UK-India Technology Security Initiative

Dan Aldridge Excerpts

Tuesday 28th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Dan Aldridge (Weston-super-Mare) (Lab) [R]]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the UK-India Technology Security Initiative.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. As a member of the Business and Trade Committee, I recently visited India, alongside colleagues from across the House, as part of our inquiry into the UK’s trade with India. It was a fascinating visit, where we discussed critical trade policy such as the UK-India technology security initiative with Indian officials and officials from His Majesty’s Government.

I am also chair of the all-party parliamentary group for cyber innovation and of the digital inclusion APPG. I care deeply about how our people and communities are empowered by technological advances and not left behind.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

As the hon. Gentleman says, it is important that no one is left behind. Does he agree that the devolved regions are sometimes left behind? We must remember that we have a world-class cyber ecosystem at Queen’s University Belfast, with thriving tech start-ups across Northern Ireland. Will he join me in asking the Minister what steps have been taken to ensure that the £7 million joint research programme on future telecoms and the new connectivity and innovation centre are directly accessible to firms in Strangford and across Northern Ireland, as well as the UK mainland?

[Dan Aldridge]

When I was on the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, we visited Queen’s and talked about its cyber-security prowess. The ecosystem in the UK is very much connected—something we are very proud of—so I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention.

I am delighted to have secured this debate; in the spirit of interconnected communities, before going into the specifics of the UK-India TSI, I will talk about something a bit closer to home. This topic speaks to one of the reasons why Britain’s international relationships, our diplomacy and our international trade agreements matter not just at the Government level, but locally, on the streets of Weston-super-Mare and in towns, villages and cities across the UK.

My constituency might not be a place that people automatically associate with India, but our town is home to a small but thriving Indian community. Their contribution to local life is immeasurable, whether in our NHS, businesses, schools or civic institutions. The people who came to Weston from India and whose families have grown up here are woven into the fabric of what makes our town work.

[Sarah Edwards (Tamworth) (Lab)]

What a wonderful speech my hon. Friend is making about this important connection that our two countries can have! Similarly, I pay tribute to my constituency; it might not be associated with a huge Indian community, but it does have one, and they contribute a lot to the UK, and certainly to our medical professions and businesses locally.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dan Aldridge]

I thank my hon. Friend, who accompanied me to India. It was a phenomenally insightful visit.

The human connection is not incidental to this debate; it is the very foundation of it. I use this opportunity to give a special shout-out to people such as Akhilesh Madhav and his family, who chose Weston to work in our NHS, to care for our people and to raise their children. Akhilesh and his friends and colleagues do more than just work and live in Weston-super-Mare; they are tireless community builders and campaigners, setting up new organisations such as FYI-Weston, which hosts wonderful, inclusive events, bringing people together from across our community to connect, learn, make friends and often do business, linking our two great countries.

I also give a shout-out to Sanju Varghese, who along with his friends created the charitable Weston Association of Malayalees, a forum to help Malayalees from Kerala in India to engage with local communities through acts of service. The association is always out with local groups, litter picking and fundraising for local causes.

Our shared stories go back generations, with a complex history, but firmly focused on the future and a desire to create opportunity and prosperity. They are all examples of how the relationship between the United Kingdom and India is not, in essence, a relationship between two Governments, two economies or even two sets of interests; it is actually a relationship between people and communities. We share a history, a legal tradition, a language and deep cultural ties. It is a friendship with deep roots, which is now growing into something genuinely transformative.

[Sarah Edwards]

My hon. Friend is correct that we had a wonderful trip to India as part of the Business and Trade Committee’s work. One thing we looked at was the joint value of the free trade agreement that we have recently signed, which sends a powerful signal about the future and how our countries can benefit each other.

[Dan Aldridge]

Absolutely. Building on that point, many of us who made that visit think we need to address the problem that too much of British public life is working with an image of India that is frankly decades out of date. Many still think of India as a poor nation, a country that we assist, rather than as a strategic partner of great global significance.

Not only is that perception inaccurate, but to continue thinking like that is a strategic weakness for the UK. India has risen dramatically to the top five of the world’s biggest economies, from a position of 13th in the year 2000. Under Viksit Bharat, the developed India vision, the Indian Government are targeting GDP of between $30 trillion and $40 trillion by 2047. To put that in context, that would potentially make India the biggest economy in the world, at about eight or nine times the size of the current UK economy.

Those numbers alone should command attention, but what really struck me during last month’s visit to India was not the statistics, but the confidence, energy and sense of forward momentum. Whoever we spoke to, the message was the same: India knows where it is going, and it is moving fast. If we in all parts of the UK do not wake up to that reality, we will limit our part in that story and the ways it could deliver shared prosperity, innovation and opportunity for both our countries.

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

The hon. Member is making a very persuasive argument for building relationships between two democratic nations. Does he agree that consideration of human rights must also be at the forefront? There are violations in Kashmir, so does he agree that the Government should intervene and ensure that international law is upheld?

[Dan Aldridge]

I thank the hon. Member for his question. We must take those considerations really seriously, and they are absolutely part of a wide-ranging conversation that we have with all our trading partners. We should be aiming for the best out of our relationships; we do not want a low bar.

This issue is not simply about what the UK can gain, but about recognising that our futures are increasingly interconnected and that we have to build new ways to navigate that. Our Government understand the potential and the scale of the opportunity, but its value has to filter out to the rest of the economy, to towns such as mine where trade with India might feel very far away from the daily concerns of the majority. We need to change that and build those relationships to show how much we can all gain from each other. Whether in clean energy, technology, education or trade, there is a real opportunity to build a partnership that supports both our economies while creating good jobs, stronger industries and deeper ties between our people. The question for us is not whether India will succeed; it is whether we choose to engage with that success in a meaningful, long-term and mutually beneficial way.

It is against that backdrop that the UK-India TSI matters so much. It sets out a bold new framework for how our two countries can work together on the defining technologies of our generation. That is not a vague statement of intent; it is an ambitious partnership covering telecoms, 5G infrastructure, AI, critical minerals, semiconductors, quantum computing, advanced materials and health and biotechnology. It is co-ordinated at the highest levels by the national security advisers of both countries and it is already delivering.

A year on from the launch of the TSI, both Governments reaffirmed their commitment to expand into new frontier domains. Private sector partnerships are multiplying, research collaborations are under way and investment is flowing. It is an important framework and forum for dialogue and diplomacy in key areas such as critical minerals, which are crucial to our economic and national security. That is particularly important right now, as China increases its global dominance of critical mineral production and refining capability, giving it enormous leverage over the global supply of those minerals.

How we build and strengthen our supply chains in an increasingly complicated and unpredictable world must be at the top of the Government’s agenda. Last week in the Business and Trade Committee we heard plea after plea from industry for a focus on diplomacy and dialogue to get Britain’s strategy on critical minerals right. The UK Government published their critical minerals strategy in November last year, aiming to increase global production while building resilient domestic and global supply networks. That is a much needed start, but for it to deliver, we need dedicated and sustained diplomacy to support our relationships with trusted international partners such as India, with both the resource base and political will to build resilient supply chains alongside us.

[Sarah Edwards]

The point on critical minerals, which the Select Committee has been looking into, is really important. One piece of evidence we heard was on the slight concern about the size of the UK and our ability to do this alone, which meant that our emphasis would be on friendshoring and the throughput of material we would need to make this viable. Does my hon. Friend therefore agree that we need these types of deals to make sure that we can, for example, recycle our lithium and that we have friends to do that with, so that we can support important initiatives such as this?

[Dan Aldridge]

I absolutely agree. One of the most exciting things about the UK-India partnership is the complementarity of our needs. To build on my hon. Friend’s point about that partnership on critical minerals, an example of our partnership is the UK-India critical minerals supply chain observatory—the first of its kind in the world. The second phase, which has been backed by nearly £2 million in funding, will deliver the world’s largest data infrastructure on the critical minerals value chain.

Our two Governments are also establishing a UK-India critical minerals guild to transform financing standards and push innovation—as somebody who worked for a chartered institute, that excites me more than most. The geopolitical argument here is simple: in a world where we must do more to secure reliable access to critical minerals that power our economy, our defence and our energy transition, having a partner of India’s scale, with its own often complementary interests in diversifying global supply chains, is not just useful, but a strategic necessity.

Under the TSI, the first UK-India conference on AI opportunities was held in Bengaluru in February last year. Both Governments have agreed to establish a joint India-UK centre for AI to drive advancement in the use of AI in telecoms, including in telecoms cyber-security. I find it compelling that the TSI’s approach to AI emphasises governance as well as innovation. Given the scale of the challenge facing Parliaments around the world on this issue, having a trusted, democratic partner with whom we can develop shared frameworks, conduct joint research and exchange expertise on safety and bias testing is vital.

[Sarah Edwards]

One of the interesting things that we learned on the trip was that India’s approach is also about how it uses Government procurement. With careful consideration, that could be used to make sure that UK tech companies can grow and benefit from having a revenue stream and contract. There may be things we can learn from India in terms of how the country approaches that sensibly and safely, so that we can use it as a driving force for economic growth in the UK.

[Dan Aldridge]

As ever, I agree with my hon. Friend. Specifically on the point about how we build our domestic capacity, there is something very exciting about the new £500 million investment in sovereign AI. It would be great to hear how that investment might—I hope—be linked closely to this work.

[Jim Shannon]

The hon. Member is making an excellent speech, with plenty of thoughts for the Minister to reply to. We probably all agree that student exchange is important. The hon. Member showed his knowledge of Queen’s University Belfast, and I thank him for that, but student exchange also matters when it comes to technology and working together. Does he agree that, although we must always focus on immigration, we should perhaps look at and do more with the good points of student exchanges, which create opportunities for UK students as well as those from India?

[Dan Aldridge]

I absolutely agree. One of the things I took back to my constituency was about how I engage with schoolchildren and college students, but that point is much wider; we should be really ambitious in that cross-cultural dialogue. There is nothing but gains to be had, so far as I can see.

It came out loud and clear from our counterparts in India that cross-party political support for the UK and India’s partnership on AI and technology was critical in reassuring Indian officials and politicians that the UK was a safe and reliable partner. Politicians and officials in India were really impressed that the main two UK political parties could share a stage in India, and saw that as a real positive—a really good thing on the global stage.

On semiconductors, under the TSI the UK and India are pursuing a broad and ambitious partnership focused on research and development in chip design, compound semiconductors and advanced packaging. Both Governments have committed to sharing best practice on supply chain challenges and to facilitating trade and investment flows between semiconductor companies in both countries.

Then there is quantum: quantum computing, quantum sensing, quantum communications. For most people, those technologies remain firmly in the realm of science fiction, but not for long. The countries that invest in quantum research and development now will have decisive advantages in cryptography, defence and pharmaceuticals, and in areas that we cannot yet fully predict. It is important that elected Members champion these frontier technologies and make them real for people in our constituencies, because if we do not do it, who will? It will probably be a drama or a TikTok, and those are not necessarily the best places for them to get their information.

The TSI explicitly includes quantum as a priority area for collaboration. I find the idea of building partnerships between UK and Indian research centres and developing the next generation of technologies together really exciting. The UK has world-leading quantum research capabilities. India has the engineering talent and institutional ambition to match them, and it is a brilliant match.

These are the technologies of tomorrow, and our collaboration on these sectors provides huge opportunities for the UK, particularly the small and medium-sized enterprises in our constituencies. The Indian Government and Indian businesses are actively looking for British partners, particularly SMEs, and the TSI is not just a framework for multinational corporations or Government-to-Government exchanges; it is designed to create partnerships at every level of the economy, including start-ups, research institutions, academic collaborators and supply chain partners. I am excited that next month I will be welcoming some start-up innovators from India to Parliament.

Our partnerships with small and medium-sized enterprises are the exception, not the rule, but it is our responsibility as local representatives to help change that—to open doors and to make the benefits of the UK-India partnership seen in our constituencies up and down the country. The only way we can make the most of the relationship is through sustained engagement, which relates to the point made by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) about youth and student engagement. The only limit is our creativity. A lot of this is not about huge investment, but about creativity of thought.

[Sarah Edwards]

I thank my hon. Friend for his compelling point about the role of parliamentarians and how we can engage with our constituents and other organisations. I also pay tribute to the British high commission, which did a lot of work to make sure that our trip went well and is hugely important in engaging our businesses right across the country. I have a specific shout-out to Harjinder Kang, the trade commissioner, who has done some excellent work. Will my hon. Friend also pay tribute to the work that will continue?

[Dan Aldridge]

Absolutely. All the officials we worked with were fantastic.

The UK-India tech security initiative is the right framework at the right moment. It covers the technologies that will define this country and it brings together Government, industry and academia. It has the backing of both Prime Ministers and cross-party support. We must ensure that the ambition of the TSI is matched by delivery and that it is felt in towns across the country, including Tamworth, Weston-super-Mare and Worle, because the India of 2047 will be one of the world’s biggest economies—if not the biggest—and a technological superpower and confident global leader. It is being built right now, and the question for Britain and our constituents is a simple one: do we want to be part of that story? I believe we do, and we should run towards it.

UK-based Tech Companies

Dan Aldridge Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Mike Martin]

I thank my hon. Friend for her comprehensive intervention, which speaks to exactly the issues that I will raise.

The key example is DeepMind, which was the world-leading AI company. We, the Brits, failed to create the ecosystem, funding and risk-taking capital to enable it to scale fully. It was then bought by Google, and now the British Government contract with Google rather than with DeepMind. That is exactly my fear: even though we are the world’s third AI power, that could move away from us very quickly if we do not create the right ecosystem to support our tech firms.

If this Government are serious about supporting growth, we need to look at small and medium-sized enterprises. It will not surprise hon. Members that I have some examples from my Tunbridge Wells constituency. First, Capital Web develops AI software to help businesses to improve productivity. That is on the application side of AI; we are never going to compete on the frontier model side of AI, but the UK can certainly compete on how we implement those frontier models to work cases. I will also give a bit more detail about Adzuna, a firm based in Tunbridge Wells that helps people to find jobs.

The problem in the UK is one of scaling up. We often have support for businesses that are very small. We might have research and development tax credits or innovation grants, or we might help them to spin directly out of universities. However, what just does not happen in the UK is moving them on from the position where they have a concept and patent and are perhaps ready to scale rapidly. Those firms are left to go abroad, be taken over, or perhaps wither and see the market move on and eclipse them. That is the real danger.

[Dan Aldridge (Weston-super-Mare) (Lab)]

I held a roundtable in my constituency with the Startup Coalition just two weeks ago. We found that one of the biggest barriers was not an absence of talent or expertise in my town, but a poverty of access to information, advice and guidance. No one had heard of small business start-up loans, the £500 to £25,000 Government-backed loans, which are really critical. That was one of the things people critically needed. That is a big issue. I would ask the Minister how we improve communication to places such as Weston-super-Mare.

[Mike Martin]

That is an excellent point. It is very much something that the Government can do, because they understand where capital can be found and how to create the legal and regulatory ecosystem that enables these companies to thrive.

Let me touch briefly on access to capital—I am thinking of slightly larger amounts than those the hon. Gentleman just mentioned. Pension funds are a huge source of capital. In the UK, trillions are under management in our pension funds. This is something that Canada does very well. Canada’s pension funds operate almost like specialist investors, pumping billions of dollars into AI, infrastructure and software. To pick another example that is dear to my constituency, South East Water, which many hon. Members will have seen me rail against, is 25% owned by NatWest pensions—our favourite cuddly UK bank—which makes its money by selling debt to South East Water at a rate of 10% interest. That is not pension fund investment that is driving growth in the UK. We must do better. We must think about how we can push and guide our pension funds, and all those millions that are under investment, to invest in growth sectors in the UK, rather than going abroad.

Let me turn to reforming public procurement. At the worst end of the spectrum is probably the Ministry of Defence, where it takes six years from first contact to signing a contract. That is just to sign the contract, not to deliver the piece of military hardware and test it or have it in service. The stories out of MOD procurement would not be out of place in an episode of “The Thick of It”.

That is the worst case, but then there is the Department for Work and Pensions. Andrew in my constituency founded Adzuna, which is effectively a super-duper job search thing that uses AI to match people’s profiles to the skills needed and so on. It took him two and a half years from approaching the DWP to signing a contract. Andrew started out with a laptop at his kitchen table, and businesses that size cannot wait two and a half years. Cash is king—and they will either have gone out of business or decided to go somewhere else by the time that contract is offered.

Whether in defence, where people actually need to contract much more quickly because of the pace of technological change, or Government, who actually need an effective job search tool on their websites, these timescales need to be compressed. In that way the Government will open themselves up much more to small firms instead of just the big firms that are able to take two and a half years on a punt for a contract with the DWP.

To sum up, there are a number of things that the Government could do around information sharing—I thank the hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge) for making that point—and access to capital, particularly encouraging pension funds to invest. They should also look at procurement and focusing that on small businesses, because small businesses are the ones that deliver growth. That is where we get growth in our economy—much more so than from big businesses. The Government have a huge set of levers to pull, so I implore the Minister, “Could we perhaps start pulling them?”. I look forward to his remarks.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

As always, it is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts; thank you for all you do for us in relation to Westminster Hall. I also thank the hon. Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune) for raising this issue and thereby giving us all an opportunity to participate in this debate—and it is always good to see the Minister in his place. I wish him well in the role that he plays and we very much look forward to hearing his response to the debate.

I always say good things about Northern Ireland, but today I want to talk about the things that I believe put us at the top of the tree when it comes to cyber-security. Northern Ireland has become the cyber-security centre of Europe—it is increasingly possible that it might even be the global cyber-security centre—but that situation did not simply arise out of nowhere. There has been a dedicated focus on investing in the sector, and on training young people to think differently and to become involved in it.

My parliamentary aide attended a grammar school that typically focused on maths, English language and science, yet she recalls a careers day when an adviser from Queen’s University in Belfast came in and advised her and her classmates to consider tech and computer science, saying that those would be the future of employment and job security in Northern Ireland. That was back in the year 2000. How right and how prophetic that university adviser was.

Sometimes along life’s way we meet people who will have an incredible influence on our lives; we all have those people, when we look back. That university adviser was one of those people; he had a vision, and in particular a vision for young people. Many of the people he taught are now in that category themselves, in that department or that section.

[Dan Aldridge]

I just want to pay tribute to a number of lecturers at the universities in Northern Ireland. I used to work for the British Computer Society and the Northern Ireland branch was phenomenal. If the hon. Gentleman has not yet made contact with that branch, to speak to it about its cyber-security work in Northern Ireland, it would be a fantastic group of people for him to connect with.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the hon. Gentleman very much for that intervention; it is always good to get an intervention that reinforces the point of view that I am putting forward. Obviously, he has a personal knowledge of this issue and we thank him for that, too.

Due to the dedication and focus of universities in Northern Ireland, in particular Queen’s University in Belfast, cyber-security quickly became a focal point for careers. Subsequently, Northern Ireland, because of its unique combination of world-class academic research, a high concentration of global firms and a stable, highly skilled talent pipeline, has developed a well-established reputation in this field.

However, we all know that we can never rest on our achievements or laurels, but must continue to strive for more. That is why it is imperative that funding exists to keep pace with and even outstrip our competitors in providing skilled workers and innovation, supported by world-leading university structures. Northern Ireland leads the way in that regard and it is good that it does so.

The Centre for Secure Information Technologies at Queen’s University in Belfast is the primary driver of world-class academic research, and we need to retain and enhance funding for that research to continue. The centre is the UK’s innovation and knowledge centre for cyber-security and is the largest of its kind in Europe, recognised by the National Cyber Security Centre as an academic centre of excellence in both research and education. Those are big plaudits for Queen’s University and its work.

Belfast has consistently ranked as the No.1 global destination for US-based cyber-security foreign direct investment, with more than 100 cyber-security businesses and teams located within just three miles of the city centre, hosting European or global security operations for firms including Rapid7, Proofpoint, IBM Security, Microsoft, Nvidia and Nihon Cyber Defence, as well as international financial giants such as Aflac, Allstate and Citi, which has established its global cyber-security operations centre in Belfast. Again, that is an indication of the confidence across the world in Belfast, in Queen’s University and in Northern Ireland.

We have the highest percentage of qualified IT professionals in the United Kingdom and Ireland, with more than 77% holding degree-level qualifications. Added to that is the fact that operating costs in Northern Ireland are approximately 40% to 55% lower than in other parts of western Europe. With a 40% reduction in typical salary costs compared with London, it is easy to see the attraction. The money that has been invested in growing this space has had a real return for the local economy—plenty of high-paying jobs and opportunity.

The sector generates more than £258 million in direct gross value added for the local economy annually, and supports almost 2,800 roles across more than 120 companies, with the average advertised salary in the sector exceeding £53,000, which is significantly higher than the regional private sector median. The recent £3 million investment in the Centre for Secure Information Technologies is estimated to unlock some £10.7 million in broader economic impact across the United Kingdom.

I am not quite sure if the Minister, in his role, has had a chance to go to Northern Ireland? If he has not, I encourage him to go. I think he would be impressed. Everyone knows that I am in favour of support for the Union; I think we are all better together. We have no Scottish nationalists or Plaid Cymru here to say otherwise. In this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, we all help each other, and there are great advantages to being a part of this, the best Union in the world.

If the Minister gets the opportunity to go, he would be impressed. He may tell me he has been there. If he has, that is fantastic news. Investing in growth in this sector is a must. I look to the Minister to ensure that Northern Ireland sees her share of investment, because we have proven already that we can not only provide the goods, but do so much more.

Online Safety: Children and Young People

Dan Aldridge Excerpts

Tuesday 26th November 2024 Westminster Hall

[Lola McEvoy]

A smartphone-free pledge is a great idea, and I will take it to Darlington. Parents are further down the line than we are on this; children are further down the line than we are; campaign groups are further down the line than we are. We are lagging behind. We have taken action—the last Government passed the Online Safety Act. I think it is time for us to make sure that there is nothing missing from that Act. In my view, there are some areas where we could go further.

Children in Darlington have said to me that they are getting these unsolicited images—from the algorithms. These images are being fed to them. They are not from strangers, or bogeymen from another country, although that might happen. The most common complaint is that the algorithm is feeding them content that they did not ask for, and it is deeply disturbing, whether it is violent, explicit or harmful. Once they have seen it, they cannot unsee it.

That is why I am arguing to strengthen the codes. I am not sure that we should be retrofitting harmful apps with a code that may or may not work, and having to tweak a few bits of the algorithm to check whether it will actually protect our children. I think we can take stronger action than that.

[Dan Aldridge (Weston-super-Mare) (Lab)]

Numerous mental health charities and a number of civil society experts have raised with me that there are powers within the Online Safety Act that must be used by the regulator. Indeed, the Secretary of State for DSIT made it very clear last week that he backed the Act and those powers. Does my hon. Friend agree that the regulator could and should act with more powers than it has?

[Lola McEvoy]

I am loath to tell Ofcom that it does not have enough power. As I understand it, the powers are there, but we need to be explicit, and they need to be strengthened. How do we do that? The reason I outlined the timelines is that the time to act is now. We have to explicitly strengthen the children’s codes.

There are many ways to skin a cat, as they say, but one of the simpler ways to do this would be to outline the audience that the apps want to market to. Who is the base audience that the apps and platforms are trying to make money from? If that is explicitly outlined, the codes could be applied accordingly, and strengthened. If children are the target audience, we can question some of the things on those apps and whether the apps are safe for children to use in and of themselves.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lola McEvoy]

I thank the hon. Member for raising that issue, because there are lots of different nudge notifications. We can understand why, because it is an unregulated space and the app is trying to get as much data as possible—if we are not paying for the service, we are the service. We all know that as adults, but the young people and children who we are talking about today do not know that their data is what makes them attractive to that app.

[Dan Aldridge]

I thank my hon. Friend for allowing me to intervene again. In my previous role as head of public policy at the British Computer Society, the one thing that my colleagues and I talked about a lot was the lack of focus on education in the Online Safety Act. I commend the previous Government for passing that legislation, which was very brave. The Act has tried to do some wonderful things, but what is missing is that we have failed to empower a generation of young people to act safely online, to be able to take back the power and say, “No, I am not going to do that.” We have failed in that so far. How do we build that in for the future?

[Peter Dowd (in the Chair)]

Order. I would like to bring to the attention of Members that we have had a huge number of interventions and we are 20 minutes into the debate. The Minister and Opposition spokesperson will get up at just after half past 3. It is a matter for the speaker whether she takes more interventions, but that does mean that the amount of time for those who have asked to speak will be significantly more restricted than I originally planned. That is just a housekeeping matter to be aware of. There is also an issue about the length of interventions: they are getting a bit long. On a matter of this importance, I do not want to restrict interventions and contributions, but I ask Members to please bear that in mind.