Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 29th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 2 February will include:

Monday 2 February—Consideration of Lords amendments to the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill, followed by motions relating to the High Speed Rail (Crewe-Manchester) Bill.

Tuesday 3 February—Second Reading of the Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill.

Wednesday 4 February—Opposition day (17th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition, subject to be announced.

Thursday 5 February—General debate on road safety, followed by a general debate on obligation to assess the risk of genocide under international law in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 6 February—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 9 February includes:

Monday 9 February—General debate on the UK-India free trade agreement, followed by a debate on a motion on increasing survival rates of brain tumours. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Tuesday 10 February—Debate on motions to approve the draft Guaranteed Minimum Pensions Increase Order 2026 and the draft Social Security Benefits Up-rating Order 2026, followed by a debate on motions to approve the draft Child Benefit and Guardian’s Allowance Up-rating Order 2026 and the draft Social Security (Contributions) (Rates, Limits and Thresholds Amendments, National Insurance Funds Payments and Extension of Veteran’s Relief) Regulations 2026.

Wednesday 11 February—Motions relating to the police grant and local government finance reports.

Thursday 12 February—General debate on LGBT+ History Month, followed by a debate on a motion on mobile connectivity in rural areas. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

The House of Commons will rise for the February recess at the conclusion of business on Thursday 12 February and return on Monday 23 February.

[Jesse Norman]

I thank the Leader of the House very much for the business.

As the House will know, this is the week of Holocaust Memorial Day, and I am delighted that we will be debating it in this Chamber later today. I am sure colleagues will have visited the extraordinary exhibition of shoes in Portcullis House. I visited Auschwitz in 1988, when Poland was under communist control, and saw the originals of that exhibition—it was a profoundly moving experience. I know that everyone present will share my sense of sorrow and remembrance for all those who died.

This is also the week in which we note with great sadness the death of Captain Philip Muldowney in a live-fire exercise. We send our very best to his fellow soldiers, his friends and his family. I also put on record my personal sadness on the death of Howard Flight, Lord Flight, a dedicated servant of this House and the other place over many years.

This week, the Prime Minister demonstrated his genius and political touch once again by getting Andy Burnham barred from standing in the Gorton and Denton by-election, in which he would almost certainly have been hammered if he had stood—problem solved.

Meanwhile, the Resolution Foundation has calculated that the extra uncertainty created by the Chancellor’s repeated U-turns has already cost, or will cost, this country £8.2 billion, which will only increase over time. The figure is based on official Office for Budget Responsibility numbers and includes the Government’s U-turns on personal independence payments, universal credit and the winter fuel allowance, but not the additional uncertainty created by their recent U-turns on business rates for pubs and inheritance tax rules for farmers. Those will take the cost closer to £9 billion-worth of unnecessary extra burden on the people of this country created by the Government since July 2024. And lest we forget, even without any U-turns, the extra cost of servicing UK Government debt since July 2024 has been, and remains—again, thanks to the Chancellor of the Exchequer —higher than in either the US or the eurozone. That is according to Labour’s own friendly think-tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research.

Finally, extraordinarily—irony of ironies—we hear that Sir Tony Blair will sit on President Trump’s so-called board of peace for the reconstruction of Gaza, to which one can only say, in the words of the late, great Tom Lehrer, “Satire is dead.” This is the man who took this country to war in the middle east on a false prospectus. One must ask: have the people of Gaza not suffered enough?

I note that AstraZeneca is accompanying the Prime Minister on his trip to China. As the House will know, AstraZeneca is the single biggest investor in research and development in the United Kingdom. Its best-selling, global best-in-class breast cancer drug, Enhertu, is available for reimbursement in America, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Scandinavia and Japan. Within these islands, it is available for reimbursement in Scotland, but not in England, outside a few special cases. That is an insult to AstraZeneca, but still more to the 46,000 women a year who are diagnosed with breast cancer in England, and the millions more who have had breast cancer, who are at risk and who are unable to be treated affordably as a result. There is deep concern among all Members of the House about this issue. Does the Leader of the House share my view of it, and will he take up the matter urgently with his Cabinet colleagues?

Finally, data from this week shows that over the last year police numbers have fallen sharply. Between September 2024 and September 2025, the number of full-time equivalent police officers fell by 1,318. Police staff were down 529, and police community support officers were down 204. The number of special constables was down 514, and police volunteers were down 429. In total, around 3,000 fewer people are now involved in policing our communities. Those figures compare the same point in both years, precisely because recruitment happens in cycles, so there can be no statistical disguising.

I actually rather agree with Commissioner Rowley, who has said that police should be judged by outputs rather than inputs—a very welcome corrective to the endless tendency started, I am afraid, under Messrs Blair and Brown to trumpet increased spending as though it is the same thing as results—but that hardly applies to the number of volunteers and specials, both of which are down. In general, fewer officers and staff mean fewer crimes investigated, fewer patrols on our streets and slower responses to 999 calls. The Home Secretary’s announcement earlier this week was silent on protecting overall police numbers, so could the Leader of the House spell out whether the Government’s policy is to allow police numbers to decline over time? Could the House have an up-to-date statement on that specific issue?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

First of all, through you, Madam Deputy Speaker, may we send our best wishes to Mr Speaker and wish him a speedy recovery from his recent injury?

As the shadow Leader of the House said, Tuesday was Holocaust Memorial Day. During Cabinet we heard from Mala Tribich, who shared her testimony. She actually sat in the Cabinet Room, which is the first time a Holocaust survivor has done that. Yesterday I had the honour of joining Annick Lever in speaking at an event in the Cabinet Office. Holocaust Memorial Day reminds us that societies who do not learn from the mistakes of the past run the risk of repeating them. We must stand together against hatred, prejudice and intolerance wherever it occurs. The theme for Holocaust Memorial Day this year is “Bridging Generations”. The theme is a reminder that the responsibility of remembrance belongs not only to survivors but to us all.

I echo the sentiments of the shadow Leader of the House in paying tribute to those who have died. I want to add a tribute to Sir Christopher Jenkins, the former first parliamentary counsel in the Cabinet Office, who died recently. Sir Christopher was renowned for his mastery in drafting legislation and worked on many important pieces, including the Summer Time Act 1972 and the first devolution Bills for Scotland and Wales. He will also be remembered for pioneering explanatory notes, which clearly explain the purpose of the Bill. I am sure that the whole House will join me in passing on our condolences to his friends and family. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]

That gives me an opportunity to reflect on the work of those in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. They work tremendously hard behind the scenes supporting Ministers in bringing forward legislation. I want to take this moment to pass on my thanks to them for all their hard work.

Speaking of legislation and Government action, this week the Government published the draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill, which will deliver on our manifesto commitment to reform the commonhold model, making it easier for existing leaseholders to convert to commonhold and banning the use of leasehold for most new flats. It will significantly improve the current system for over 5 million existing property owners, ensuring a better deal for future generations of homeowners in England and Wales.

We also published a police reform White Paper, which the shadow Leader of the House referred to, announcing the largest reforms to policing since the police service was founded around 200 years ago. The reforms will create a police service that is more rooted in local communities and remove the barrier that prevents police from focusing on what really matters to our constituents.

Let me turn to the specific points raised by the shadow Leader of the House. He referred to the cost of what he calls U-turns. I notice that he did not welcome in his remarks the changes that we made to farmers’ inheritance tax and, indeed, the help that we brought forward for pubs. He cannot have it both ways. He talks about the cost of borrowing. It is, of course, important that that cost, and indeed borrowing, is brought down so that money is spent on better things, including public services. I gently ask him, however: who ran up the borrowing in the first place? Why is the cost of borrowing so high in this country? The answer is that it is because of the Truss Budget, which crashed and trashed the economy.

Breast cancer drugs, which the right hon. Gentleman raised, are a very important matter. I accept that there is concern, but this Government are determined to do more to address not just breast cancer but other cancers. I will draw his remarks to the attention of the Secretary of State.

Finally, the right hon. Gentleman mentions police numbers, but forgets that the number of police officers fell by 22,000 under the Government he supported. When they did recruit officers, they put them into offices—they were not on the frontline. The Home Secretary has been absolutely clear that we need to get more officers on to the frontline and we are determined to do that. The right hon. Gentleman wants me to spell out our ambitions for that, but he will need to wait slightly longer. I have just announced the business, which includes a debate on police funding on 11 February, when we will not only be able to spell out our plans for increasing the number of police officers, but be happy to compare our record against that of his Government.

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 22nd January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 26 January will include:

Monday 26 January—Second Reading of the Armed Forces Bill.

Tuesday 27 January—Consideration of an allocation of time motion, followed by all stages of the Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill.

Wednesday 28 January—Opposition day (16th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition; subject to be announced.

Thursday 29 January—General debate on Holocaust Memorial Day. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 30 January—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 2 February will include:

Monday 2 February—If necessary, consideration of Lords message on the Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill, followed by consideration of Lords amendments to the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill.

Tuesday 3 February—Second Reading of the Universal Credit (Removal Of Two Child Limit) Bill.

Wednesday 4 February—Opposition day (17th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition; subject to be announced.

Thursday 5 February—General debate on road safety, followed by a general debate on obligation to assess the risk of genocide under international law in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 6 February—The House will not be sitting.

[Jesse Norman]

I thank the Leader of the House for that update.

The House will know that I am obsessive about improving education, skills and life opportunities for young people; I know that the Leader of the House, with his own background, shares that passion. I cannot let this week pass without noting that on Tuesday our new specialist technology and engineering university in Hereford, the New Model Institute for Technology and Engineering, formally launched its new autonomous robotics degree, which is sponsored, designed and delivered in collaboration with the British Army. I thank the Defence ministerial team, and in particular the Minister for the Armed Forces, for coming up to Hereford and supporting that. I believe that it is the UK’s first undergraduate drones technologies degree. It starts in September 2026, which is light speed compared with the normal progression of these things in higher education. It will be of inestimable value not only to young people up and down the country, but to the defence of the realm and in a host of other sectors, including food and agriculture, infrastructure and energy.

Otherwise, what a week this has been! Rising international tensions, heated public disagreement, desperate attempts at diplomatic solutions—and that is just Brooklyn Beckham’s Instagram account. Talking of elites, we have had the amusing spectacle this week of that self-proclaimed friend of the people, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), hoovering up the free food and glugging down the champagne with the global bullshiterati in Davos.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. No, no, no, no.

[Jesse Norman]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

No, I have not even spoken.

[Jesse Norman]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

I am going to speak first. I want temperate language, and I am sure you would love to withdraw that little message you had for us.

[Jesse Norman]

I thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to exercise my quadriceps on several occasions. Yes, of course I unhesitatingly withdraw that appalling term from the record.

All this, I should say, comes from the hon. Member for Clacton after a lifetime spent denouncing Davos as a hub of evil globalist elites where, in his words, there is

“no space for the little man”.

At least we know that that is not true any more. Oh, the irony of it all, Mr Speaker! A wildly anti-establishment figure and long-time member of the Reform club—no relation—now joining the globalist elites. Can it be long before he aspires to join the Garrick club, or indeed joins the Prime Minister in professing publicly that he prefers Davos to Westminster?

Amid all this nonsense, other, very serious changes are under way. Last week, the Government published the results of the latest auction for renewable energy, which set a floor price for renewables of £91 per kilowatt-hour. No one in this House disputes the importance of green energy, or the importance of renewables in the energy mix—[Interruption.] Few sane people dispute the value of green energy, but energy prices are already unfeasibly high for British businesses and, despite the Government’s promises, are set to go higher still, especially once the cost of new nuclear is added in. The effect of the policy will be to punish taxpayers, and of course bill payers, but it is also a form of corporate welfare, because the only benefits will come to the better-off.

Meanwhile, the Government have decided to ignore North sea oil and gas, gravely damage the north-east of Scotland, undermine the employment of thousands of skilled workers, in disagreement with their own unions, and import gas from overseas at greater cost, with more carbon and more carbon miles. In its own way, this is a repetition of the private finance initiative scandal of 30 years ago, in which the country paid tens of billions of pounds more than it should have for public infrastructure, and a lot of wealthy people in the City of London—now resident in overseas countries—made out like bandits.

In 1919, John Maynard Keynes wrote a little book called “The Economic Consequences of the Peace” about the disastrous effects of the treaty of Versailles and the demands that it made for payment from the other side in the first world war. I am not suggesting for a second that there is any comparison between these times and those, in Weimar Germany and the rest of it, but I will say that we are facing severe economic constraints as a result of energy prices. I therefore ask the Leader of the House whether we can have a debate on the economic consequences of the Energy Secretary.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The shadow Leader of the House has clearly had his Weetabix this morning.

Through you, Mr Speaker, may I wish everyone well who is celebrating Burns night this coming Sunday? This weekend is also the annual Big Garden Birdwatch, when the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds asks people to observe their garden for an hour and count the number of birds they see. I understand, however, that Members on the official Opposition Benches have been warned not to take part by the Leader of the Opposition, who says that they should be spending less time watching the bird table and more time watching the shadow Cabinet table. There is clearly concern about more migration from her party to join the lesser spotted Member for Clacton, but surely there is a limit to the number of cuckoos that will fit into the Reform nest.

Before I get on to the remarks of the shadow Leader of the House, let me turn to some other things that have happened this week. We have announced a consultation on further measures to keep children safe online. It will consider the options of banning social media for children below a certain age and raising the digital age of consent. We are committed to keeping children and young people safe online, and colleagues from all parts of the House will have heard from their constituents on this matter, and the Government are listening to those concerns.

The Government also published the water White Paper, setting out a new vision for water and transforming the water system for good. It sets out clear powers for a new regulator, delivering tougher oversight and stronger accountability for water companies, which is consistently raised with me at business questions. We also published the warm homes plan, and we are doubling down on support for home upgrades. We have set out our plans to help households and support thousands through more clean energy jobs.

In response to the shadow Leader of the House, I certainly congratulate his constituency on the developments in higher education. He is a man who hides his light under a bushel—perhaps not quite so much this morning—because he has played a huge role in those developments in higher education in his constituency, and we should recognise that.

The shadow Leader of the House said that no one disputes the importance of green energy, but I think he is stretching the point a bit. It is not simply Members of Reform; there are still Members in his party who dispute the importance of green jobs. He talks about the benefit to the better off, but I remind him that every household will benefit from the £150 cut to energy bills, and it is not just households that will benefit. The other side of it is the thousands of green jobs, not least in my constituency and my region. Finally, I welcome his conversion, perhaps belatedly, to Keynesianism. It is perhaps another sign of his not quite fitting in with the mainstream of his party.

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 15th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 19 January will include:

Monday 19 January—Remaining stages of the Public Office (Accountability) Bill.

Tuesday 20 January—Consideration of Lords amendments to the Sentencing Bill, followed by consideration of Lords amendments to the Holocaust Memorial Bill, followed by consideration of Lords amendments to the Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill.

Wednesday 21 January—Committee of the whole House and remaining stages of the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill, followed by motion to approve the draft Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 (Remedial) Order 2025.

Thursday 22 January—General debate on Government support for the fishing industry, followed by a general debate on the impact of import standards on the agricultural sector. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 23 January—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 26 January includes:

Monday 26 January—Second Reading of the Armed Forces Bill.

Tuesday 27 January—Consideration of an allocation of time motion, followed by all stages of the Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill.

Wednesday 28 January—Opposition day (16th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition. Subject to be announced.

Thursday 29 January—General debate on Holocaust Memorial Day. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 30 January—The House will not be sitting.

[Jesse Norman]

I thank the Leader of the House for the clarity he has given us on the business of the House, and in particular for the rescheduling of the Diego Garcia Bill immediately after it was going to be debated, following the changes made to the Hillsborough law.

I know the whole House will want to join me in expressing our continuing concern for the people of Iran in the face of the vicious repression that they have faced and apparently may continue to face.

If I may, I want to raise two issues: one that is big and one that is small but, in its own way, also big. First, on defence and security, the Chief of the Defence Staff was in front of the Defence Committee this week. He revealed that the strategic defence review was not fully costed, despite all the assurances that were given to the Committee and to Parliament at the time.

As a result, the defence investment plan has been repeatedly delayed—until March, as it appears—because the Treasury is apparently seeking to come to terms with the fact that we are in a pre-war situation and that the actual cash spending power of many of our armed forces will barely grow over the next two years. This is an enormously important topic for the whole House. I would be grateful for the assurance of the Leader of the House that he will speak to No. 10 and the Cabinet Office to ensure that my shadow Cabinet colleagues continue to receive the appropriate security briefings that they require to do their job.

Secondly, the issue of pubs and hospitality has consumed so much of the power, concern and interest of the House. We are always apt to get lost in generalities. In a way, that is a condition of politics: we debate the laws and the general issues of the country. It is also important, however, to zero in on a particular factual situation from time to time and use that to get a wider sense of what is happening.

I will put before the House the facts of a specific case relating to hospitality. In my constituency, the Bay Horse Inn is a great country pub that sits on the outskirts of Hereford. It supports local people and serves my constituents. From April, its business rates are scheduled to rise from £31,000 to over £51,000 a year—a 67% increase. The landlord Neil tells me that energy costs have also risen to £5,500 a month. Unlike households, there is no price cap for commercial energy. Indeed, pubs are charged risk premiums and are locked into prices of nearly 40p a unit, while domestic customers pay around 28p.

The pub already pays above the minimum wage. Neil estimates that the rise in the national living wage will add £18,000 a year to his costs. Meanwhile, monthly national insurance contributions have risen by nearly 170%, and that is made worse because the higher employer contributions now exhaust the employment allowance more quickly. That is a direct tax on employing people, especially young people, and it lands hardest on small, labour-intensive businesses such as pubs. Neil has a few guest rooms at the Bay Horse, so he does not even know if he will be helped by the latest rumoured U-turn on rates support.

That is the reality of the Government’s unwillingness or inability to join up policy in relation to a key set of sectors in the economy that affect hospitality. All those increases are the result of current ministerial decisions. Every Member of the House—including every Government Member—will have pubs and hospitality businesses in their constituency in the same situation.

The Bay Horse is not just a business: it has raised over £60,000 for the Hereford Lions club; it installed a defibrillator at the landlord’s expense; it provides a place for supervised, responsible drinking; and it supports schools, the hospice and local causes year after year, yet Government policy treats it as expendable. When will Ministers start talking to each other? When will they put away the rhetoric of helping and actually get on with assisting small businesses? Can we have a debate in the House that goes into not just the specific issue of hospitality, but the generality of all the different Government policies across different Departments that make life so difficult for these hard-working, struggling local businesses?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join the shadow Leader of the House in sending our thoughts to the people of Iran and the region at this very difficult time.

I also send our congratulations to Lord Forsyth, who was announced as the new Lord Speaker earlier this week, and I pay tribute to Lord McFall, the outgoing Lord Speaker, for his service and commitment.

I am glad to welcome the shadow Leader of the House back to his place. Last week he was on a shadow Cabinet awayday. I thought that he might want to give us a read-out on that and whether a place was set at the top table for the Leader of the Opposition’s new adviser, Nadhim Zahawi, who shortly afterwards had his own awayday when he defected to Reform. I understand from breaking news that things have got worse for the Leader of the Opposition, who has just sacked her rival and shadow Justice Secretary amid rumours that he was about to join Reform too. We watch developments with interest.

The shadow Leader of the House raised the issue of defence. As a member of the Defence Committee who takes a keen interest in these matters, he will know how difficult these decisions are, but the Government are committed to increasing defence expenditure and to taking whatever decisions are necessary to defend our country. As far as briefings are concerned, he raises an important matter about access to the information that the official Opposition require. He knows that I am a strong advocate of the role of the official Opposition—I spent quite a long time in opposition myself. It is important that the Opposition get access and I will take back to No. 10 and others his request and ensure that that happens.

The right hon. Gentleman is perfectly entitled to raise the issue of pubs, and there are some fantastic pubs in his constituency and that part of the country. I would gently remind him that 7,000 pubs closed under the Conservatives, and in the Budget we put in £4.3 billion of support over three years to help pubs deal with the transition from the support that they previously received. On top of that, other measures that we have taken include easing licensing to help pubs offer drinks more flexibly, maintaining our cut to draught alcohol duty and capping corporation tax. We do recognise that pubs are still worried and many of them are in a difficult situation, and that is why the Chancellor has commissioned work examining a pub support package. That is not just words, as the shadow Leader of the House suggested: it is action.

In terms of joined-up policy across Government, of course the Government are joining up our approach, especially on the economy. The House may have noticed this morning that performance statistics show that waiting lists are down by 312,000, and more people are being treated within 18 weeks. November saw the second biggest monthly drop in waiting lists in 15 years. The Government also announced this week that we will deliver Northern Powerhouse Rail, a multibillion pound investment that will create a turn-up-and-go railway across the northern growth corridor of Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds, Sheffield and York. We have also launched the first ever town of culture competition, which will boost local pride and celebrate the unique stories of our towns, not just in urban areas but in rural areas. Today is national pothole day—although the Leader of the Opposition may think it is national dig-yourself-into-a-hole day—and the Government have provided a record £7.3 billion of funding for local roads, announced in the Budget, allowing councils to get on and fix our roads. That demonstrates that this Government are getting on with the job.

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Tuesday 13th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

I thank the Leader of the House for his statement and for advance notice of it, but I think it should be noted by the House that this—I am sure he would agree—is a bit of a mess. The Public Office (Accountability) Bill was in Committee in December, and amendments should have been filed by the Government on Wednesday of last week, but in fact they came on Friday, too late for colleagues to be able to address them. Now we have had a sudden emergency rejig of business tomorrow, and we know not what is going to happen to the ping-pong that was planned for next Monday. Instead will be debating this Bill.

Can the Leader of the House explain why this has happened and what has gone wrong here? Can he also explain what will happen to the legislation and motions that were originally to be debated on Monday 19 January? Finally, can he assure the House that when these matters are brought in front of the House next Monday, the Minister will give a full explanation as to both the ministerial snafu and the substantive issues that have caused this in the first place?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I appreciate the shadow Leader of the House’s comments, not least because we spoke earlier at the earliest opportunity. He will be aware, as will the House, of the importance and sensitivity of the Public Office (Accountability) Bill. I recognise that it is not ideal for Members when we have to change business at short notice. Last Friday the Government tabled a series of amendments to further strengthen the Bill’s provisions. We continue to listen to stakeholders on all sides of the debate, to ensure that our amendments strike the careful balance that is required and, where necessary, make changes. For that reason, I decided that we would move the Bill from tomorrow to next Monday. I am not going to provide a running commentary on what the changes might be, but the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones), is sitting next to me and has heard what the shadow Leader of the House has said. We will be tabling new amendments tomorrow. The Government will continue to keep all Members updated on this, and on Monday we will have an opportunity to debate these important matters fully.

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 11th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 15 December will include:

Monday 15 December—Consideration of a Lords message to the Employment Rights Bill, followed by Second Reading of the Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill.

Tuesday 16 December—Second Reading of the Finance (No. 2) Bill.

Wednesday 17 December—If necessary, consideration of a Lords message, followed by Second Reading of the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill, followed by if necessary, consideration of a Lords message.

Thursday 18 December—General debate on matters to be raised before the Christmas Adjournment. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

The House will rise for the Christmas recess at the conclusion of business on Thursday 18 December and return on Monday 5 January 2026, when the provisional business for that week will include:

Monday 5 January—Debate on a motion on mobile connectivity in rural areas. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Tuesday 6 January—Second Reading of the Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill.

[Jesse Norman]

A key theme of business questions has been the need for the Government and, indeed, the whole country to be resolute in the face of Russian aggression in Ukraine. In that context, I know the whole House will want to join me again in expressing our profound sorrow for the death of Lance Corporal George Hooley of the Parachute Regiment. He was clearly an exemplary soldier. We salute his courage and his service, and we send our deep regrets and condolences to his friends and family.

You will have noted, Mr Speaker, that I have inaugurated a chink-of-light moment at business questions, recognising a time when, accidentally, deliberately or under compulsion, the Government have done something right. Last week, they quite rightly dropped day one protections in the Employment Rights Bill. In that same spirit, I express my very strong support for work under way on the need for European nations to collaborate on immobilising, freezing and utilising Russian financial assets for the benefit of Ukraine. Will the Leader of the House make inquiries with the relevant Ministers to ensure that the Government are taking every conceivable measure to do the same immobilisation, freezing and utilisation for any Russian assets controlled by UK financial institutions or passing through the jurisdiction of the City of London?

I do not know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer is a fan of the film “Casablanca”. The House will recall the immortal moment in which the morally flexible chief of police, Captain Renault, professes himself “Shocked, shocked” to discover that there is gambling going on in Rick’s casino, even while he trousers his own winnings. So it is with the Chancellor, who told the Treasury Committee this week of how angry and upset she was at the level of leaking of the Budget that had taken place. It was, as she put it, “incredibly damaging”, and she had initiated an immediate leak inquiry.

I do not think that I am revealing a state secret in telling the House that that inquiry will not name any individuals as responsible or, indeed, discover that anyone was at fault at all, let alone in the nest of singing skylarks now occupying Downing Street. It is, however, offensive to think that the head of the Office for Budget Responsibility can investigate and review the leak there and resign within a matter of hours while this nonsense drags on. We must therefore conclude that, as with Captain Renault, the whole thing is a sham confected for the benefit of the Government.

Even so, it is quite a revealing sham. One does not normally think of the Chancellor as a philosopher of language—though doubtless that will soon be added to her CV—but she drew an interesting distinction in her testimony between what she called authorised and unauthorised leaks. What, one might ask, is an authorised leak supposed to be? Given how damaging leaks are to the markets, should we think of authorised leaks as somehow not having those damaging effects? Under some circumstances, the act of leaking can itself be a criminal offence, or does that apply only to unauthorised leaks? If it does, perhaps someone should inform the Metropolitan police. I ask the Leader of the House to encourage the Chancellor to complete her inquiry within days and to make a statement to the House once the inquiry has reported, setting out its approach and results and explaining in plain English what an authorised leak is supposed to be.

Let me go further. Thanks to some excellent—indeed, forensic—detective work by my right hon. Friend the Member for Melton and Syston (Edward Argar), it appears that two Government leak inquiries are still outstanding many months after they were launched. The first is in the Department for Education on the leaking of the tuition fee increases, dating back a full year to November 2024, and the second is in the Cabinet Office on the leaking of the Prime Minister’s defence statement in February—a topic on which you, Mr Speaker, had some very pithy words for the premier. It is a total embarrassment to the Government that these leak inquiries are still outstanding after so long. They underline what a charade this whole process has become. I cannot imagine that the Leader of the House feels any differently about all of this, so will he please sort it out as soon as possible?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

First, I join the shadow Leader of the House in sending our condolences to the friends and family of Lance Corporal Hooley, who died while serving our country and in the cause of keeping the flame of freedom alive.

As we approach Christmas, I want to recognise the contribution that charities make across our country. Homelessness charities in particular provide an invaluable service in supporting those experiencing homelessness throughout the year, but particularly as the temperatures fall. I draw the House’s attention to the launch of the Government’s homelessness strategy today, which aims to halve the number of people sleeping rough long term by 2029 and which will rewire the system to ensure that support is where it is most needed. My hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness will provide further details to the House in her statement later today.

I also want to mention the charity Citizens UK, which does a fantastic job across the country, including in my constituency, and which has been selected by The Guardian for its charity appeal this year. As a result of Citizens UK’s successful campaign, it has helped to triple the number of living wage employees across the north-east region and launched a citizens commission on mental health, particularly for young people. It has had a direct influence on the excellent work that the Government are doing in that regard. I want to place on the record, as the Member of Parliament for Tynemouth, my thanks to the Reverend Simon Mason and Father Chris Hughes, who provide fantastic leadership on these matters.

I am pleased to announce today the publication of the Modernisation Committee’s first report with recommendations to improve accessibility across the parliamentary estate. It is simply not acceptable that some MPs, staff and visitors are prevented from engaging in some aspects of parliamentary life due to this place’s inaccessible nature. As the crucible of our democracy and national debate, the House of Commons must be accessible for all, and I am happy to say that work is under way, but much more needs to be done. I thank all members of the Committee and the former Leader of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), for their work on the inquiry.

On wider matters, last week the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025 received Royal Assent, which will protect vulnerable animals by strengthening the rules on pet travel to ensure that animals imported into the country for sale are healthy, treated with care and transported humanely. I congratulate the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) on navigating the Bill successfully to Royal Assent, which underlines, as we approach a second Session at some point in the new year, how important private Members’ Bills can be. They can be highly effective and can provide an invaluable opportunity for Members to promote the causes they support, to change the law and—certainly in this case—to help deliver Government priorities.

If the shadow Leader of the House wants to take credit for some changes, I am pleased to let him live in a world in which he can do that. On Russian assets, the Government continue, as he knows, to consider how Russian assets might be used, particularly in support of Ukraine. We are working very closely with allies to make progress on that. I can assure him that we are constantly aware of what might be happening in our own country and therefore take these domestic issues very seriously indeed.

The shadow Leader of the House mentioned leaks and what the Chancellor said to the Treasury Committee yesterday. She made her views on leaks and briefings, including what happened with the OBR ,very clear to the Committee. Of course, any Government have a responsibility around Budget time to take market reaction into account, but I gently remind the shadow Leader of the House that the reaction of the markets to the Budget was actually quite positive—I want to ensure that that is on the record. If anything emerges from the inquiries that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor talked about yesterday, I am sure that Ministers will want to update the House about those matters—they would be absolutely right to do so—but I gently remind the House that, although all these discussions about process are important, the Budget was about cutting the cost of living, balancing the books and getting growth in our economy, and those are the matters of most interest to people in our constituencies.

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 4th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 8 December will include:

Monday 8 December—Consideration of Lords message to the Employment Rights Bill, followed by consideration of Lords message to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, followed by consideration of Lords message to the Mental Health Bill [Lords].

Tuesday 9 December—Second Reading of the Railways Bill.

Wednesday 10 December—Opposition day (14th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition. Subject to be announced.

Thursday 11 December—General debate on St Andrew’s day and Scottish affairs, followed by general debate on the impact of foreign interference on security, trade and democracy. The subjects of these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 12 December—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 15 December will include:

Monday 15 December—Second Reading of the Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill.

Tuesday 16 December—Second Reading of the Finance (No. 2) Bill.

Wednesday 17 December—Second Reading of the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill.

Thursday 18 December—General debate on matters to be raised before the Christmas Adjournment. The subject of this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

The House will rise for the Christmas recess at the conclusion of business on Thursday 18 December 2025 and return on Monday 5 January 2026.

[Jesse Norman]

If I may, I would like to express my personal sorrow at the death of Sir John Stanley this week. The House may not know that he was the first person to reach and to comfort the dying Airey Neave, after Neave had been the victim of a bomb from the Irish National Liberation Army, a spin-off of the IRA. Sir John was also a highly effective member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

A couple of weeks ago, I invited the House to join me in supporting our cricketers down under. That was the kiss of death: they instantly lost the first test. So I am now thrilled, and I hope the House will join me in congratulating Joe Root on his majestic hundred in Australia in the present test.

Once again, the past seven days have not been a thing of glory for the Government. Not a single measure in the Budget has been scored by the Office for Budget Responsibility as positive for growth, while the OECD and a host of other experts have warned that the Chancellor’s tax rises last week will actually hold growth back. Except for seven Members, every Labour Member voted in favour of keeping the two-child benefit cap in 2024; last week, they voted in exactly the opposite way. Junior doctors will go on strike for the third time this year in the run-up to Christmas. In fairness, though, I should say that there has been one chink of light: the Government have rightly dropped day one protections in the Employment Rights Bill.

Yesterday, we were treated to the inglorious sight of the Prime Minister misusing the engagements question once again to make a party political broadcast at Prime Minister’s questions. We do not have a presidential system in this country, thank the Lord, nor do we insist on a rigid uniformity of practice in this House, but if the Prime Minister wishes to make a statement to Parliament, he may do so in the usual way, giving notice to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, or to the Speaker, and taking questions from colleagues in this House on the policy. I therefore ask the Leader of the House, as our spokesman in the Cabinet, to tell the House what he will do to prevent this practice from recurring. I am also asking Mr Speaker to make it clear in public that this will not be tolerated by the Chair in future.

It was reported this week that the Government will be drawing on German start-up companies to fill a supposed drone gap for the British Army. I am sure the whole House will share my view that the UK should seek to offer a welcoming environment for foreign investment, and all the more so after a Budget that has done nothing to support economic growth. I also recognise the value of having leading international companies competitively involved in the testing and development of drones. However, it is a serious concern that there appear to be no plans within the Ministry of Defence to provide strategic leadership, investment and support to start-up drone companies created, led and managed in this country and by British nationals. We have been promised a defence investment plan, but Ministers have been unable to say when this plan will be presented to the House. It looks as though they may be leaving it to the last full week of term, perhaps to avoid a proper measure of parliamentary scrutiny. Experience has repeatedly shown that, in times of crisis, the nation needs to have core capabilities solidly based in UK-owned and led domestic manufacturing. That was one of the lessons of the pandemic. It is hard to imagine a more significant emerging defence need than that of high-quality, high-technology and cost-effective drones. There are superb companies in this country ready to scale, as needed.

Last June, the Prime Minister called for what he termed a “national conversation” on defence. He made it clear, rightly, that the defence of the realm was not just a matter for the Ministry of Defence; the whole of our society, as well as the whole of Government, needed to be mobilised into a better understanding of the threat. Since then, that threat has become only more serious. I am delighted that the Prime Minister is in Lossiemouth today to make an announcement, but the sad fact is that he has said precisely nothing to lead that wider national conversation or raise awareness of the threat. Meanwhile, the public are uncertain on the need and rationale for new spending, and key aspects of our defence and security readiness are, if anything, getting worse. May we, at the very least, have a statement next week on what the Government are planning to do to support the UK drones industry in filling that important strategic need?

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 27th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 1 December will include:

Monday 1 December—Continuation of the Budget debate.

Tuesday 2 December—Conclusion of the Budget debate.

Wednesday 3 December—Remaining stages of the Pension Schemes Bill.

Thursday 4 December—Debate on a motion on the war in Ukraine. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 5 December—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 8 December includes:

Monday 8 December—Consideration of Lords messages to the Employment Rights Bill, followed by consideration of Lords messages to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, followed by consideration of Lords messages to the Mental Health Bill [Lords].

Tuesday 9 December—Second Reading of the Railways Bill.

Wednesday 10 December—Opposition day (14th allotted day), debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition, subject to be announced.

Thursday 11 December—General debate on St Andrew’s day, followed by a general debate on the impact of foreign interference on security, trade and democracy. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 12 December—The House will not be sitting.

[Jesse Norman]

I am sure colleagues across the House will want to join me in wishing a very happy Lancashire Day to Lancastrians everywhere, and perhaps most especially to the only Lancastrian Speaker of the 158 people to have held that office—there will have to be three more before it reaches the number of Herefordians who have held it. I also wish a very happy Thanksgiving to all our American friends, hosts and families.

No one needs reminding that the Leader of the House is a thoroughly good and sensible man. [Interruption.] “Careful”, he says. We like to keep things orderly at business questions, but I cannot imagine what he can possibly have made of the past few weeks. We have had an entirely unnecessary period of prolonged economic uncertainty; endless media pitch-rolling and U-turns; a relentlessly dismissive attitude to this House from Ministers; repeated breaches of the ministerial code; and even the fiasco of a convenient Office for Budget Responsibility leak on the morning of the Budget.

The House should be in no doubt that yesterday we saw the Government increase taxes to the highest levels since at least 1970, according to the OBR. Between last year and this, the Government have raised something like £100 billion in additional tax revenue, much of which will fall on working people. They have done so not through any coherent tax policy or vision for the UK economy, but through an array of “back of a fag packet” tricks and wheezes, whose inevitable effect will be to make it even harder for businesses to expand and for people to get jobs. As Paul Johnson, lately of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said, it is

“big tax rises but no effort at reform”.

The tax rises are mainly to finance extra spending, and are not because of worse forecasts.

This Government claim to speak for working people, skills, employment and growth, but those are all things they chose to undermine at yesterday’s Budget. Those were their choices. Even now, the Government have failed to please their union paymasters. In the words of Sharon Graham, general secretary of Unite, the decision to freeze income tax thresholds will result in 10 million workers paying the higher rate of income tax. A stealth tax on workers means that everyday people pay the price again.

What is the point of this Government? What are they for? No one can say, however they vote and whatever their politics. This Chancellor and this Prime Minister came to power last year with no idea and no plan. Even by that standard, they have been a colossal disappointment, but that is not all. As we just noted in the urgent question, this week has also seen a leak of the Justice Secretary’s intention to abolish jury trial for all but the most serious cases. We had the embarrassing sight of the junior Justice Minister, the hon. and learned Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Sarah Sackman)—a woman who transparently believes in the importance of jury trial—defending this preposterous proposal. The Justice Secretary is the same man who said in 2020:

“Jury trials are fundamental to our democracy.”

Blackstone, no less, called them

“the glory of the English law”,

and yet they are to be abolished by a Justice Secretary and a junior Justice Minister who both went to Harvard law school and a Prime Minister who spent nearly four decades at the Bar.

The Bar Council has made clear that jury trials are not the cause of any case backlog, destroying the Government’s attempted justification for the policy. The Criminal Bar Association has strongly criticised the proposal, as has the legendary Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws. Many others will doubtless do the same in the coming days. Again, it is inconceivable to me that the Leader of this House supports this decision. I hope that at the very least he will allow time for a Backbench debate soon on this topic.

Both the Budget and the Government’s proposal to abolish jury trial have something fundamental in common. The Chancellor seemed unaware yesterday that in asking people to, as she put it, “make a contribution” to the Budget, she is not inviting them to engage in some voluntary process. She is in fact using the full force of the coercive power of the state to take away their freely owned property in taxes. The removal of jury trial would do the same thing to the involvement of citizens in this country in the exercise of the criminal law—that other supreme coercive power of the state. Whatever the rhetoric, and whatever the smoke and mirrors, both these actions demonstrate that this Government hold the ordinary men and women of this country in profound contempt. No one should be surprised if those actions and this Government are now treated by those people with similar contempt.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join the shadow Leader of the House in wishing everyone a happy Lancashire Day. I am sure the House will join me in sending our condolences to those affected by the fire in Hong Kong. The tragedy that is unfolding is deeply saddening, and my thoughts are with all those impacted. I am sure that the thoughts of the House are similarly with them.

Before I respond to the points that the shadow Leader of the House has made, I remind the House that this week is UK Parliament Week, which is now in its 15th year. Parliament Week continues to increase its reach each year, engaging schools, youth groups and community organisations in constituencies across the United Kingdom. I have been pleased to be involved in a number of Parliament Week events, and I am sure that a number of colleagues are out doing exactly that as we speak. I know that many Members on both sides of the House have also been involved, and I thank you, Mr Speaker, for your involvement and your leadership on these matters.

Tuesday was White Ribbon Day, when people around the world stand up against male violence against women and girls. I am pleased that the House is in the process of becoming accredited with White Ribbon UK, demonstrating a commitment to preventing abuse and violence against women and girls by promoting gender equality and encouraging everyone, particularly men, to be part of the solution. Ending violence against women is a top priority for this Government, and the violence against women and girls strategy will be published soon. It will outline how we can halve levels of violence against women and girls within a decade.

The right hon. Gentleman refers to the Budget. Yesterday the Chancellor delivered her Budget statement—a Budget that will ease the cost of living, reduce our national debt and bring down NHS waiting lists. He asks about the purpose of the Budget, and those three things are its purpose. Today we begin the second day of debate on the Budget, with further days to follow, which I am sure many Members will want to contribute to.

I recognise the contribution of Members from across the House who have been strong advocates for a number of measures that were included in the Budget yesterday. For example, the Chancellor announced that the Government will transfer the investment reserve fund in the British Coal staff superannuation scheme to the scheme’s trustees. That will mean that more money is unlocked for members of the scheme, and I recognise the contribution of my hon. Friends the Members for Mansfield (Steve Yemm), for Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney (Nick Smith), for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) and for Blyth and Ashington (Ian Lavery), and many others who campaigned on this matter.

The Chancellor also announced that the Government will exempt search and rescue vehicles from vehicle excise duty, which will mean that more money can be diverted into critical frontline services. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) on advocating for that in business questions. Clearly, the Chancellor heeded his words.

The shadow Leader of the House raises the question of briefings and leaks. I take these matters very seriously, as I know you do, Mr Speaker. It is very important that matters are brought to this House at the earliest opportunity, so that Members can be told first. I understand that the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee is looking into the wider question of briefings outside this House, and we look forward to seeing its findings.

The right hon. Gentleman also raises the question of the OBR leak. We take that very seriously indeed, and the matter is being investigated.

I return to what I have said previously to the right hon. Gentleman and others on his side of the House on our discussions about the economy and Budgets. After 14 years of failure, my advice is that the best thing they can do is start with an apology. He should apologise, because the very problems that we are seeking to address were partly caused by the legacy of his Government. We are bringing down the cost of living and reducing the national debt, and we will be bringing down waiting lists in the NHS.

Let me finish on the point with which the right hon. Gentleman started: the way in which I take these matters and try to approach being Leader of the House. I do so with seriousness and seek to ensure that there is respect for Members of this House, wherever they sit, so I have to say that I was slightly disappointed yesterday—not about the Budget, which is excellent. Important matters should have been the first order of the day, but we heard from the Leader of the Opposition a speech that, quite frankly, fell short because of the tone that she took. We have talked about ending the knockabout in this place. I just think that yesterday hit the wrong tone, and I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will take that message back.

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 24 November will include:

Monday 24 November—Remaining stages of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (day one).

Tuesday 25 November—Remaining stages of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (day two).

Wednesday 26 November—My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will deliver her Budget statement.

Thursday 27 November—Continuation of the Budget debate.

Friday 28 November—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 1 December includes:

Monday 1 December—Continuation of the Budget debate.

Tuesday 2 December—Conclusion of the Budget debate.

Wednesday 3 December—Remaining stages of the Pension Schemes Bill.

Thursday 4 December—Debate on a motion on the war in Ukraine, followed by a general debate on St Andrew’s day. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 5 December—The House will not be sitting.

[Jesse Norman]

May I start by recording my thanks to the Leader of the House for agreeing to the request to have the Ukraine debate on 4 December? I think we all feel warmly about that decision.

Politics at the present moment may not be enormously pretty, but it has been a week of triumph in the sporting world. We have had the joyous mayhem of Scotland reaching their first world cup for 28 years, but let us not forget the extraordinary thumping that the England rugby team dealt out to the All Blacks at the weekend or the perfect world cup qualification record of our English footballers. In that spirit, I hope many Members—if perhaps not all—will join me in sending our best wishes to the England cricket team as they prepare for the opening test in Perth tomorrow.

This has been another week in which the headlines have not been kind to the Government and their allies. They have reported that the Prime Minister has spent a sixth of his time in office abroad. That is two and a half months to date spent outside the UK since the last election. Half of all UK jobs lost since the Government came to power are among the under-25s. That is 80,000 more young people out of work since July 2024. Agency staff brought into work during Birmingham’s eight-month-long bin strike by members of Unite have now themselves decided to go on strike. The former Deputy Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner), is reported to be planning a leadership bid, following last week’s speculation about the Health Secretary and last month’s unfortunate foray by the Mayor of Manchester. Since Labour took office, the energy price cap has not fallen but risen by £187 to £1,755.

I often wonder if the Government have forgotten that there is a world outside London and our biggest cities. In that spirit, I hope I may raise a couple of important issues on which I would be grateful for the assistance of the Leader of the House. The first is local. Last weekend, the village of Ewyas Harold in my constituency was devastated by flooding as a result of Storm Claudia. The village was inundated after record levels of rainfall flooded the Dulas brook, with water levels rising to the highest ever recorded by the monitoring station. The emergency services were called out to help vulnerable residents and houses, and local pubs and other businesses were severely damaged. Many local people have been involved in clearing up the mess—in particular the brilliant young farmers club—but it will take months for the village to fully get back on its feet.

The House was given time to discuss the severe flooding in nearby Monmouthshire in Wales yesterday, so may I ask the Leader of the House if he will encourage both the Environment Agency and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to take the swiftest and most comprehensive action to protect Ewyas Harold and other flood-hit areas across England in order to prevent this from happening again?

The second issue is a national one. The listed places of worship grant scheme helps thousands of churches, synagogues, mosques, temples and other places of worship to reclaim or get grants to cover the VAT paid on repair and maintenance work. It is a small but very useful and cost-effective institution that has quietly worked away over more than two decades to preserve the historic fabric of our nation. Unfortunately, since the last election the size of the scheme has been cut in half and a new cap has been imposed on the level of individual grants. It is a feature of these repairs that if they are not made, the damage often leads to enormous further costs. The Government seem determined to maintain or increase public spending in other areas, so given that and the relatively very small sums involved, could the Leader of the House pick this matter up with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and see whether this scheme can be quickly restored to its previous glory?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank the shadow Leader of the House for his questions. Can I first, through you, Madam Deputy Speaker, thank Mr Speaker for his timely reminder this week of our responsibilities in this House regarding national security? As the House will know, the Security Service issued an espionage alert to Parliament, highlighting targeted outreach by the Chinese Ministry of State Security to individuals in our community. This is a serious matter that the Government take very seriously, and I know that Mr Speaker does too. I urge all MPs to heed the advice and to report any suspicious activity immediately.

Next week is Parliament Week, when we encourage young people and the public to engage with the UK’s democratic systems and institutions. In that spirit, I was delighted yesterday to meet children from East Hunsbury primary school, after my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton South (Mike Reader) mentioned them during a business questions earlier this year. The school has won the kind school award, and it was a great pleasure to meet the children. They are a credit to their school, to their parents and, most of all, to themselves. They are a reminder to us all of the importance of being kind. You will be pleased to know, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I have been made an honorary kindness ambassador—[Laughter.] I have to say, that is an honour that I never received during my time as Chief Whip.

I was pleased to announce in this week’s business that the Backbench Business Committee has chosen Ukraine as the subject for its debate on 4 December. I thank the shadow Leader of the House, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean), and the hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex (Sir Bernard Jenkin) for their representation to help secure the debate.

Members will welcome the publication of the men’s health strategy this week. It is an important topic that has been raised frequently during business questions. The strategy will address the stark inequality in men’s health to create a society where men and boys are supported to live healthier and happier lives. I encourage Members to contribute in the debate later, on International Men’s Day.

As the shadow Leader of the House said, it has been a good week for sport. I want to congratulate Scotland on qualifying for the world cup for the first time since 1998, and I remind the House that the only time a home nation has won the world cup was under a Labour Government.

The shadow Leader of the House complains about the amount of time that the Prime Minister has spent abroad. That reflects two things above all. One is the uncertainty of the international situation. The second is the fact that he has spent a great deal of time addressing the issue of trade and bringing investment into this country. On the issue of jobs, he surely must realise that getting good trade deals—which his Government were not prepared or able to do—will not only bring investment to our country but, hopefully, turn into jobs across our nation.

The shadow Leader of the House quite rightly raises the issue of flooding. I will draw to the attention of DEFRA and the Environment Agency the urgency of ensuring that preparations are made as far as possible, but I also gently encourage him to urge some of his colleagues to start recognising the effect of climate change.

As a constituency MP, the shadow Leader of the House has every right to raise the listed places of worship grant scheme. I have to say that his constituency and neighbouring constituencies have some fantastic churches, many of which are in need of repair. I will not comment on matters of VAT or possible tax changes, as we have only a few days before the Budget, but I will draw his concerns to the attention of not only DCMS but the Treasury.

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 13th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 17 November will include:

Monday 17 November—Committee of the whole House and remaining stages of the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill.

Tuesday 18 November—Second Reading of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill.

Wednesday 19 November—Consideration of Lords amendments to the Border Security, Asylum And Immigration Bill, followed by Committee of the whole House and remaining stages of the Property (Digital Assets) Bill [Lords].

Thursday 20 November—Debate on a motion on the subject of international Men’s day, followed by debate on a motion on an injury in service award. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 21 November—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 24 November includes:

Monday 24 November—Remaining stages of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (day one).

Tuesday 25 November—Remaining stages of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (day two).

Wednesday 26 November—My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will deliver her Budget statement.

Thursday 27 November—Continuation of the Budget debate.

Friday 28 November—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 1 December includes:

Monday 1 December—Continuation of the Budget debate.

Tuesday 2 December—Conclusion of the Budget debate.

[Jesse Norman]

I am sure I speak for many Members when I thank you, Mr Speaker, and the whole of the Speaker’s Office for the work you have put in to make this past week of remembrance so memorable. The gardens of remembrance, the projection of images from the second world war on to the Elizabeth Tower, the wreath laying in Westminster Hall and much else—all these things, I know, took a huge amount of organisation, co-ordination and hard work, so I thank you and your office. I draw colleagues’ attention to the launch of the project to build the remembrance clock at the national arboretum, and hope that they will dig deep to support that.

In the spirit of exchanging news stories that have developed over the past two or three weeks, I will, if I may, set out a raft of intriguing items. Nine former four-star generals have condemned the Government’s treatment of veterans on Remembrance Day. One million more people than a year ago are now claiming universal credit without any requirement to look for a job. The Chancellor gave an unexpected early press conference—apparently to prepare people for major tax rises—and the Prime Minister acknowledged yesterday the rise in national insurance. Junior doctors have announced a five-day strike, starting tomorrow, in pursuit of a 26% pay rise, on top of the woefully inadequate—as they see it—29% received last year. No. 10 Downing Street has insisted that the Prime Minister has full confidence in Morgan McSweeney, and that he—or perhaps Mr McSweeney —will still be Prime Minister at the next election.

It has rightly been said that our country has moved from being post war to being pre-war. In recent weeks, we have seen a marked escalation of the conflict in Ukraine: Russian forces have made gains in and around the city of Pokrovsk, threatening to cut transport routes and displace thousands more civilians, and missile and drone attacks on energy and transport infrastructure have intensified, with serious consequences for Ukraine’s ability to sustain its economy through the winter. These developments follow reports of a significant increase in Russian arms production and continued circumvention of sanctions through covert oil and gas shipments. At the same time, international aid flows have slowed, and Ukrainian forces are facing actual or potential shortages of money, ammunition or equipment.

All that, I suggest, underlines the need for Parliament to take stock. Three years into the conflict, the nature of the war is shifting, and now demands renewed strategic co-ordination among Ukraine’s allies. In that context, I ask the Leader of the House to commit to keeping back 4 December for the Backbench debate on Ukraine requested by my brilliant hon. Friend the Member for Harwich and North Essex (Sir Bernard Jenkin) and agreed by the Backbench Business Committee.

By my calculation, we have not had a general debate on Ukraine on the Floor of the House since February this year, and not on a substantive motion since 2023. The debate would allow the House to review the current worrying state of military preparedness and humanitarian situation, the position on frozen Russian financial assets held in Europe, the status of occupied territories that Russia wrongly claims for itself, and the Government’s approach to long-range defensive support and sanctions enforcement. Right hon. and hon. Members could examine the diplomatic context, test Government policy and cross-departmental co-ordination, and bring the diverse range of expertise and knowledge across the House to bear on a crucial issue facing the entire continent of Europe. Above all, it would allow this House of Commons, as an institution, to brief itself in full and demonstrate the strong sense of unity that exists in this country on the vital defence of our sovereign ally, Ukraine. The House has been steadfast in its support for Ukraine, and rightly so, but, as the conflict evolves, we must ensure our response evolves with it. It is possible that the Leader of the House’s genius for prognostication and intelligence-gathering may have already caused him to form a supportive view of this request, but, if not, I ask very much that he have the Government make time on 4 December for that timely and important debate.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the House.

Business of the House

Jesse Norman Excerpts

Thursday 30th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 3 November includes:

Monday 3 November—Second Reading of the Public Office (Accountability) Bill.

Tuesday 4 November—Opposition day (12th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition, subject to be announced.

Wednesday 5 November—Consideration of Lords message to the Employment Rights Bill, followed by consideration of Lords amendments to the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill.

The House will rise for the November recess at the conclusion of business on Wednesday 5 November and return on Tuesday 11 November.

The provisional business for the week commencing 10 November includes:

Tuesday 11 November—General debate on the contribution of the armed forces to mark Remembrance.

Wednesday 12 November—Opposition day (13th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition, subject to be announced.

Thursday 13 November—Consideration of Lords amendments to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill.

Friday 14 November—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 17 November includes:

Monday 17 November—Committee of the whole House and remaining stages of the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill.

[Jesse Norman]

I thank the Leader of the House for that update.

I know the whole House will want to join me in sending our very best wishes to the victims of the hurricane in Jamaica, and now also Cuba, Haiti and the Turks and Caicos Islands.

I want to pay a personal tribute to Prunella Scales, who died this week. She was a magnificent actress, the linchpin of a great acting dynasty and—as was her husband Timothy West—a wonderful reader of audiobooks.

Among the news this week have been the following items: the former Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), has been elected as deputy leader of the Labour party, and has vowed to work constructively with No. 10 Downing Street; the Director of Public Prosecutions has publicly contradicted the Prime Minister in relation to the collapsed China spying case; the Labour party has fallen in the polls to a record low for a recently elected Government; and Irish citizens may now be forced to have digital identity cards to work in this country under the Government’s new plans.

I would like to raise with the Leader of the House two important issues, one directly relating to the recent business of the House. As a former Chief Whip, he will know that the first question at Prime Minister’s questions always follows a simple formula: the Prime Minister is asked to list their engagements; he or she typically presents public condolences or congratulations and comments on an issue—often an international issue—affecting the whole House; and then says, “This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others,” and so on.

Unfortunately, since taking office last year, the present Prime Minister has increasingly misused his first engagements question. Two weeks ago, he used it to avoid making a full statement to the House about China, which I do not think can have pleased the Speaker’s Office. This week, he used it to try to score a series of partisan political points—by my counting, the eighth time he has tried to do this since taking office. This is an abuse of procedure, and it is a discourtesy to this House. Its effect is to turn an open question into a party political broadcast. It undermines a valuable opportunity to bring the House together every week on a matter of public importance before the usual knockabout of PMQs begins. It is unworthy of the Prime Minister’s office and unworthy of the Prime Minister, who is a very decent human being. Therefore, may I politely invite the Leader of the House to ask the Prime Minister to desist? [Interruption.] And may I wish him good luck in doing so?

My second issue concerns the so-called graduate premium. The Government hold an extremely powerful set of data known as the longitudinal educational outcomes —or LEO data—which link people’s school results, university records and later earnings. Many people in this House—including, perhaps more than any of us, the Leader of the House—will know that education can transform people’s lives for the better. This dataset can show what happens and how it does so in detail, but most of the data remain entirely hidden. Only limited figures have been published, such as average graduate earnings five years after university. The Government also have information on what happens to those who do not go to university, but this too is withheld, so we still cannot answer questions that are crucial for many people. How financially worthwhile is a particular course or a particular institution? How effective are apprenticeships? What difference does university really make?

The secrecy weakens public trust and good public policy. Families and young people are being forced to make major life choices without clear facts, because no member of the public or, indeed, Member of this House can see which courses or institutions genuinely improve this kind of opportunity. It seems that the Government themselves will increasingly use the data to shape policy, but without making those data public. People go to university for many different reasons, and financial returns are only part of the story, but these data are gathered at public expense and describe public outcomes. With the right safeguards, they should be open for review and for public debate and discussion. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has explained exactly how, so will the Leader of the House ask his colleagues in the Department for Education to make the LEO data public soon?