Women and Girls: Isle of Wight

Joe Robertson Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr Quigley]

I thank the hon. Member for raising an important point. The numbers he mentioned should certainly terrify us all. Someone going through 50 incidents of abuse before reporting it is the hidden story. I thank him for his intervention and agree entirely with his point.

The barriers are exacerbated by our poor cross-Solent connectivity, which restricts access to training, higher education and employment beyond the island. One of the Government’s key ambitions is to ensure that every child gets the best possible start in life, but if we are serious about making that a reality for children on the Isle of Wight, additional support is essential. For some girls—and boys—born there, the cost of cross-Solent travel means they have never left the island. That is a missed opportunity to experience the wider world and broaden their horizons.

I am pleased to have worked with the ferry companies to introduce an initiative offering free ferry travel for West Wight residents on their 18th birthday, but two return tickets alone cannot tackle the deeper challenges they face. Unless we address the barriers head on, we risk limiting not only their access to education, but their aspirations and future opportunities.

This year’s GCSE and A-level results paint a stark picture. As the Isle of Wight Observer put it, students on the island face an “uphill battle”. Our local performance has fallen significantly below national outcomes across key benchmarks, placing it at the very bottom of the national rankings. Just 62.5% of students achieved a standard pass of grade 4 or above, compared with the national average of 70.5%. Every one of the statistics puts the island at the bottom among English counties.

Although I am speaking about education broadly, this is fundamentally an issue of equality, not only between island and mainland students, but in ensuring that girls have the tools, confidence and opportunities to pursue any education or career path they aspire to.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

I congratulate my constituency neighbour on securing this debate and highlighting the issues, and thank him for his ongoing work to help to make the island a better place to live for women and girls. I associate myself with all his remarks and arguments. Policymakers and commissioners have often overlooked the unique challenges that we face as an island. I urge the current Government, although it would be true of any Government, to remember the challenges we face and to be prepared to make special provision for us, because we are a populated island in England, which is a unique thing.

[Mr Quigley]

It will come as no great surprise to hear that the hon. Member and I agree on many things. Despite our opposition politically, as family MPs on the Isle of Wight we share many frustrations with the limitations of being on an island. I thank the hon. Member for his intervention.

All too often, the opportunities feel harder for girls to access, which is something we must change. Educational outcomes are not an abstract issue for women and girls on the island: they shape their entire future. Although jobs in hospitality and retail exist on the island, I worry about the young women for whom those sectors hold little appeal. Too often they feel that meaningful opportunities and long-term careers are out of reach. I am aware that that is not an unusual feeling for young people but, as I have set out, due to a variety of factors, young girls on the island may feel that the opportunities are still further from them. That is why targeted support for girls leaving education on the Isle of Wight, helping them to access a wider range of career paths, would make a real and lasting difference.

The picture I have painted today may seem like a story of lost opportunities for the island’s women and girls, but I want to end on a different note. I want to celebrate the resilience and ambition of the women and girls I have had the privilege to meet as an MP. As I am sure my colleague from the other side of the island would agree, the bright and confident students, the determined businesswomen, and the mothers, sisters and daughters on the island all demonstrate that women and girls on the Isle of Wight do not lack drive or aspiration. What they lack is the support to turn their ambition into opportunity, whether through access to medical care when they need it or through meaningful job prospects when they leave school. With the right backing from the Government, I truly believe they can not only reach those opportunities but thrive in them.

Women on the Isle of Wight are among the bravest, smartest and funniest people I know—and that is not just because my wife, who is one of them, is watching. They understand the added challenges that come with living on an island. Some extra burdens are to be expected, but the burden we are placing on them now is a burden too far. Whether it is in respect of healthcare inequalities, domestic abuse, limited job opportunities, or the combination of all those factors, the women and girls of the island deserve better, and I will keep fighting to make sure that they get it.

UNESCO: 80th Anniversary

Joe Robertson Excerpts

Tuesday 18th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Derbyshire (Jonathan Davies) on securing this debate.

I am pleased to salute the 80th anniversary of UNESCO, an organisation born from a world in ruins after the second world war, yet built on the very best intentions of peace, co-operation and shared progress. The founding of UNESCO was a cross-party British achievement in London in 1945, led by Conservative Minister Rab Butler. The second world war had left its impact. As well as the horrific human sacrifices and loss of life, there had been the destruction of books, cultural heritage and education systems. This led to endeavours to foster a hopeful and forward-looking spirit of international co-operation. Eighty years later, that founding spirit still runs through UNESCO’s mission. It owes its durability to its ambition—196 nations united around a common purpose.

As a country, the UK is rooted in cultural and artistic traditions. For centuries, we have led the world in creativity, scholarship and heritage protection. Today, the UK’s 60 UNESCO designations form a national network that covers more than 15% of our landmass, spans over 170 parliamentary constituencies and is home to roughly 9 million people. They are invaluable cultural, economic and diplomatic assets. Across that network, we have 35 world heritage sites, from Stonehenge to the Tower of London, 10 global geoparks, seven biospheres, from the Isle of Wight to the Isle of Man, 14 creative cities, and 10 learning cities. These designations are not ornaments; they are engines of local pride, international co-operation and economic activity. They showcase British leadership, soft power and the value of working together. It is important, therefore, that the Government play an active role in supporting state parties and encouraging international collaboration to safeguard our shared heritage.

Economically, heritage has an enormous value. The annual visitor attraction survey showed that in 2023, seven of the 10 most visited paid attractions in England were heritage sites. A study by the UK National Commission for UNESCO found that UNESCO designations generate more than £151 million in additional revenue each year across 76 sites. They attract investment, boost tourism, support apprenticeships, strengthen volunteering and foster global partnerships. Yet the tourism sector remains fragile. Rural and independent operators in particular are already managing tight margins and cannot simply absorb additional costs.

I am proud that the previous Government secured the UK’s ratification of the 2003 convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. On the Isle of Wight, we have pottery craft traditions, and across the UK we have stonemasonry, blacksmithing and thatching—skills that are cultural treasures, but that are also essential for repairing historic buildings. The Government must do more to support them and to leverage philanthropy effectively for cultural institutions.

On the Isle of Wight, where my constituency is, we are home to one of the oldest carnivals, the Ryde carnival, and to a UNESCO biosphere reserve that extends across the Solent into Hampshire. Our biosphere is a model of how to address ecological decline, productivity stagnation and demographic inversions. Two opportunities sit within our biosphere: strong creative and cultural production through the Arts Council, and expertise in environmental science and emerging strengths in green finance. This combination offers opportunities for new economic activity, regeneration on our island and deeper collaboration with other biospheres across the world.

However, there is currently a lack of meaningful Government engagement with UNESCO policy. Despite a UNESCO presence in more than 170 constituencies, these sites are not integrated into levelling-up missions or used as anchors for regional development. They are not part of any cross-departmental co-ordination and the Government have no strategy for utilising UNESCO designations as innovation infrastructure. These assets remain underused. Will the Government commit to taking a cross-departmental approach to UNESCO sites and recognise these designations as core national assets for innovation, regeneration and economic growth?

The UK is also a signatory to UNESCO conventions on behalf of our overseas territories, yet it is unclear how the Government are supporting those territories in applying for intangible cultural heritage recognition, or navigating the process of achieving world heritage status. Several territories have no designations at all. In the spirit of co-operation, how are the Government sharing their expertise to assist countries and territories with no UNESCO sites? We have five UK assets on the tentative list for future UNESCO designation. What steps are the Government taking to ensure those applications remain active and properly supported?

On the topic of UK expertise, three of Iraq’s four UNESCO world heritage sites are currently on the list of world heritage in danger. I would welcome an update from the Minister on how the Government are supporting the stewardship of endangered world heritage sites worldwide and how British expertise is being deployed, again in the spirit of co-operation. On a broader point, I would appreciate clarification on whether reductions in the development budget will affect UNESCO programmes. With public finances under pressure, how are Government ensuring that UK contributions to UNESCO deliver maximum value for taxpayers?

Of course, UNESCO is not entirely without controversy. The UK and the United States have both withdrawn from it in the past and concerns have been raised about political manoeuvring within the organisation, including disproportionate attention on certain countries while overlooking others with significant human rights or cultural heritage issues. Between 2009 and 2017, UNESCO adopted 60 resolutions concerning Israel, but none concerning several states with far more severe cultural violations. In this respect, UNESCO occasionally mirrors the trajectory of the European Court of Human Rights, another institution in the creation of which a Conservative Government played a central role, but the remit of which has sometimes stretched beyond what its founders intended.

As UNESCO enters its ninth decade, we must monitor its focus, ensure UK funding is used effectively and guard against the organisation unduly creeping into politics. If we do so, the UK can continue to lead by example, honouring our heritage, strengthening global co-operation and investing in the next generation’s cultural, ecological and educational future.

[Peter Dowd (in the Chair)]

I think we will have time for the mover of the motion to wind up the debate, but first to the Minister.

Ambassador to the United States

Joe Robertson Excerpts

Tuesday 16th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[David Davis]

The hon. Gentleman makes a good point. He is right and I will reiterate the point. In addition to what my right hon. Friend the Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) said, there should have been a fully developed vetting process and that appears not to have happened. There is a vetting unit in the Foreign Office and a vetting unit in the Cabinet Office, and normally one of them would have been engaged on this. There have been claims that developed vetting happens after an appointment. No, it does not. For existing ambassadors who are on a five-year vetting cycle, sure. For ambassadors or officers who are being read into a new class of material, sure. But for this—an outsider coming into the most sensitive job in Government—certainly not.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

Will my right hon. Friend give way?

[David Davis]

I am being frowned at by Mr Speaker for taking so much time. I will give way for the last time.

[Joe Robertson]

My right hon. Friend is being very generous. At the weekend, the Secretary of State for Business and Trade appeared to say that the Government believed it was “worth the risk” of appointing Lord Mandelson from the outset. As I heard it, what the Business Secretary was saying was that for the positive qualities Lord Mandelson had—as they saw it—it was worth the risk that he might be more involved with a convicted paedophile than they thought from the outset. If that is the risk the Government were judging him by, is that not shameful?

[David Davis]

I have already said that my view is that ethical standards are absolute, so there should not be a trade-off.

Let us take this, for a second, as a practical decision and take Mandelson at his own measure. He loves being called the dark lord and all the rest of it. He preens himself on being a master of the dark arts: spin, message management, political tactics and manipulation of the truth—a repertoire of things that most people would not be proud of. If the Government think that those skills actually make up for his sins, well no. First, he is not as good as he is cracked up to be, frankly. He is being measured—remember this—against Karen Pierce, the officer in place who was probably the best ambassador in Washington and certainly the most revered, and, after her, Tim Barrow, who was our ambassador to the European Union during Brexit and the National Security Adviser. He knows all these things to the tips of fingers. Was Lord Mandelson better than them? Pull the other one.

I am coming to the end, Mr Speaker, before you frown any more. No. 10 claims that Mandelson was economical with the truth. Mandelson claims he told the whole truth. Both statements cannot be true. The questions I pose to the Minister are these. Will the Government rule out Mandelson being brought back into Government? No. 10 refused to rule out giving him another job last week. If Mandelson withheld information during the vetting process, will he lose the Labour Whip? I am looking at Mr Burgon when I say that. Is he going to have to resign from the House of Lords? Will Lord Mandelson be receiving compensation? Some reports in the media suggest we will pay £100,000 of taxpayers’ money. Will the Prime Minister, his chief of staff, his Cabinet Secretary and the permanent secretary to the FCDO appear before the Select Committees of the House to give evidence? Will the Minister provide the House with the documents—the propriety and ethics team report and the developed vetting report, if it exists—required to answer our questions as to who knew what and when? There are many quotes in the newspapers from those in the Minister’s own party about their horror regarding the Prime Minister’s decisions and processes.

British Indian Ocean Territory

Joe Robertson Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Doughty]

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave a moment ago. We are absolutely clear that the United States recognises the strength of this deal. We have had excellent co-operation with the US throughout. The full details will be provided in due course.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

Not only are the Government preparing to give away sovereign British territory, but they are preparing to pay for the privilege of doing so by handing over billions to Mauritius. The Minister cannot say where the money is coming from, but can he at least agree that that money would be better spent restoring the winter fuel payment to pensioners in need and relieving social care providers, hospices and charities from their national insurance increases here in the UK, rather than being handed over to Mauritius?

[Stephen Doughty]

Quite frankly, the hon. Member neglects to mention the shocking mess that his former Government left us to inherit. I have been clear in this House on many occasions that we will not scrimp when it comes to the national security of this country, whether that is in relation to Diego Garcia or investment in defence and our armed forces. That is exactly what my hon. Friend the Minister for the Armed Forces and the Defence Secretary have been setting out on our wider defence spending. What we are doing in this deal is protecting our national security and defence and that of our ally the United States.

Oral Answers to Questions

Joe Robertson Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Lammy]

Clearly, it is welcome that the new Government have moved in this direction. I reassure the right hon. Gentleman that we recognise our skills in governance and in working with allies and partners, and we will use that strength to help to support the new Government. We are aware of his concerns and we will work with the new Government to get that better separation that he wants.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

2. Whether any costs arising from the proposed treaty with Mauritius on the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands will be met by his Department.

[The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)]

The UK-Mauritius treaty, which enables the continued operation of the base on Diego Garcia, is still subject to finalisation and signature. Financial obligations arising from the agreement, including departmental budgetary responsibilities, will be managed responsibly within the Government’s fiscal framework, including through the upcoming spending review.

[Joe Robertson]

Oh dear, Madam Deputy Speaker, that is not the answer to the question that I asked. Perhaps the Minister has brought the wrong file with him. My question was very simple and it is one to which the British people deserve an answer. The Government are planning to give away sovereign British territory along with billions of pounds to Mauritius. The money was not referred to in the spring statement or in the Budget. Where is it coming from?

[Stephen Doughty]

I have answered questions on that matter a number of times in this House. This Government will not scrimp on security. The base on Diego Garcia will be secured for ourselves and our allies. Protecting the British people and our allies is our No. 1 priority, and full details will be provided in due course.