocity prevention and evidence gathering, to ensure that people can be held to account, and that prosecutions can take place for these horrendous crimes.

The shadow Foreign Secretary is right: what is happening in Sudan is one of the greatest travesties of our generation. The situation is horrendous, whether it is on sexual violence against women and girls or the sheer scale of civilian killings. The Government will continue to do all that we can to bring the perpetrators to account, to ensure aid enters Sudan, and to stop any conflict becoming more widespread.

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Minister is a good man, and I know that he cares deeply about this subject, but the time for calling on the belligerents and their backers to desist, for urging them to stop, or for raising matters with them, has ended. We did all of those things before El Fasher, and up to 60,000 people were slaughtered. We now have half a million people in El Obeid who are worried that if they do not die of thirst, they will die by drone, violent gang rape or summary execution. Will the Government start naming and shaming the belligerents and their backers, and slap more sanctions on them? Will they ensure that there is a UN Security Council resolution that explicitly calls on the belligerents and their backers, including the UAE, to halt the impending invasion of El Obeid?

[Chris Elmore]

My right hon. Friend is a passionate advocate on this issue, and a former Minister for Development and for Africa. As I said in my statement, the Foreign Secretary has raised the matter directly with the UAE and a number of other countries. My right hon. Friend will know that we have issued sanctions in relation to Sudan, but we do not discuss additional sanctions on the Floor of the House. We are putting money in to offer additional support to help the people at El Obeid. We are working at the UN: there have been conversations between the Foreign Secretary and Secretary-General António Guterres as recently as Tuesday, and we have led the work on the UN fact-finding mission on what the RSF is doing. We are leading the work, ensuring that there is joined-up working to bring about a peaceful resolution. However, my right hon. Friend is right that the situation is absolutely horrendous.

Environmental Sustainability: UK-Indonesia Collaboration

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Kerry McCarthy]

The hon. Member makes a very important point. At Foreign Office questions last week, I had the first question on the Order Paper, which was very ably answered by my hon. Friend the Minister. My question was about the Tibetan plateau, the environmental degradation there and what China is doing to divert water sources. Obviously, Nepal is part of that situation, as it is in the Himalayas. I think that a fifth of the world’s population depends on the Tibetan plateau for water sources.

If the hon. Gentleman seeks out the answer that the Minister gave me on that occasion, he will see that we have quite a few international initiatives that try to ensure that people get access to the water that they need.

If Indonesia is under threat environmentally, that affects us all, as I think some interventions today have already illustrated. Over recent decades, Indonesia has lost hundreds of thousands of hectares of forest each year. The main drivers of that loss are unsustainable agriculture, especially palm oil production, legal and illegal logging, mining, and rapid urbanisation.

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

My hon. Friend will recognise that where there is such degradation, huge amounts of biodiversity are lost. Indonesia is one of the most biodiverse countries in the world, and I am grateful to the Indonesian Government for the work that they have been focused on in this regard.

My hon. Friend will also know that forests in Indonesia are home not only to flora and fauna, but to people as well. The Indonesian Government agreed to a visit from the UN Human Rights Commissioner six years ago—that visit has not happened yet. I hope that the UK Government can keep pushing on that. Does she agree that protection for flora and fauna, which she is talking about so eloquently, has to go alongside protection for people as well?

[Kerry McCarthy]

I absolutely agree. I have just come from an event that Fairtrade is hosting in the Inter-Parliamentary Union room, at which people were talking, among other things, about the forest risk commodities legislation—I will come on to that later, because the Government have announced regulations today—and about the cost to smallholders and indigenous communities of complying with it. Of course, we want to ensure sustainability and stamp out deforestation in the supply chain, but we have to remember that there are small farmers and indigenous communities whose livelihoods depend on that.

At Easter, a number of us went to Indonesia—Borneo, in particular—and met communities doing agroforestry projects. We were looking at how we could support them. It was mostly about orangutans, which I will talk about at some length in a moment, but the people matter very much too.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alex Sobel (Leeds Central and Headingley) (Lab/Co-op)]

As you have made clear, Sir Jeremy, I have a little time, so I start, as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on West Papua, by dedicating my speech to our former vice-chair, Lord Harries of Pentregarth, who passed away recently. He was a fervent supporter of West Papua and, as I am sure my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) will agree, of environmental issues. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy) said, I will use this debate to highlight the world’s largest deforestation project in Merauke, West Papua, which is home to hundreds of indigenous communities, unique biodiversity and extremely rare species, and to briefly—although maybe not so briefly now, Sir Jeremy—address specific threats to the Tapanuli orangutan in Sumatra.

One of the greatest threats to Indonesia’s progress on climate and environment is a three million-hectare, Government-backed food and energy estate project in West Papua. The Financial Times has described it as the world’s largest deforestation project. It threatens a total area that is five times the size of London—we are getting in all the major UK cities in this debate—and the livelihood of 50,000 indigenous people who call the forest home. West Papua’s unique biodiversity and the irreplaceable habitat of endangered tree kangaroos, birds of paradise and many other species are at stake.

Deforestation on that scale would release a staggering 783 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, doubling Indonesia’s emissions. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, who I have met to discuss this matter multiple times, is currently investigating indigenous rights violations in West Papua. In particular, he is investigating the Merauke Food Estate to document the evidence of displacements of Indonesian groups, land tenure violations and the use of military force. The project operates on the lands of more than 250 indigenous communities in West Papua. Customary land rights of indigenous communities are being ignored in the project areas and indigenous people are resisting.

Just this month, a 64-year-old woman from the community known as Mama Yasinta went missing. She features prominently in the film “Pesta Babi”, which is all about the Merauke project and the violations there. Mama Yasinta has since reappeared in Jakarta and issued a public statement distancing herself from the film. Her family believe that her travel to Jakarta and subsequent statements were done under duress. I hope the Minister can make representations that she should be returned to her family in West Papua in the immediate future.

The BBC has done an in-depth investigation showing involvement of both military and intelligence forces in Merauke, so there is ample evidence. Several television and film documentaries, which we can all view, rebut the claims of the Indonesian embassy and Indonesian Government that this is not a deforestation project removing absolutely unique and vital habitats.

The UK Government need to raise serious concerns bilaterally with the Government of Indonesia and discuss sustainable and climate friendly alternatives to support the country’s food and energy security plans, which I absolutely accept given the size of the population there.

[Anneliese Dodds]

My hon. Friend is making another important speech after that of my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy). Does he agree that it is concerning to hear from reports of eyewitnesses that around 40 indigenous people have been killed over the last couple of months, and that drones and booby traps are increasingly being used against indigenous people?

[Alex Sobel]

Absolutely. Unfortunately, that follows a history of 60 years of extrajudicial killings and internal displacement in what are, and have traditionally been, very thickly forested areas. The island of New Guinea, which includes Papua New Guinea, is the world’s third largest rainforest. Modern technologies, which we have seen put to very positive use in Ukraine by the Ukrainian forces and very destructive use by the Russian forces, are now being used by the Indonesian military against civilians who have no way of defending themselves. Again, that has been documented. I am pleased that my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East has raised that.

I am asking the Minister whether the UK can assist Indonesia in meeting its commitment to climate and nature protection through Indonesia’s plan to restore 12.7 million hectares of forests, but not in Merauke and not in virgin rainforest, which has a unique ecosystem and biodiversity.

I will briefly talk about ecocide. That is a real threat to Indonesia and its international reputation and claim to be a democracy. Ecocide is where acts create a

“substantial likelihood of severe and…widespread or long-term”

environmental damage. Although it is not a separate crime in the International Criminal Court or the International Court of Justice, the 2025 advisory opinion on the climate brought by Vanuatu very much brings ecocide into scope. The last thing that we want is a major international country like Indonesia being hauled before the International Criminal Court for a project like Merauke or some of the other mining and deforestation projects that are occurring, particularly in West Papua, but in other parts of Indonesia as well.

That leads me nicely to the threats to the Tapanuli orangutan in Batang Toru, Sumatra. The Batang Toru ecosystem in north Sumatra is the only home of the Tapanuli orangutan. Identified as a separate species in 2017, at the time their estimated number was fewer than 800. More recent surveys have shown that they are the most endangered great ape in the world, so the Indonesian Government have a special responsibility for the Tapanuli orangutan. Research suggests that losing even eight adult orangutans a year could lead to the extinction of the species.

The Tapanuli orangutan faces several threats. The Batang Toru dam, owned by the PT North Sumatra Hydro Energy company, sliced through its habitat precisely at the intersection of three subpopulations. There is also PT Agincourt’s Martabe gold mine expanding north into their habitat, as well as logging concessions, community incursions of subsistence farming and small-scale agriculture, and hunting and human-wildlife conflict. Those five threats could mean the end of the Tapanuli orangutan.

Oral Answers to Questions

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Tuesday 16th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Seema Malhotra]

Hamas is a terrorist organisation, and we have been clear that it must decommission its weaponry and no longer be allowed to pose a threat to Israel’s security. The UK is committed to supporting the implementation of the 20-point Gaza peace plan in full. As part of that transition process, set out in phase two of the peace plan, we will continue to support those international efforts and a credible plan to achieve those goals.

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

I recently visited Chad with the all-party group for Sudan and South Sudan, and in that connection we will shortly be registering an interest. Like the Foreign Secretary, I was moved by Chad’s willingness to accept 1.3 million refugees, but disturbed by the horrific scale of the crisis. Will the Prime Minister be raising the Sudan crisis at the G7, because it must be raised at every international gathering? Is the UK advocating for countries such as Chad to be included in international talks?

[Yvette Cooper]

I welcome my right hon. Friend visiting Chad and raising this issue, and I assure her that I have already raised it as part of the G7, when the G7 Foreign Ministers had a significant discussion. We will continue to raise the issue at every level, and pursue the possibility of comments around what is happening in Sudan at every level, including G7 communiques.

Oral Answers to Questions

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Tuesday 21st April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Order. You may do it at the end of Question Time.

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

On Sudan and the failing international response, will the Foreign Secretary consider further economic measures and sanctions, including against the nationals of the countries that support the belligerents? Will she encourage the Prime Minister to prioritise Sudan in his international engagements so he can show the leadership that she has shown?

[Yvette Cooper]

I can assure my right hon. Friend that we are continuing to raise matter this as well. We assess that around a dozen countries are providing different kinds of arms flow support to the warring parties. That is an extremely serious concern and we are raising it with a range of countries. We also continue to look at the issue of sanctions.

Community-owned Assets: Government Support

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Monday 20th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

I rise to highlight the case of the Ultimate Picture Palace in my constituency, which shows the need for Government support for community assets.

The Ultimate Picture Palace is the only remaining independent cinema in Oxford. Founded in 1911, it shows an eclectic mix of independent, international and classic films, all in its cosy single-screen auditorium. This beautiful cinema is a real landmark in Jeune Street, abutting Cowley Road in the heart of east Oxford. It was built when dangerously flammable outdoor screenings were being replaced with screenings in safer buildings. The heritage of tented outdoor shows is clear in the beautiful art deco building, not least because of the original box office window, which opens straight out on to the street. The team of staff and volunteers who run the cinema is small but passionate.

In 2022, the cinema became community-owned when 1,200 local people took a stake in it. It is a vibrant place, defying national trends in ticket sales. At a time when thousands of community assets have closed, the UPP stands as a reminder that a different model is possible, and that that model works. It aims to be a leader in community cinema, empowering local people to determine the future of this neighbourhood venue and enabling all local residents, from families to young people, students, workers and community groups, to be uplifted through the joy of cinema. It has hosted numerous festivals, and it really does cater for all. Last year, it screened a wider variety of films than any other cinema in the city, as well as attracting new audiences by, for example, introducing special “Kino Kids” screenings, and through the development of a new education programme. The cinema’s relaxed and welcoming atmosphere means that anyone can come and enjoy a film, whether on their own or with friends or family.

I have heard many wonderful stories about the way in which this small community cinema has shaped local people’s lives. One of the most moving was the story of a new year’s eve screening 50 years ago; it was when a resident who had moved to Oxford finally felt at home in my city. Dame Pippa Harris, co-producer of the Oscar-winning film “Hamnet”, came to the UPP as a young person, and has said,

“Big dreams started in that little cinema and I’m lucky my dream came true”.

Perhaps my favourite quote about the cinema came from the sadly late true Oxford original Bill Heine, who said of his approach to the cinema when he ran it:

“Look, if you’re going to sail why not sail in dangerous waters. Who wants to play around on the beach?”

The UPP has a truly incredible, storied history, from legal fights with Stanley Kubrick and the BBC to the squatted “Section 6” cinema, right through to today’s community ownership.

To be fit for the future, this special cinema needs to invest in better access, sightlines and sound quality, and more efficient use of energy. It has planning permission for those changes, and funders who are keen to support them if their requirements for a long-term lease are met—but herein lies the problem. The landlord of this community-owned asset, Oriel College, will not commit to such a long-term lease. That is because, it appears, the building is in the footprint of its plans for a “fifth quad” to accommodate graduate students. The idea of the cinema’s being used for that purpose strikes me, and local residents, as very strange. The building is Grade II listed, which reflects its historical status and striking exterior and interior. It is one of the oldest independent cinemas in England, and the only one that is community-owned.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the right hon. Lady for raising this subject. I spoke to her beforehand, and she is right to refer to the issues affecting her local cinema and to its community-based importance. Does she not agree that community-owned assets are essential to our quest to overcome hidden barriers, such as transport poverty, social isolation among the elderly and digital exclusion—things that go far beyond the cinema—which prevent rural residents in Oxford East, but also in my constituency, from gaining access to essential community and health services? That does not always apply to their urban counterparts. Does the right hon. Lady agree that support for these assets should not be limited to one community group or another, but should be given to entire populations, who rely on these assets, and on Government help, in their time of need?

[Anneliese Dodds]

I absolutely agree with the hon. Member that community-owned assets are often targeted at those inequalities, because communities understand where the challenges are on their streets, in their backyard or, if we are talking about rural areas, down their lane. They really understand where the need is. That is one of many reasons why community-owned assets are so important. Of course, they are not only important for those communities; they can be nationally significant as well. That is the case with this cinema; the head of cinemas at the Independent Cinema Office has said that the UPP is of national importance.

I and thousands of local residents have called on Oriel College to grant the cinema the long-term lease it needs; indeed, a petition calling for this has gained nearly 20,000 signatures in a matter of weeks. The granting of this lease would be great for local students, and could unlock exciting collaboration between the cinema and Oriel College. There are some brilliant examples of higher education institutions working with arts organisations in the UK, and such co-operation could make the UPP an even more special place. So far, Oriel College appears not to have recognised the potential benefits of engaging with the Ultimate Picture Palace in this way. I urge it to reconsider, and to grant the UPP its long-term lease. I urge the Government to recognise the value of community assets like the UPP, and to go further to protect them.

[Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)]

My right hon. Friend is painting a beautifully evocative picture of the UPP, and it takes me straight to my favourite film, “Cinema Paradiso”. Does she agree that communities often deliver in a way that the Government cannot? They deliver according to what communities and local people need, but they can also act in a more agile way. They can often access different funding, but they need initial support and the capacity to grow their knowledge and experience in order to deliver.

--- Later in debate ---

[Anneliese Dodds]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for making that really important point, and she is absolutely right. The flexibility that community-owned assets often have cannot be underlined enough, and the fact that they can respond to community needs is just one of the many positive aspects of these very special assets. Of course, community ownership shapes who holds power within organisations and over assets. It shapes who makes decisions about them and who benefits from them, as in the cases she talks about.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

The right hon. Lady is outlining a really clear case for community-owned assets. Can she elaborate on that and tell us if the UPP is an asset of community value? We have recently had to fight a campaign to stop Harrogate Spring Water chopping down the much-loved Rotary Wood, which is an asset of community value. If that planning decision had gone ahead and not been voted down, there would have been a moratorium that allowed the community to come together and put in a bid to try to purchase it, but there needs to be more support to make sure that those bids are prioritised, and that multinationals like Danone cannot simply swoop in and outbid a local community.

[Anneliese Dodds]

I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman that the “asset of community value” designation can be a really powerful tool. Yes, that has been applied in the case of UPP; it is something that the cinema itself and local people pushed for. I am really pleased that the council granted that designation, and in the case of important community assets, we really need to guard against the kind of development that he mentions.

A recent measure that the Government have been working on, and which will help in this area, relates to the community right to buy, which I know the Minister is really passionate about. The community right to buy is about giving local people the right to own and protect the places that matter to them, from pubs and parks to community centres and sports grounds. When communities have a real stake, as they do with the UPP, they do not just preserve assets; they make them thrive. This reflects a core co-operative belief—fundamental for the Co-op party, of which I am a member—that communities are best placed to shape their future. Where communities have succeeded in ensuring that vital shared spaces can continue to exist, they have done so despite the system, not because of it. The current situation brings into sharp relief how many hurdles communities face in trying to take control of the places that matter most.

The Ultimate Picture Palace is just one example of a community-owned asset facing blockages. We know that communities elsewhere are not eligible for funding streams or tax relief, and that there often is not the correct development support for those trying to pursue community ownership. The community right to buy will mark a landmark shift, but we need to go further, and I know that the Co-op party has argued this.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

My right hon. Friend is putting forward a very persuasive argument. In Penn in my constituency, where I live, we have the Old Stag’s Head, a pub that closed down some time ago. Many efforts have been made to allow the community to purchase the pub, so that it can recreate the community value that it provided. Does she agree that community assets can be quite wide-ranging? They can be pubs, community centres or sports halls. This is a very important topic on an issue on which Government support can be so useful.

[Anneliese Dodds]

Absolutely. I strongly agree with my hon. Friend, who is completely right. We have seen many campaigns to keep local pubs open, and we have seen local people working hard to deliver a community asset designation, but they have often lacked the finance. I hope that the new measures coming through will start to deal with that, particularly the right to buy and other measures. I would also mention the community wealth fund and the Pride in Place programme. They all aim to tackle the inequalities, the lack of social infrastructure, including physical social infrastructure, and of course economic deprivation. Too often, as in the case of the UPP, we see a David and Goliath situation for communities that want to control local assets.

In conclusion, I urge the Minister, first, to co-ordinate policy on community assets with other Departments, so that we can truly unlock their promise. Secondly, I urge her to work with Culture, Media and Sport Ministers and Education and Skills Ministers to encourage place-based collaboration between arts and cultural organisations and higher education providers.

[Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)]

The UPP sounds like an absolute cultural gem, and I love anything to do with arts and culture, as a former chair of an arts and culture organisation. The Government have launched the town of culture programme, which will be an amazing way to bring people together. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is a positive step forward, and will she get behind Bawtry being the first town of culture in the country?

[Anneliese Dodds]

I am very fond of my hon. Friend, but I know many other Members are pushing for their amazing towns to become the town of culture. I agree with him that the programme is an exciting new development, as is what we are seeing in community ownership, and the engagement with arts and culture.

My third ask of the Minister is that she comes to the Ultimate Picture Palace and experiences the magic of cinema. She will find a friendly welcome, lovely drinks and snacks, and a dedicated team of staff and volunteers. If she comes, she will experience what promoters of the cinema said it would deliver when it was built right back in 1911: “Real fun and instruction”, in a beautiful building. Long live community cinema, and long live the Ultimate Picture Palace!

UK-German Relations

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Wednesday 25th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is such a pleasure to speak in this debate with you in the Chair, Mr Twigg. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Preston (Sir Mark Hendrick) for securing this debate and to others who have supported it. As he says, it is taking place during a very important week: of the ratification in the Bundestag of the Kensington treaty.

I associate myself with many of my hon. Friend’s remarks, particularly those on town twinning, because the link between my city of Oxford and Bonn has been incredibly strong. It has gone from strength to strength, and it has involved local politicians, including myself. We have enduring friendships—including across party lines—between our two countries. It has included young football players from the council estate that I call my home, Rose Hill; in Bonn, they very much enjoyed the football, the friendship, and the Haribo factory visit.

I want to underline three areas where the collaboration between our two countries is particularly important, given the current circumstances. First, I underline what my hon. Friend said about industrial linkages. In my constituency, we see just how important they are. My hon. Friend mentioned BMW, which runs the Cowley Mini plant. That is a source of immense pride for my local community, provides good-quality jobs and supports a huge supply chain associated with those direct roles. It is an incredibly productive plant, and it is important that, wherever possible, we reduce barriers to joint working between our two countries when it comes to the kind of amazing advanced manufacturing taking place in Cowley.

I am encouraged by the fact that UK Ministers have spoken with their German counterparts about the European Commission’s “Made in Europe” plans. I hope that we can go further on that. The European Union’s desire to ensure that there is economic security is understandable, but it is important that that does not lead to a reduction in trade between the UK and EU—indeed, we need to increase trade. I have been encouraged by what I have heard in that regard, including on automotives and making sure that the UK is not cut out of those processes. I urge the Government to press ahead on that and the other measures that they have announced on energy costs, for example, which are important for a lot of the manufacturing in places such as BMW Cowley.

Secondly, I want to underline some points that are germane to those mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey). He talked about the fact that both our countries are currently experiencing exactly the same kinds of hybrid threats. This week of all weeks, four years after Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, we are seeing similar patterns of foreign interference, including sabotage and online disinformation, often sponsored by Russia. The Representation of the People Bill is now progressing through the UK Parliament and we have Philip Rycroft’s review of foreign interference. It will be important that there is collaboration between our two countries in that regard so that we can learn together.

I am aware of what happened in the run up to the German election. This is not a partisan point, because I understand that some of the sabotage was directed at trying to discredit the Green party there. There were also attacks on critical infrastructure with unclear attribution—as there so often is in these cases. As we are in these difficult waters, we need to see collaboration between democracies such as the UK and Germany on such matters.

Article 17 of the Kensington treaty is especially relevant here:

“The Parties shall cooperate on strategies for strengthening the resilience of their democracies in order to build resilient societies which are able to contribute to their countries’ security and to withstand the increasing attempts of interference and manipulation.”

I also welcome the treaty talking about deepening co-operation against all forms of hate crime, which, again, disturbingly, we are seeing in both of our nations.

Finally, I underline the welcome mention in the 11th lighthouse project under the Kensington treaty of working together on conflict prevention and committing both of our countries to strengthen joint work on the women, peace and security agenda. That will require engagement across our Governments, not just in our Foreign Ministries, where I know that there are very strong relationships, but in our Ministries of Defence. It would be helpful to understand more about what is being done in that regard. I thoroughly hope that the strong relationship between the UK and Germany can only become stronger in the years to come, and it is such a pleasure to speak in this debate.

[Derek Twigg (in the Chair)]

I am going to call the Front Benchers no later than 5.10 pm, so could Members keep their speeches to around five minutes?

Sudan

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Thursday 5th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

I welcome the shadow Foreign Secretary’s words on Sudan. It is the worst humanitarian crisis in the 21st century, and the whole House should be united in wanting it to end. She asked about the work being done through the Quad, and the work led by the US. I am in close contact with the US special envoy, Massad Boulos, and I am keeping in close contact with Secretary Rubio on this issue. I have also been involved in discussions with the UAE, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. A lot of work is being pursued by the Quad, but, linked to that, the UK and Norway are also pursuing further work, particularly to build civilian capacity. We all want this to move towards a civilian political transition, but we need to build up the capacity of Sudanese civilians, who have faced the most horrendous devastation and had to flee their homes as a result of this conflict, and they need support as well.

As I said in my statement, we believe that this has to be an international effort, in the same way as in the run-up to the Gaza ceasefire, where there was work by the Arab League to say that Hamas should play no role, work by the UK, France and other countries to recognise the state of Palestine, and work by different countries to put forward potential reform plans during the summer, all of which was ultimately drawn upon in the 20-point plan put together by President Trump last year. We need the same intensity in relation to Sudan, with the same level of international engagement. That is what I want to see, and it is why I spoke to so many African Foreign Ministers in neighbouring countries this week. It is why I have been speaking to the African Union, and why I will be raising the issue not just at the UN Security Council when we hold the Chair this month, but at the Munich security conference, and as part of the Berlin conference. It is crucial that we keep that focus and energy in relation to Sudan. The £20 million announced this week is new money that will be used, in particular, for the survivors of sexual violence.

The right hon. Lady mentioned Peter Mandelson. As the House will know, I withdrew Peter Mandelson from his role as ambassador to the United States less than a week after I was appointed as Foreign Secretary. I am clear that his actions are completely unforgiveable. Given that at the heart of what Epstein did was the grave abuse and trafficking of women and girls, this is particularly disturbing. I will say something else: I was Chief Secretary to the Treasury at the height of the financial crisis, when everybody was busting a gut to rescue the savings and livelihoods of ordinary people across this country, so the idea that a senior and experienced Cabinet Minister, working alongside us, could instead be behaving the way we have seen is truly shocking. It is right that a police investigation is under way.

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for her impactful visit and for the sanctions that she has announced today. Earlier this week, the all-party parliamentary group for Sudan and South Sudan met the Somoud civilian coalition. It stressed, as she has done today, that it is often civilians who are delivering humanitarian assistance, and it was civilians who were ejected from Government by the two generals who are currently slogging it out, at the expense of thousands upon thousands of slaughtered civilians, and millions of hungry and displaced civilians. She talked about the UK and Norway being focused on developing civilian capacity, but does she agree that cannot be a separate track to what the Quad is doing? Civilian voices must be involved in peace processes. We cannot see an empowerment of the generals, who have caused the crisis in the first place, which is what will happen if civilians are not engaged in what the Quad is doing now.

[Yvette Cooper]

I welcome my right hon. Friend’s points and pay tribute to the bravery of Sudanese civilians, especially those who continue to run the emergency response rooms, providing urgently needed support for desperate people in Sudan. She is right that civilian capacity has to be a central part of the peace process. In fact, members of the Quad have specifically asked us to play a role in developing that as part of the peace process. I also discussed that with the African Union this week, because we believe that civilians can only be supported with the assistance of the countries bordering Sudan, and with the African Union.

Oral Answers to Questions

Anneliese Dodds Excerpts

Tuesday 20th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

Yesterday, the International Criminal Court’s deputy chief prosector said that atrocities in Sudan would be repeated from town to town unless impunity for belligerents ended. What measures have the UK Government been taking to make it clear to the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement North, as well as to the Rapid Support Forces and the Sudanese armed forces, that they must protect civilians and let aid through?

[Yvette Cooper]

I thank my right hon. Friend for raising this issue, because the continuing humanitarian crisis and horrendous violence in Sudan are deeply troubling, and I worry that they are not getting sufficient international attention. This weekend, I discussed extensively with the UN Secretary-General what further action can be taken and what concerted pressure can be put on any country that has any influence on the warring parties. We urgently need a ceasefire, but we also need an end to the horrendous and brutal violence, particularly the sexual violence towards women.