Machinery of Government

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Written Statements

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

I am making this statement to bring to the House’s attention the following machinery of Government change.

I am today announcing that overarching policy and response responsibilities for severe space weather will move from the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology will be responsible for co-ordinating across Government to ensure that appropriate capabilities are in place, so that impacts from severe space weather are minimised. This will bring about efficiencies by centralising the management of space risks, including their assessment, response, recovery, and mitigation in a single Department.

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero will retain its responsibilities for mitigating the impacts of severe space weather events on the energy sector. The responsibilities of the Met Office and UK Space Agency, the latter of which will join the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology by April 2026, will be unaffected by this change.

This change will be effective immediately.

[HCWS1200]

Oral Answers to Questions

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

The antisemitic terror attack on Bondi Beach was sickening. It has had a profound impact around the world, including on Jewish communities here in the United Kingdom. These incidents are not isolated; we think of the appalling attack at Heaton Park earlier this year. These incidents are chillingly focused on some of the holiest days in the Jewish calendar. Over the last few days, I have been in touch with the Community Security Trust, the Home Office and the Chief Rabbi about security for Hanukkah events here in the United Kingdom. Last night, we held a Hanukkah reception in Downing Street, where I reaffirmed our fight against the poison of antisemitism. We will use all our powers to make sure that Jewish communities are safe and secure, as they should be.

Mr Speaker, may I take this opportunity to wish you, all the staff in Parliament, and every Member across the House and their families a very happy Christmas? I have a little festive advice to those in Reform: if mysterious men from the east appear bearing gifts, this time report it to the police.

This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

[Melanie Ward]

I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s condemnation of the horrific attacks in Australia. We must be clear that antisemitic terrorism is always an outrage.

At Christmas time, many across our country will be thinking of Bethlehem, where the situation remains extremely difficult. The Government’s important scheme for students from Gaza with scholarships to study in the UK expires on 31 December, but a number of scholarship holders and their children have not yet been permitted to leave Gaza. If the scheme closes, these brilliant Palestinians will lose their university places and we will lose their talent. Will the Prime Minister extend the UK’s existing scheme into next year to prevent that from happening?

[The Prime Minister]

I know that Gazan students face huge challenges in taking up their places, and we are considering solutions for those yet to arrive. Let me be clear: I want them to be able to take up their places and continue their education in the United Kingdom. I am proud that we have also created a medical evacuation scheme for children from Gaza, and last week I met some of those who have been brought to the United Kingdom for specialist treatment in the NHS. We continue to focus on aid into Gaza, and I will make sure that my hon. Friend is kept updated on the next steps for students.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

[Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his words on antisemitism. What happened at Bondi Beach was an atrocity, but words of solidarity are not enough. We know the evil we face. Islamic extremism is a threat to western civilisation. It abuses our democracies and subverts our institutions. It is incompatible with British values. It is not enough just to protect Jewish communities—we must drive Islamic extremism out of this country.

I would also like to send my best wishes to our armed forces, the emergency services and everyone who will be working over Christmas. I would like to take this opportunity to wish you, Mr Speaker, the House staff and all Members of this House, including the Prime Minister, a very merry Christmas.

It is the Prime Minister’s second Christmas in Downing Street, and by his own admission he is not in control. He says that nothing happens when he pulls the levers. Does he blame himself or the levers?

[The Prime Minister]

I will just set out what we have achieved this week. We are setting out our violence against women and girls strategy tomorrow, which will offer specialist support for abuse victims and 999 call experts—

[Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)]

Where’s the defence investment plan?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Sorry, Prime Minister. Mr Obese-Jecty, I expect better from you, an ex-serving officer. We expect the standards of a good officer.

[The Prime Minister]

The next lever was 500 jobs protected at Grangemouth, partnering with Ineos to safeguard the plant’s future. The next lever was rejoining the Erasmus scheme from 2027, which will be announced later today. The next lever is the Employment Rights Bill becoming law, with the biggest uplift in workers’ rights in a generation. There is a whole lot more on the list; I could go on for a very long time.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I am not sure exactly what that had to do with the question. The fact is that the Prime Minister promised economic growth, but the only thing that has grown is his list of broken promises. He promised to reduce unemployment, but yesterday unemployment hit its highest level since the pandemic—it has gone up every single month since he came into office. Why is that?

[The Prime Minister]

These are the facts: there are 350,000 more people in work this year and we have the lowest inactivity rate for five years. We are taking a number of measures to address unemployment, particularly with the young unemployed. I remind the Conservatives that, under their watch, unemployment averaged 5.4%—higher than it is today.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I do not know what planet the Prime Minister is living on, but unemployment has gone up every single month under him, youth unemployment is at record levels, and graduate recruitment is at its lowest ever. He promised that he would not increase taxes on working people, but he has. Last year he increased national insurance and last month he froze income tax thresholds, so will the Prime Minister finally be honest and admit that he broke his promise on tax?

[The Prime Minister]

I am very proud that at the Budget, we had record investment into our public services, we stabilised the economy and we bore down on the cost of living. The Conservatives voted against all those measures, but it is the season of good will, so let me congratulate the Leader of the Opposition, because she has broken her own record since last week. Last week, 21 former Tory MPs had walked away to Reform; this week the number has gone to 22, as the former vice-chair has now gone. The question is, who’s next? It is hard to name anyone because, according to the shadow Transport Secretary, the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden), the shadow Cabinet is full of “non-entities”—that’s you lot. He should know.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister is talking about non-entities. Has he looked at his Cabinet? They are a bunch of turkeys; they could fit right in at a Bernard Matthews factory. He is one to talk. Last week, his MPs were calling him a “caretaker Prime Minister”; after what he has done to the economy, they should be calling him the undertaker Prime Minister.

Let us look at what else the Prime Minister has promised. He gave his word that he would help pubs, yet they face a 15% rise in business rates because of his Budget. Will he be honest and admit that his taxes are forcing pubs to close?

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Lady knows very well that the temporary relief put in place during covid has come to an end. That was the scheme that the Conservatives put in place; we supported it, but it was always a temporary scheme coming to an end. We have now put in place a £4 billion transitional relief. We have also taken other measures, creating hospitality zones and greater licensing freedoms, and tackling late payments. We are also bearing down on the cost of living so that more people can enjoy a drink or a meal out. Freezing rail fares, freezing prescription charges, £150 off energy bills, driving wages up: what did the Conservatives do in relation to each of those? They voted against each and every one of those measures.

[Mrs Badenoch]

What pubs has the Prime Minister been speaking to? Labour Members have been barred from all of them! [Interruption.] I do not know why Labour Members are shaking their heads; it is not my fault that they have nowhere to drown their sorrows.

Let us look at another broken promise. The Prime Minister promised to end the doctors’ strike. He gave the doctors a 28.9% pay rise. What did he get in return? This morning, they have gone back on strike for the third time, in the middle of winter—in the middle of the worst flu crisis in years. This should not be allowed. We already ban strikes by the police and the Army, so why does he not put patients first, show some backbone and ban doctors’ strikes?

[The Prime Minister]

Let me be clear about the strikes: they are dangerous and utterly irresponsible. My message to resident doctors is: don’t abandon patients—work with us to improve conditions and rebuild the NHS. The Conservatives left the NHS absolutely on its knees, with waiting lists through the roof and confidence absolutely at rock bottom. I will take no lectures from them on industrial harmony; more days were lost to strike action on their watch than in any year since the 1980s.

[Mrs Badenoch]

Of course the Prime Minister is not going to ban doctors’ strikes; he does not have the baubles! [Interruption.] Labour Members can shake their heads all they like, but we all know who is running their party, and it is not him. The trade unions did not just buy him for Christmas; they bought him for life. This matters for all those people out there facing a difficult new year.

The Prime Minister has lost control. It is not the levers that do not work; it is him. He is breaking every promise he has made. He promised to bring down unemployment—it is up. He promised that he would not increase taxes—they are up. He promised to end the doctors’ strike—they are on strike, again. He said that his main mission was economic growth, but the economy is shrinking. With a year like that, is it any surprise that all his MPs want for Christmas is a new leader?

[The Prime Minister]

Mr Speaker, we have “The Muppet Christmas Carol” here. The defections are happening so fast that at Christmas, the Leader of the Opposition is going to be left “Home Alone”. And the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin) is clearly dreaming of a “White Christmas”.

We know what the Leader of the Opposition wants for Christmas. Her list to Santa is this: “Dear Santa, please freeze the minimum wage. Please push hundreds of thousands of kids back into poverty and scrap maternity leave.” Merry Christmas from the Tories! What we are bringing is cheaper mortgages, new rights for workers, and lifting half a million people out of poverty. We have achieved more in 14 months than the Tories achieved in 14 miserable years.

[Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)]

Q3. Ukraine is facing a fourth Christmas of war and loss. A Ukrainian family I met last week spoke movingly of the help and support they had received from our community in Newport, but also of the real pain of separation from loved ones who are still in Ukraine, serving near the frontline. Will the Prime Minister join me in paying tribute to the bravery of those families and those who support them, and for their sake, will he take this opportunity to give the House an update on what more we as a Government can do to support our Ukrainian friends?

[The Prime Minister]

I heartily agree with my hon. Friend—British families have shown incredible kindness and hospitality. To support Ukrainians in their hour of need, we have been working with our allies on the issue of frozen Russian assets. Today, I can announce that we are issuing a licence to transfer £2.5 billion—funds that have been frozen since 2022—from the sale of Chelsea football club. My message to Abramovich is this. The clock is ticking. Honour the commitment that you made and pay up now. If you do not, we are prepared to go to court so that every penny reaches those whose lives have been torn apart by Putin’s illegal war.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I wish you, everyone in the House and the whole country, a merry and peaceful Christmas.

I join the Prime Minister in expressing our horror at the appalling antisemitic terror attacks on Bondi Beach on the first day of Hanukkah. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and friends of all those who have been killed and injured in this senseless act of violence, and our thoughts are with the whole Jewish community. I am sure we have all heard British Jews explain how they no longer feel safe in this country. Many of us have friends who volunteer to put on stab vests and stand guard outside their synagogue, and at Heaton Park in October, we saw why. Antisemitism is real, it is poisonous, and we must all work together to stamp it out. The Board of Deputies of British Jews has called for a comprehensive Government strategy to tackle antisemitism. Will the Prime Minister commit to that today and set out what concrete steps he is taking to make sure Jewish people are safe in Britain?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this really important issue. It is important that we take actions that match the words we have expressed in response to these horrific attacks. The actions we have taken so far include increasing the funding for Jewish security up to £28 million. I am pleased to do that, but I am sad to do it—having to pay more money to provide security for people to be at their place of worship and to go to school is a sad thing for this country to have to do. I have ordered a review of protest and hate crime laws to stop protests breeding hatred; we are looking at new police powers to deal with repeated, targeted protests; and we have launched a review and training to tackle antisemitism in the NHS. There are other steps that we are talking to the community about taking, but all those actions have already started.

[Ed Davey]

I thank the Prime Minister for that answer, and I hope he will look at the proposal from the Board of Deputies. I think we can work across this House to end the scourge of antisemitism.

Turning to the NHS, even before today’s irresponsible strike by the resident doctors, patients were facing a terrible winter crisis. Thousands have been left on trolleys in hospital corridors for hours, with no privacy and no dignity; some have even soiled themselves because there was no response. There have even been tragic cases of people dying on those trolleys and left undiscovered for hours. The expectation is that this could get worse. Will the Prime Minister make ending this crisis his No. 1 priority, through a mass vaccination programme to stop so many people ending up in hospital with this virus and through funding the social care places that people need to leave hospital when they are ready?

[The Prime Minister]

May I say how unacceptable the conditions that some are enduring in our hospitals are? There is no excuse, and it is our No. 1 priority. On vaccinations, we have had over 17 million patients vaccinated this year. That is an increase on last year, but I want to drive that up again next year, because vaccinations make such a difference both to patients and to staff within the hospitals, and of course we will take action on social care.

[Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)]

Q4. Merry Christmas to you, Mr Speaker, and all your fantastic staff. The year 2025 has been momentous for Darlington—Britain’s best town—but there is much more to do. I met a lovely woman when I was out door-knocking recently, who works 12-hour night shifts at a care home in the town. Her colleagues are on minimum wage and many care workers across the town are not even paid time and a half for working on Christmas day. Like so many in her profession, she wants the system fixed not for herself, but for her residents. I believe that starts with radical improvements to care workers’ terms and conditions. This workforce of mostly women do essential, skilled and exhausting work without fuss, fanfare and—still—fair pay. They deserve better. What can I tell the Darlington care workers will have improved for them by next Christmas?

[The Prime Minister]

Carers are incredibly skilled workers. My sister is one of them, and I am very proud of them and her for their invaluable work. I am pleased that we have increased the carer’s allowance earnings limit by the largest amount since it was introduced, and we are providing £500 million to fund the first ever fair pay agreement through the Employment Rights Bill that was passed yesterday, to ensure that care workers are properly recognised and rewarded.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

It is indeed the season of good will, so with that in mind, I do not intend to ask the Prime Minister about his broken promises on energy bills, the 1,000 jobs being lost in the North sea, or the fact that Peter Mandelson is still a Member of the House of Lords. I will not even ask the Prime Minister about the chaos that is engulfing the Labour party, his Budget or his own leadership. I simply want to wish him a happy Christmas. How does he intend to spend his final one in Downing Street?

[The Prime Minister]

I am going to get an update from the Chancellor on Grangemouth in just a minute. The right hon. Gentleman is clearly not interested in Grangemouth. I would have thought, on a day like this, that he would want to welcome the £120 million investment into Grangemouth. It is a landmark investment protecting 500 jobs there and hundreds more across Scotland’s supply chain, and he cannot even bring himself to mention it. That is on top of the Typhoon defence jobs in Edinburgh and the shipbuilding jobs on the Clyde. After decades of SNP rule, its Members are totally out of ideas and they cannot even welcome the Grangemouth news. Scotland deserves change next year with Anas Sarwar.

[Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)]

Q5. In 2020, my constituents John and Karen Rowlands lost their son Andrew in a road collision. He was just 18 years old and a passenger. Like too many others, the driver of the car should never have been on the road. He was under age, unlicensed and uninsured, and he bought the car on social media using cash. Can the Prime Minister tell me how bereaved families like the Rowlands can have a meaningful say on our road safety strategy to ensure that the right checks are in place to prevent future tragedies?

[The Prime Minister]

May I send the condolences of the whole House, I am sure, to Andrew’s family? It is an awful case and every life that is lost to dangerous driving is a tragedy. The range of measures that we are taking to protect young drivers include penalties for driving uninsured and unlicensed, and measures to reduce the risks posed by unroadworthy vehicles. On her constituents being able to have an influence, I would be very happy to set up an appropriate meeting for them.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

Q2. I thank the Prime Minister for having confirmed a Cornwall-only devolution deal since my last question to him. In 1988 more than 20,000 North Cornwall constituents were poisoned by the then South West Water Authority, and in a recent BBC documentary strong suggestions were made of a cover-up by the Thatcher Government. None of those victims have ever been properly compensated, and today South West Water poisons my constituents with impunity through its constant sewage dumping. Christmas swims across Cornwall have been cancelled again, while constituents such as William Howells in Padstow have been hospitalised. Will the Prime Minister please meet me to finally deliver justice to all water poisoning victims, and ensure that this never happens again?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman is right to remind us of what was a terrible scandal, and I will ask the Water Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), to meet him and his constituents to discuss it. He and the public are right to be furious that companies are still polluting our seas, lakes and rivers. We have taken action by banning bonuses for bosses in six polluting companies, changing the law so that those who hide sewage spills can be locked up, and issuing almost £30 million in fines to clean up waterways. We are clearing up the mess that the party over there left, like everything else.

[Antonia Bance (Tipton and Wednesbury) (Lab)]

Q6. The west midlands car industry is world famous, and this Government back our automotive sector. We have a United States trade deal, and when criminals shut down production at Jaguar Land Rover we backed the supply chain—brilliant companies such as J.H. Lavender in my constituency. What a contrast with the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), who, as usual, is not here. [Interruption.] He said:“I predict Jaguar will now go bust and…They deserve to.” Does the Prime Minister agree that the workers of the west midlands and the entire country need a Labour Government, and cannot afford the economic vandalism of Reform UK?

[The Prime Minister]

Apparently the leader of Reform is in the “lounge”. I know that he likes an early getaway at Christmas to get to his place in France. He lobbied for economic sanctions against his own country when he was in the United States, with no thought for British workers and zero patriotism. The difference is that our US deal secured the best deal for the car industry, providing certainty for the workforce at JLR—and there is more good news for the car industry this week, because Nissan is now building its new electric Leaf in Sunderland. That is the difference that a Labour Government make.

[Sir Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

Q8. May I compliment the Prime Minister on the work that he has done on Ukraine, and wish him well over Christmas on that topic? Pubs are at the centre of rural communities in areas such as North Yorkshire, but they are under more pressure than ever before. May I urge the Prime Minister and the Government to look again at the rates issue, and to look at how to relax transitional relief for those pubs, many of which will otherwise close?

[The Prime Minister]

It is an important sector. At the heart of this challenge is the end of the temporary relief that was introduced during covid. That is why we put in place the transitional measures and invested half a million in a hospitality support scheme to help rural pubs to diversify. On issues such as the cost of living, we have taken a number of measures to make it easier for people to go out and enjoy themselves in pubs, and we will always look at what measures we can put in place to support pubs.

[Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)]

Q7. People throughout Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages will be looking forward to a very happy new year, not least because of this Government’s commitment to the midland rail hub project, which will revolutionise rail travel across the west midlands and further afield. As we are all eager to see a better service between Lichfield and Birmingham as soon as possible, will the Prime Minister join my campaign for a more regular service on the cross-city line, and will he confirm that rail commuters will benefit from frozen fares because of this Labour Government?

[The Prime Minister]

The hub means more regular services for up to 15 stations across the region. That is vital, given that the Lichfield-to-Birmingham service was slashed under the previous Government. The construction will create about 13,000 jobs, and we are delivering them as quickly as possible, with Network Rail awarding design contracts this week. We are also freezing rail fares. It is the first time that that has happened in 30 years, and it will save my hon. Friend’s constituents about £90 a year on the commute to Birmingham.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

Q9. As the ghost of Christmas past scoops up the Prime Minister from his slumber in No. 10 this year, I wonder what he will show him on Christmas Eve. Maybe it will be the devastated family farmer putting up the “For Sale” sign in the yard, or the children hugging each other as their independent school closes, or any of the 100,000 hospitality workers who have lost their jobs, or the millions of families who are trying to work out how they will pay their tax bills to fund the ever growing welfare state. Is it any wonder that the ghost of Christmas future has given up on this Prime Minister, and all that is left is for him to get his bag of coal from Santa and his P45 from his own MPs?

[The Prime Minister]

Happy Christmas! I saw that the hon. Member was asking the public to suggest questions for today. I actually put in a bid—I filled it in—but I assume that he missed my question. I said he should ask about the 6,000 well-paid, high-skilled jobs that we have secured in his constituency to build Typhoons, thanks to an £8 billion deal with Turkey. I am disappointed that he did not want to talk about good, well-paid jobs in his constituency that have been secured by this Labour Government.

[Linsey Farnsworth (Amber Valley) (Lab)]

Q10. Just days before Christmas, heartbroken Derbyshire families and staff have learned that the Reform-led council is closing eight care homes, including Rowthorne in Amber Valley. That comes just days after we learned that the council’s cost-saving claims were entirely fabricated. Does the Prime Minister agree that when Reform talks about DOGE, it is actually talking about cutting vital public services such as care homes? Will he join me in urging Derbyshire county council to think again?

[The Prime Minister]

It is deeply concerning to hear about the closure of eight Derbyshire care homes by the Reform-led Derbyshire county council. It will be hugely concerning to residents and their families, while we are making £3.7 billion of extra funding available to councils to fund social care. Let me say to the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), who is relaxing in the lounge, that Christmas is a time for forgiveness. It is never too late to apologise to former classmates.

[Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)]

Q14. Labour’s tax rises mean lower growth and higher unemployment, and the reason for the tax rises is Government spending. The Prime Minister personally promised the country that he would limit spending increases to £9.5 billion a year, so what mandate did he have in his first two Budgets to increase annual spending 15 times faster, by £146 billion?

[The Prime Minister]

We had a mandate for change, because we inherited major challenges across the country. If only the hon. Gentleman had done something to solve these problems when he was working in Downing Street. He left a complete mess.

[Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) (Lab)]

Q11. Over the past few weeks, I have been contacted by a number of constituents who work in the health and care sector, because they are concerned about the proposed changes to the rules on indefinite leave to remain. These individuals came to this country to do a job that we asked them to do, and then we decided to change the rules halfway through the process. Does the Prime Minister agree that if we are to be a proud, rules-based nation, going back on our word to people who are contributing to our society and building lives here is not only unfair, but profoundly un-British?

[The Prime Minister]

We are replacing a failed settlement system with one that is fair and that recognises contribution. It is right to apply more stringent controls, and we are currently consulting on the right approach. I recognise the huge contribution of those working in our NHS, and we will not change the rules for those who already have settled status.

[Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)]

Jimmy Lai is 78 and is a British citizen. He has already been in prison in Hong Kong for five years, simply for being a journalist. If he receives a further sentence on 12 January, he is likely to die in prison. Will the Prime Minister make it clear that his visit to Beijing can go ahead only if Jimmy Lai is released?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this really important case. As he knows, we continually raise it with our counterparts, and we will continue to do so. I condemn the conviction. Obviously we await the sentence, but it is absolutely clear that Jimmy Lai has been targeted by the authorities. It is wrongful, and I call it out. It is important that we continue to engage, so that we can raise this issue with those counterparts.

[Sam Carling (North West Cambridgeshire) (Lab)]

Q12. In September, a National Secular Society report highlighted alarming numbers of extremist religious organisations in the UK from various faith traditions expressing hideous views about women, including promoting female genital mutilation and denying the existence of marital rape. Many of these are registered as charities, and are therefore eligible for various tax exemptions, as well as thousands or even millions of pounds in public money through gift aid. Will the Prime Minister, as part of the Government’s mission to halve violence against women and girls, support my campaign for a review of charity law and regulations, so that we can make sure the UK taxpayer is not funding extremism and hate?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this really important issue. The scale of violence and abuse suffered by women and girls is a national emergency, and the violence against women and girls strategy will be published tomorrow, setting out concrete steps to deal with this. We have already taken action to protect victims, including placing domestic abuse specialists in the first five 999 control rooms, and we are launching a new national policing centre to co-ordinate the police response and target these crimes. I will make sure that Ministers look specifically at the issues that he has raised.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

Yesterday, the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), declined a meeting with the representatives of a number of hunger strikers in prison at the present time. These are all remand prisoners; they have not been convicted of anything. Since then, a further prisoner, Qesser, has been taken to hospital, as others have been. Many people are very concerned about the regular breaches of prison conditions and prison rules in respect of these hunger strikers. Will the Prime Minister make arrangements for the Ministry of Justice to meet representatives of the hunger strikers to discuss these breaches of the conditions that they are experiencing?

[The Prime Minister]

As the right hon. Member will appreciate, there are rules and procedures in place in relation to hunger strikes, and we are following those rules and procedures.

[Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)]

Q13. England is the only country in the world with a fully privatised and monopolised water system, and it is broken. My constituents in Sheffield Central, like many across the country, continue to face burst water pipes, polluted rivers and rising bills—all while the chief executive of Yorkshire Water has taken £1.3 million in bonus payments through an offshore company, and that is on top of her very healthy £660,000 salary. Will the Prime Minister assure the House that the forthcoming water White Paper will have stronger accountability and put the public interest first, before bosses’ bonuses? More importantly, will it consider bringing this essential public service back in-house?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes is the simple answer to that question, and our decisions are already holding polluters to account—new severe fines, banning bonuses, and a record 83 criminal investigations have been launched. We have also secured over £100 billion of investment to upgrade infrastructure to deliver better services to constituents.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Member for raising this matter. Nobody could forget the shocking scenes at Lockerbie, and I know the huge impact it has had on the community that he grew up in, where people have responded with such compassion and strength. He has rightly stood by their search for justice and truth through all the intervening years, and I pay tribute to that. All our thoughts remain with the families and friends of all the victims, who deserve truth, and I urge the Scottish authorities to consider the points that he raises.

[Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Investigatory Powers Commissioner Annual Report 2024

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Tuesday 16th December 2025 Written Statements

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

I have today laid before both Houses a copy of the annual report of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner, the right hon. Sir Brian Leveson. This report covers the activities of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office (IPCO) and the Technology Advisory Panel for 2024.

The Investigatory Powers Commissioner provides independent oversight of the use of investigatory powers, as outlined in the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. This oversight includes the inspection and authorisation by judicial commissioners of the use of these powers by over 600 public authorities. This includes the intelligence and security services and law enforcement agencies.

The report is positive about how investigatory powers have been used over this period in accordance with the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 and other legislation. The Investigatory Powers Commissioner acknowledges that there continue to be good levels of compliance in respect of how investigatory powers are being used.

Where the Investigatory Powers Commissioner has identified concerns, our agencies and Departments are working with IPCO to address these. I thank them all for their hard work to protect the UK, at home and abroad.

Now in its seventh year since creation, IPCO continues to provide independent oversight of the use of investigatory powers, providing assurance to both the public and Parliament that privacy safeguards are applied. In March 2024, IPCO merged with its sister organisation, Office for Communications Data Authorisations, to become one organisation, while retaining the IPCO name. I wish to express my sincere thanks to Sir Brian, his team of judicial commissioners, and all the staff at IPCO, for their important work.

Maintaining public trust and confidence in the exercise of investigatory powers is vital for national security and public safety, and a top priority for this Government. This report demonstrates the high quality of oversight over our intelligence and security agencies’ use of the most intrusive powers. I am satisfied that our oversight arrangements are among the strongest and most effective in the world.

In accordance with section 234(6)(b) of the IPA, I wish to notify both Houses that the report contains no material considered too sensitive to be published. Following consultation with relevant Government Departments and agencies, the contents of this open report are not prejudicial to national security or ongoing investigations.

I will be sending a copy of this report to Scottish Ministers, as required under section 234(8) of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (IPA), and I commend this report to the House.

[HCWS1188]

Intelligence and Security Committee Annual Report 2023 to 2025

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Monday 15th December 2025 Written Statements

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

The Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament has today laid before Parliament, pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of the Justice and Security Act 2013, its annual report. This covers the period April 2023 to March 2025.

The Government recognise and welcome the independent and important oversight provided by the Committee.

I thank the Committee for the comprehensive and detailed nature of the report and the extensive work behind it.

[HCWS1170]

Oral Answers to Questions

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Wednesday 10th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)]

Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 10 December.

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

The whole House will join me in sending our deepest sympathy and condolences to the family and loved ones of Lance Corporal George Hooley of the Parachute Regiment, who died yesterday in Ukraine. Lance Corporal Hooley was injured in a tragic accident, away from the frontlines, while observing Ukrainian forces testing a new defensive capability. His life was full of courage and determination. He served our country with honour and distinction around the world in the cause of freedom and democracy, including as part of the small number of British personnel in Ukraine. I place his name on record today to express our gratitude and respect, and to affirm that his service will never be forgotten. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]

On Monday, I hosted President Zelensky, President Macron and Chancellor Merz in Downing Street. We must redouble our efforts. The UK, Europe and our allies will stand shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine, stand up to Putin’s aggression and work to deliver a just and lasting peace.

This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

[Sarah Olney]

A couple in my constituency fled persecution from the Egyptian authorities, who accused them of being traitors and terrorists due to their work as professional journalists. They gained refugee status here in 2021 and are now three months away from being eligible for indefinite leave to remain. The UK is their home, but their stability and family life are being threatened by changes in Government policy. I am concerned that the Government have lost sight of the real-life impact that those changes will have on working families living here legally. With details of transitional arrangements still under consultation, will the Prime Minister provide clarity regarding the transitional support available to families already on the pathway to indefinite leave to remain?

[The Prime Minister]

This country will always be compassionate in relation to refugees and comply with our full obligations under the various conventions. It is important that we address some of the challenges that we face at the moment, but we must not lose sight that we have always been a compassionate country that welcomes refugees to our shores.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

Q3. While the last Government were indifferent to child poverty, this Government’s driving mission must be to eradicate child poverty, and the strategy is a first step on that path. Over the first 1,001 critical days in pregnancy and early years, poverty contributes to malnourished babies, developmental delay, hypothermia and poor life outcomes. That is unacceptable. Will the Prime Minister lift pregnant women and babies in York and across the country out of poverty in this Parliament and ensure that we relieve poverty over the first 1,001 critical days?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that. I am proud that babies born today will have a better start in life thanks to our decisions. I am particularly concerned by maternity services. That is why we have commissioned a review so every mother is heard and gets proper care at what should be a special time. Currently, too many are failed. We are funding healthy babies services in 75 of the most deprived areas and we have taken action to save parents up to £500 a year on infant formula. It is a moral mission of this Government to lift children out of poverty and we intend to do so. The Leader of the Opposition thinks that maternity pay is “excessive” and would go back to the payment that put hundreds of thousands of children into poverty.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

[Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)]

I echo the sentiments of the Prime Minister: the thoughts of the whole House will rightly be with the family of Lance Corporal Hooley, who tragically died supporting Ukraine in its fight for freedom. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House why his own MPs are describing him as a “caretaker Prime Minister”?

[The Prime Minister]

My own MPs are very proud: we have just passed a Budget that protected our public services and our NHS—no austerity, which brought our NHS to the ground; we have created the conditions for economic stability with the headroom we need; and we are concentrating on the single most important issue for families up and down the country, which is the cost of living, by taking £150 off their energy bills. That is in addition to the £150 for the 6 million poorest households. We are concentrating on what matters to the country. The right hon. Lady is trying to save her job.

[Mrs Badenoch]

Let me answer the question for the Prime Minister. He is being called a caretaker because everyone can see that he has lost control of his party, and this lot on the Government Front Bench are all so busy trying to replace him—[Interruption.]

[Mrs Badenoch]

Labour Members can make as much noise as they like. We all know that this lot are so busy trying to replace the Prime Minister that they have taken their eyes off the ball. Let us start—[Interruption.] Wait for it, wait for it! Let us start with the Energy Secretary, who wants to recycle himself as leader. He said he would cut families’ energy bills by £300. Can the Prime Minister tell the House: how much have energy bills fallen by since the election?

[The Prime Minister]

I am very pleased to say that we are taking £150 off energy bills. I can also tell the right hon. Lady that that is on top of the £150 we took off last year for the 3 million poorest families and have now taken off for the 6 million poorest families. She talks about leaving, but the problem is that last week, three ex——[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Mayhew! I have told Labour Members, and I will now tell Conservative Members. We do not need the pantomime auditions any more, please.

[The Prime Minister]

Last week I pointed out that three of the right hon. Lady’s ex-MPs had gone to Reform. That included the former deputy chairman, Jonathan Gullis. He liked to think of himself as a straight talker. He said that the Conservative party was finished and that it had

“lost the trust of the British people.”

In total, 21 ex-Tory MPs have now left for Reform. The real question is: who is next? We can all see the shadow Justice Secretary, the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick), twitching after his “come and get me” plea from the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage). We need no lessons from them.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I asked the Prime Minister about energy bills. You could power the national grid on all that hot air. He promised to cut energy bills by £300. Energy bills have risen by £187.

Let’s look at someone else who is making a mess; let’s look at the Education Secretary—ah, there she is. Labour pledged to recruit 6,500 more teachers. Can the Prime Minister tell the House: how many extra teachers are there since she became Education Secretary?

[The Prime Minister]

More than when the Conservatives left office, and I am very proud to say so. We are on an upward trajectory—[Interruption.] They left our health service on its knees. They left our schools in a mess. They left our economy absolutely broken. They should be utterly ashamed of their record in service.

[Mrs Badenoch]

Wrong! There are now 400 fewer teachers since the Education Secretary came into office—[Interruption.] She is shaking her head, but it is on the Department for Education website. Does she not check it once in a while? I can understand why the right hon. Lady is angry; we are all angry at the mess she is making.

The Prime Minister does not know what is going on in energy. He does not know what is going on in education. Does he know anything about what is going on in the Home Office? Last year, the Prime Minister promised to recruit 13,000 more police officers. How is that going?

[The Prime Minister]

There will be 3,000 more by the end of March, and we are rising on police numbers. The Conservatives left the Home Office—the criminal justice system is utterly broken; Sir Brian Leveson has said that. They lost control of our borders. They lost control of every single Department.

The right hon. Lady has obviously spent the morning rehearsing for “The Liz Truss Show”. She is probably going to be the guest star next week, both of them talking about how Liz Truss was “100% right”. Liz Truss said that the Conservatives need to take—[Interruption.] They do not want to hear it! She said that the Conservatives need to take responsibility for their 14 years of failure. That was Liz Truss, their former leader, so perhaps the Leader of the Opposition will heed that, get up and say sorry.

[Mrs Badenoch]

Wrong again. I asked the Prime Minister how many police officers; there are now 1,300 fewer officers than at the election. I do not know whether the Home Secretary wants the Prime Minister’s job, but I read that she is having conversations with Tony Blair, because he has already given up on the Prime Minister.

Why don’t we talk about the Health Secretary? Let’s see how he is doing. We know he definitely wants the Prime Minister’s job. He said he would end the doctors’ strikes, so can the Prime Minister tell the House how many appointments have been lost to strike action since last July?

[The Prime Minister]

The Conservatives left the NHS in an absolute mess, with the highest waiting lists on record and the lowest confidence in the NHS ever. The Health Secretary said he would do 2 million extra appointments. He has not done 2 million or 3 million or 4 million—he has done 5 million extra appointments. That is because we invested in the NHS. What did they do? Having broken it, they voted against that investment. They should hang their heads in shame.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I asked the Prime Minister how many appointments have been lost to strike action. He does not know. Let me tell him. We have lost 93,000 appointments to strikes since the Health Secretary gave doctors a massive pay rise. [Interruption.] It is the truth; I know Labour MPs would not know the truth if it punched them in the face, but I am telling them the truth. It is no wonder that we read this morning that the former Deputy Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner), has said that she would rather stick pins in her eyes than be on the Health Secretary’s golden ticket.

The Prime Minister congratulates himself on 5 million extra appointments. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] Yeah, yeah: in our last year in office, we delivered 6.5 million extra appointments. Under Labour, everything is getting worse: jobs, bills, police numbers, teacher numbers. Everything is getting worse. The Cabinet should be doing their own jobs. What are they doing? They are trying to compete for the caretaker’s job. The only person who does not want the Prime Minister’s job is the Chancellor—she is just trying to cling on to her own. Is it not time that the Prime Minister admits that Labour isn’t working?

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Lady is living proof that you can say whatever you like when nobody is listening to anything you have to say. There is absolutely no substance. She has no credibility on the economy. She still believes that Liz Truss was “100% right”. She wants to go back to austerity with £47 billion of cuts. She thinks the minimum wage should be frozen and that it is too high. She has no credibility on foreign policy. She complains about trade deals that she tried to get and we got. She says that we should stay at home and not attend NATO or the G7. On issue after issue, she is clinging on to Reform. That is not leadership; it is weakness. No wonder so many are leaving her party—they know that there is absolutely no reason to stay.

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

Q4.  Thousands of families are moving into new estates only to discover that basic infrastructure—roads, drains and sewers—remain in limbo, unadopted by public authorities. In Mid Cheshire alone, 4,700 households—more than 12% of all properties in the constituency—face that uncertainty, with no guarantee on maintenance, safety and future costs, often years after developers have walked away. Can the Prime Minister say what steps he will take to make adoption timely and enforceable, so that homeowners are not left carrying the burden of unfinished infrastructure?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this serious issue for his constituents and for over 1.7 million homeowners across the country who are left at the mercy of unfair costs and poor management. I can confirm that we are consulting on reforming the system to reduce private management of these estates and to protect more homeowners from unfair charges. That is a vital part of our leasehold reforms to protect homeowners from high costs and ensure that everyone has the amenities they need.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)]

I join the Prime Minister in offering our condolences to the family and friends of Lance Corporal George Hooley, who died on duty in Ukraine. Our thoughts and prayers are with them.

I congratulate Glastonbury’s Lando Norris on becoming the 11th British driver to win the Formula 1 world championship, and everyone at McLaren in Woking who powered him to the title.

President Trump’s new national security strategy is a deeply alarming document. Quite apart from the irony of President Trump accusing others of trampling on basic principles of democracy, it repeats far-right tropes of “civilizational erasure” and threatens that the US Government will cultivate resistance in Europe. No wonder Vladimir Putin has welcomed the strategy. Will the Prime Minister pick up the phone and make it clear to President Trump that any attempts to interfere with our democracy are totally unacceptable?

[The Prime Minister]

I join the right hon. Member in congratulating Lando on his incredible win. I went down to Woking on Monday to see some of the team at McLaren, and they were all wearing the pride that that brought with it.

On the question of Europe and President Trump’s comments, what I see is a strong Europe united behind Ukraine and united behind our long-standing values of freedom and democracy, and I will always stand up for those values and freedoms.

[Ed Davey]

I did not hear about standing up to President Trump. If we are going to stand up to President Trump, we do need to strengthen our ties with Europe, not just on defence, but on the economy. The truth is that this Government will not succeed unless they get our economy growing strongly again, and the best way to do that is a customs union with Europe. The Prime Minister’s chief economic adviser knows it, the Deputy Prime Minister knows it, and yesterday the Labour Chair of the Treasury Committee showed that she knows it too when she backed our Bill. Does the Prime Minister fear that if he keeps opposing a customs union, in 12 months’ time he will not be standing there?

[The Prime Minister]

We have got a close relationship with the EU through our reset earlier this year, and yes, I do want a closer relationship than the one we have at the moment—we are moving towards that. We do have manifesto commitments on issues such as the single market, the customs union and freedom of movement. But I gently point this out: having now done significant trade deals with other countries, including the US and India, which are hugely important to the JLR workforce and on pharma, it is not now sensible to unravel what is effectively the best deal with the US that any country has got.

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

Q5. Working in the NHS, I saw the consequences of Tory under-investment in our health service. I welcome the progress under this Labour Government: falling waiting lists, higher patient satisfaction with general practice and the roll-out of neighbourhood health centres announced in the Budget. I thank the frontline staff, including in mental health and community services, for all their hard work. I am especially grateful to all the staff at the William Harvey hospital in Ashford who turned up to work during the last British Medical Association-led resident doctors’ strike and ensured that so many planned appointments went ahead. With rising hospital admissions because of flu and increased demand on A&E services, does the Prime Minister agree that the BMA should call off its next planned strike and instead work with the Government to find a solution?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is right. Waiting lists are falling, with over 5 million extra appointments; more people are being seen within 18 weeks; and we have hired 2,600 new GPs. That is real progress that has been made thanks to the hard work of NHS staff, backed by our record investment. I do think the strikes are unjustified, and they threaten that hard-won progress. The focus should always be on patients.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

The Prime Minister just said that he wanted a closer relationship with Europe, but he then referenced the Labour party manifesto. Wales has been hit hardest by Brexit—exports are down by a third. When will he admit that the only solution to the chaos imposed by Brexit is to rejoin the customs union and the single market, or is he too afraid of what his party might say?

[The Prime Minister]

I went to Solihull to see the Jaguar Land Rover workforce before we got the deal with President Trump. They were worried sick that they were going to lose their jobs—that would be a loss for them, their families and their communities. I took the call from President Trump, when we got the deal, in Solihull at JLR, so that the first people I could tell were the workforce, who knew very well that it meant their jobs were safeguarded. We have also just done a deal on pharma, which is the first of its kind, and the best of its kind, in the world. It is not sensible or fair to the JLR workforce, or to the pharma sector, to say that, having achieved those things now, we should unravel them through discussion of a customs union. I just do not think that is a sensible way to take our country forward.

[Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)]

Q8. Of the almost 1 million young people not in education, employment or training, hundreds of thousands are disconnected from the system entirely. Youth workers have a unique ability to bridge young people into support. I would not be stood here today if I had not been supported by a youth worker called Russell when I dropped out of school. Will the Prime Minister use the national youth strategy to deliver a shared long-term vision for young people’s outcomes, with good work as a central pillar, and youth workers and trusted adults at its heart?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. The Conservatives presided over a lost decade for our young people. I am determined to support every young person to reach their potential. That is why we are delivering the first national youth strategy for 15 years: to transform youth services, backed by over £500 million. That means more youth workers, more youth centres and a network of 50 Young Futures hubs, on top of our youth job guarantee and our plan to create 50,000 more apprenticeships. We are building a Britain for the next generation.

[Saqib Bhatti (Meriden and Solihull East) (Con)]

Q2. Over the coming weeks, millions of people from across the country will be visiting their local church. Churches are custodians of our history and they do enormous good, but in January the Government announced a £19 million cut to the listed places of worship grant, and put a cap on repair costs. The cut put thousands of local churches at risk. If we lose our churches, we lose the very soul and essence of our communities. There are 10 at-risk churches in the Prime Minister’s constituency. As we go into Christmas, will he do the right thing and reconsider that policy so that we can save our churches?

[The Prime Minister]

We do support our churches and the work that those in our churches do, particularly in the lead-up to Christmas. I have a reception for them in Downing Street this afternoon.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

Q9. Before May’s election, Reform in Kent promised that it would improve services and cut taxes. Instead, vital services for older people and those with mental health conditions, provided by great organisations such as Imago and Involve Kent, are to be cut, and taxes are going up. Does the Prime Minister agree with me on two things: that given the additional money provided to the county through the fair funding review, it is beyond belief that Kent is cutting services on which vulnerable people rely, and that Reform’s so-called DOGE unit, which we were told would eliminate waste, actually stands for “deluded, overconfident, gormless and embarrassing”?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend sums up very well how his community has been utterly let down by Reform. While the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) is making excuses about his behaviour at school, look at what his party is doing across the country. There is chaos in Kent. Reform’s mayoral candidate in Hampshire says that the Deputy Prime Minister, a black British man born in this country, should go back to the Caribbean. In Staffordshire, Reform’s leader has been exposed as a white supremacist. That is not a coincidence, because chaos and division are the life’s work of the hon. Member for Clacton.

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

Q6.   In Bath, parents of children with special educational needs, which are often very complex, are crying out for special school places. Funding to build a brand new special school at the Culverhay site in Bath was secured, but the Government have frozen the funding for almost 18 months without any explanation, leaving many families in the lurch. How much longer do families and children with special educational needs have to wait for this vital new school?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Member for raising that. We are working closely with local authorities on plans for special and alternative provision free schools. We are keen to progress that, and I will ensure that Ministers update her on the case she raises. We are determined to fix the SEND system that fails parents and fails children, and that is why we have launched a national conversation to put families at the heart of lasting reform. We have already put money into extra new places, with language support and Best Start family hubs being rolled out across every area from April.

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

Q10. In Blackburn in West Lothian, St Kentigern’s academy was part demolished due to reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, and it is being rebuilt at a cost of £35 million. West Lothian council found £20 million from its own stretched budget, but despite repeated pleas to the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, who called it a most deserving case, funding has not been delivered. Will the Prime Minister back my call for the Scottish Government to urgently fund the £15 million shortfall, and raise it with the First Minister in their next meeting?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend, who has fought for her constituents on this issue for years. Meanwhile, decades of SNP cuts and broken promises have left schools crumbling. What a contrast: by the end of this Parliament, every school in England will be either RAAC free or rebuilt entirely. We delivered the largest settlement for the Scottish Government in the history of devolution, so the question for SNP is: after decades of decline, what is their excuse?

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

Q7. Mr Speaker, I feel for the Prime Minister. It must be tough, wherever he goes in the UK, because of his policies: a pub, higher taxes; a restaurant, higher taxes; a café, higher taxes; a farm, higher taxes; a GP, higher taxes; a care home, higher taxes; a hospice, higher taxes. Is that the reason the Prime Minister chooses to spend so much time out of this country?

[The Prime Minister]

What a load of nonsense. We are at a critical stage of progress in Ukraine, which will affect Ukraine’s sovereignty, the whole of Europe and the values that we hold dear. We are one of the leading countries seeking to strengthen NATO at a vital time for defence and security in Europe; we have secured trade deals that the Conservatives tried for years to achieve but never did, because of our international engagement; and we have got better relations with the EU, all of which is good for our country. Ridiculous question!

[Chris Murray (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab)]

Q11.   Last month, the video games company Rockstar in my constituency fired 31 employees without providing evidence or union representation. The IWGB union alleges union busting. When I met Rockstar, it failed to reassure me that it is following employment law, and I share the concerns about union busting. Given that this Government are responsible for the biggest increase in workers’ rights in a generation, does the Prime Minister agree that all companies, regardless of profit size, must follow UK employment law, and all workers have the right to join a union?

[The Prime Minister]

That is a deeply concerning case. Every worker has the right to join a trade union, and we are determined to strengthen workers’ rights and ensure that people do not face unfair consequences for being part of a union. Ministers will look into the particular case that my hon. Friend raises and keep him updated.

[Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)]

Q12.   Digital ID is intrusive and fundamentally un-British. The Government have no mandate for it, and no sensible person believes that it will tackle illegal immigration or illegal working. It is an attack on our open society and a staggering waste of taxpayers’ money, isn’t it?

[The Prime Minister]

Digital ID has huge benefits, as many countries in Europe are already demonstrating. Where the Conservatives failed on our borders, we are taking control of our borders, and I am proud that we are doing so.

[Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal) (Lab)]

Q13. The Prime Minister will know that special educational needs and disabilities provision is in crisis across the country, but it is in particular crisis in Suffolk, where the county council is in special measures for its failings. I am delighted that the Government have listened to one of my asks, which is to have a national conversation about SEND, so that parents, young people and their advocates can have their voices heard. Will the Prime Minister back my calls to ensure that we deliver funding for the former Seckford Education Trust school in Saxmundham, which closed its doors for the last time in 2024?

[The Prime Minister]

I know that my hon. Friend is a dedicated campaigner on this issue and I will ensure that Ministers update her on the latest progress in her constituency. Our ambition is to ensure that all children with SEND have access to the right support. That is why we are working closely with local authorities to deliver places where they are needed most.

[Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)]

Q14. This Government are always talking about the fair choices that they have made, but is it a fair choice to balloon the benefits bill? Is it a fair choice to introduce an unfunded and unwanted digital ID that will cost the public billions of pounds? And is it a fair choice to increase taxes on working people when the promise was not to? The answer is no. Can I ask the Prime Minister to consider one final fair choice? Thinking about food security and avoiding devastation for families across the country, will his Government reverse the family farm tax?

[The Prime Minister]

Welfare ballooned on the Conservatives’ watch. When the shadow Chancellor was responsible for welfare, it ballooned by £33 billion. They left a £22 billion black hole—the Office for Budget Responsibility reviewed it and added £16 billion to that—so we will take no lecture from the Conservatives on the economy.

[Karl Turner (Kingston upon Hull East) (Lab)]

There is no denying that this Government inherited a crisis in our criminal courts, with the number of cases waiting to be tried growing every single day. If the Justice Secretary’s plan to do away with jury trials in some cases, although not all, is really about addressing the backlog and getting the position to something manageable, then why will there not be a sunset clause? Why has that been ruled out?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to draw attention to the crisis in our courts—[Hon. Members: “Yes.”] I hear “yes” from the Opposition Benches. Sir Brian Leveson is one of our most respected senior judges. He did an independent report and made it clear that we risk “total collapse” of the criminal justice system without change—[Interruption.] The Conservatives are chuntering along, but they left a system near total collapse, where victims of sexual violence and rape wait years to get justice. That is not justice—that is victims failed. I know that my hon. Friend feels very strongly about this matter, and I can reassure him that juries will remain a cornerstone of our justice system for the most serious cases. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Robertson, I do not want shouting like that again. Do we understand each other?

Oral Answers to Questions

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)]

Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 3 December.

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

Our Budget took important measures to tackle the cost of living. That is why we have frozen rail fares and prescription charges, and cut energy bills for every family by £150. Today, we are going further. For too long, parents have been pushed into spending more on infant formula than needed, told they are paying for better quality and left hundreds of pounds out of pocket. I can announce today that we are changing that. We will take action to give parents and carers the confidence to access infant formula at more affordable prices, with clearer guidance for retailers and help for new parents to use loyalty points and vouchers. Together, that will save them up to £500 before their child’s first birthday. That builds on our action to lift half a million children out of poverty and our action on breakfast clubs, and our child poverty strategy will be published later this week.

This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

[Ian Lavery]

The north-east is still picking up the pieces of the destruction and decimation of 14 years of Tory government. Men in the north-east of England still expect to live 10 years less than people in other parts of the country. Women in the north-east of England are making, on average, over £11,000 less in wages than people in other parts of the country. In my patch of Blyth and Ashington, 33% of kids are living in poverty, the unemployment rates are above the national average, and wages are below the national average. The people in the north-east are a proud breed, and we deserve much more than this, mind. Can the Prime Minister assure me and the people in my constituency and in the north-east whether there is much to look forward to on the horizon, and will he meet me to discuss how we can shape it? [Interruption.]

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend talks about poverty in his constituency, and the Opposition heckle him. They should be ashamed. It is our moral mission to tackle poverty. We have abolished the two-child cap. That will be over 3,000 children, I think, in his constituency lifted out of poverty. I am very proud to be able to do that. We have boosted the national minimum wage by £1,500, and we are adding the £150 that we are taking off everyone’s energy bills. We are driving economic growth right across the country, devolving power and investing across all of the country.

[Mr Speaker]

We come to the Leader of the Opposition.

[Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)]

Let me first pay tribute to Sir John Stanley, who passed away yesterday. Sir John was a dedicated MP for 41 years, and we send our deepest condolences to his family.

Does the Prime Minister believe that when an organisation descends into total shambles, the person at the top should resign?

[The Prime Minister]

Can I first join the Leader of the Opposition in her comments about Sir John? I am sure I speak for the whole House in that respect.

I was very proud to lead this party at the Budget last week, where the Chancellor set out that we would protect the NHS, which we have done in the Budget; create the conditions for economic stability, not repeating the mistake of austerity; and bear down on the cost of living by taking £150 off energy bills. We are fixing the mess that the Conservatives left, and I am very proud to be doing so.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister does not want to answer a question about taking responsibility, because he likes to blame everyone except himself, and so does the Chancellor. We now know that the head of the Office for Budget Responsibility was forced out for telling the truth: that the Chancellor did not need to raise taxes on working people. We also know that the Chancellor was briefing the media and twisting the facts—all so she could break her promises and raise taxes. If she were a CEO, she would have been fired, and she might even have been prosecuted for market abuse. That is why we have written to the Financial Conduct Authority, so will the Prime Minister ensure the Chancellor fully co-operates with any investigation?

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Lady is completely losing the plot. May I pay tribute to Richard Hughes for his leadership of the OBR? He made very clear why he stepped down and I have made very clear my support of the OBR. She says, “Take responsibility”. Under this Chancellor: growth is up this year, defeating and beating the forecast; wages are up more since the general election than in 10 years of the Tories; we have had, I think, five interest rate cuts; NHS waiting lists are down; and we have had record investment into this country. We are turning the page on Tory austerity and reckless experiments on borrowing. I will compare our record to theirs any day of the week.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister talks about losing the plot. Let me read to him what his own Cabinet Members are saying—that the handling of the Budget has been

“a disaster from start to finish.”

Who said that? Was it him? Was it her? It was probably her, actually—it was probably the Chancellor! [Laughter.] One of the Prime Minister’s Ministers said that the Chancellor and the Prime Minister look “weak and incompetent”. The country agrees.

We know that there were endless Treasury briefings to justify raising taxes on hard-working people to pay for benefits and those briefings had real-world consequences. Hundreds of thousands of people drew down their pension, an irreversible act. The Prime Minister pays tribute to the head of the OBR. If the head of the OBR had to resign over market-sensitive leaks, why is the Chancellor still in her job?

[The Prime Minister]

Last year, the Conservatives left us with a £22 billion black hole. This year, at the beginning of the process, the OBR did a productivity review on their record in office, and that cost an additional £16 billion that we had to find in the Budget. But notwithstanding that, we have protected the NHS—waiting times are coming down; notwithstanding that, we have cuts in borrowing at the fastest rate in the G7; notwithstanding that, we have got £150 off energy bills, in addition to rail fare and prescriptions freezes. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Holden, your voice carries more than mine. The difference is that yours will be carrying outside, not in the Chamber.

[The Prime Minister]

What the right hon. Lady does not understand is that picking up a £16 billion tab for the Conservatives’ failure is not a good starting point for any Budget. The OBR said yesterday that the Chancellor’s speech was not misleading, so if the Leader of the Opposition had any decency, she would get up now and apologise. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Other Members might be enjoying a cup of tea with Mr Holden if they carry on.

[Mrs Badenoch]

No one believes a word the Prime Minister says. We now know the black hole was fake, the Chancellor’s book was fake, her CV was fake—even her chess claims are made up. She does not belong in the Treasury; she belongs in la-la land.

The Government raised taxes on working people—that is £16 billion—to increase benefits to protect them from their Back Benchers. The Prime Minister now boasts about removing the two-child benefit cap, but he used to say that it was unaffordable. He even removed the Whip from seven Labour Members for wanting the same thing. He is very happy to throw them under a bus when it pleases him. I ask the Prime Minister, how did it suddenly become affordable at the very time he needed to save his own skin?

[The Prime Minister]

The vast majority of the families we helped in the Budget are in work. Three quarters of children in poverty are in working families. The Conservatives’ policy of nearly 10 years on the two-child benefit cap had one result and one result only: it dragged hundreds of thousands of children into poverty. They should be utterly ashamed of that. I am very proud that we are lifting half a million children out of poverty, because I believe—I profoundly believe—that every child should have a chance in life; every child should be able to go as far as their talent will take them. That is why we are lifting half a million out of poverty, but they are the same old Tories: the party of child poverty.

[Mrs Badenoch]

If all of this is true, why did the Prime Minister take the Whip away from the people asking for it? Let us remind the Chancellor that exactly a year ago today, on 3 December 2024, she said:

“We will never have to repeat a Budget like this one”.—[Official Report, 3 December 2024; Vol. 758, c. 149.]

If only!

The Prime Minister may have taken the Whip away then, but the rebels have had the last laugh—he has lost. He cannot run his own party, let alone the country. Let me quote the hard-left former shadow Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell). He said: “We’ve won.” He is right, isn’t he?

[The Prime Minister]

I have said repeatedly that bringing down child poverty is a moral mission, a political mission and a personal mission. The Conservatives drove hundreds of thousands of children into poverty—children who will pay the price for the rest of their lives for the previous Government’s failure. We are taking half a million children out of poverty, and we are very proud to do so. That is good for children, it is good for the economy and it is good for the NHS, which will have less of a burden on it. The Opposition should be ashamed of what they did on child poverty, and the right hon. Lady should stand up and apologise.

[Mrs Badenoch]

Let me tell the Prime Minister: making the whole country poorer and destroying jobs is not how to keep children out of poverty. In the past week we have seen broken promises, broken leadership and a broken Budget for “Benefits Street”—[Interruption.] The Education Secretary is chuntering. I ask her, where is the money for the children with special educational needs? Where is it? It is coming out of her budget.

[Mrs Badenoch]

She is shaking her head; she does not know where that money is coming from.

Let us be clear: unemployment is up. There are more children now growing up in workless households because people are losing their jobs. It is not just the head of the OBR who is losing his job; millions of people have been hung out to dry by the Government’s Budget. Is it not the truth that behind it all is a Prime Minister who only cares about one person’s job—his own?

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Lady wants to put half a million children back into poverty. She thinks the Chancellor should resign because the economy is improving. We are turning the page on her party’s failure. We are bringing waiting lists down. We are bringing stability that cuts inflation and interest rates, and we are bringing down bills. We are building a brighter future.

[Claire Hanna (Belfast South and Mid Down) (SDLP)]

Conversations about a new Ireland are deepening, with people from all sorts of backgrounds having serious, hopeful discussions about building something new. Yesterday in Westminster, along with the hon. Member for South Antrim (Robin Swann), who has a different view to me, we hosted two of the island’s most respected journalists, making the case both for and against Irish unity. While both positions were argued, clear voice was that the time for careful preparation is now. Does the Prime Minister agree that, although there is much work to do before any referendum, in order to avoid a mess like Brexit, it is prudent and completely compatible with the Good Friday agreement for the Irish and British Governments to jointly prepare for constitutional change?

[The Prime Minister]

One of the greatest achievements of the last Labour Government was the Belfast/Good Friday agreement. We fully support that agreement, which brought peace and stability for Northern Ireland. As the hon. Member well knows, it sets out a process for future decisions, which under the agreement I support. We are focused on working constructively with the Executive and others on all issues, including the record settlement for Northern Ireland under the Budget.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)]

I join the Leader of the Opposition in paying tribute to Sir John Stanley, and send our condolences to his family. I had the huge pleasure of working with him over a number of years on developing the relationship between our country and Korea, and he was always a true gentleman.

Yesterday, I was in Royal Tunbridge Wells, where tens of thousands of people have had no water for five days. This is now a public health emergency and, shockingly, it is the second time in just three years that South East Water has badly let down the people of Tunbridge Wells. Parents are queuing up for bottled water for their kids; pensioners are relying on neighbours to fetch water for them; businesses have closed down; and schools and GPs have been forced to shut. South East Water said that it would be sorted on Monday, and then again yesterday, but today it has still not been sorted. Will the Prime Minister convene Cobra? Does he agree that it is time for him to get a grip of this crisis so that it is sorted?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this really important issue. It is shocking, for all the reasons that he set out. I too have heard South East Water say—Sunday into Monday, Monday into Tuesday, and Tuesday into Wednesday—that it was sorting the situation, and still it has not been sorted. There are really serious consequences. We are bearing down on it, as he would expect, because this is such a serious issue.

[Ed Davey]

I am grateful for the Prime Minister’s reply and for the actions of the Water Minister, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), but I do think the Government will need to do more, because South East Water has failed so badly.

Turning now to the Budget, the Prime Minister’s chief economic adviser has recommended a customs union with the EU as one of the most effective ways of generating growth, and we Liberal Democrats agree. Instead of hitting people with higher taxes in the middle of a cost of living crisis, will the Prime Minister change course in economic policy and listen to the wise economic advice from his own economic adviser?

[The Prime Minister]

We are getting closer relationships with the EU on a number of fronts, including trade and the economy, because that is good for businesses across our country, and it has been welcomed by them. We will continue down that path, but we have clear red lines on the single market and the customs union; within those constraints, we will move closer.

[Dr Beccy Cooper (Worthing West) (Lab)]

Q2. Gambling addiction is a serious public health harm, causing ill health and misery for millions of people in this country. The industry now spends £2 billion a year on advertising, often targeting vulnerable people and exposing our children to harm. Like many Members across the House, I very much welcome the Chancellor’s announcement last week to tax harmful online gambling products. Does the Prime Minister agree that to continue this essential work, we must now act to tackle harmful gambling advertising to protect the health of our children?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is right that harm from online gambling has surged—NHS referrals are up 91% in the past year. The decisions we made in the Budget mean investment in public services and lifting more than half a million children out of poverty, but we are working with industry to ensure that adverts do not exacerbate harm and, through our £26 million investment, helping the Gambling Commission to crack down on black market sites and illegal adverts to keep players safe.

[Paul Holmes (Hamble Valley) (Con)]

Q7. In 2020, the Justice Secretary said:“Criminal trials without juries are a bad idea”,and the Prime Minister himself has said that there should be “a right of trial by jury in all criminal cases”,but now they want to scrap trials by jury. With a Chancellor who cannot count and a Justice Secretary who has lost count of the number of people he has let out of prison, is it any wonder that the people of this country cannot ever again trust a single word this Prime Minister or Government say?

[The Prime Minister]

The Conservatives left a broken criminal justice system in which victims of rape and serious sexual violence wait three or four years for trial. Only this week I have heard further examples of 14-year-old and 16-year-old girls having to give evidence four years after the allegation. That is not justice for them, and I am determined that we will deal with that. As the hon. Gentleman well knows, of all criminal cases going to court, 90% have always been in the magistrates court and 10% go to the Crown court. Of that 10%, 7% of defendants plead guilty, which means that 3% of all criminal cases go forward for a jury trial—not all our cases. We are making sensible changes to ensure that victims get justice, which was denied to them under the failure left by the Conservatives.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

Q3. I am really pleased to hear many constituents tell me how much local NHS services have improved since this Labour Government entered office, but some, such as David Wootton from Atherstone, have faced long delays. He was told that he would have to wait five months for X-ray results from George Eliot hospital—and he is not the only one. My constituents deserve better. Will the Prime Minister set out how he will go further and faster to get our NHS fighting fit again?

[The Prime Minister]

First, I am sorry to hear that her constituent David is waiting. We took decisions at the Budget to invest in the NHS and tackle waiting lists, which was to help people such as David. We delivered £29 billion extra investment into the NHS and scrapped NHS England to invest in the frontline. We are opening 250 neighbourhood health centres to treat patients closer to home, and we have more than 5 million extra appointments being delivered. Waiting lists are down 230,000—[Interruption.] Conservative Members are chuntering, but they absolutely destroyed our health service—we are picking it up. They should be ashamed of themselves.

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

Q9. My constituent Claire runs Claire Howard Jewellery in Fakenham, and she is one of many small business owners who contacted me after the Budget last week. She was absolutely incensed by the style of the Chancellor, who seemed to give the impression that she was reducing taxes on small businesses when the exact opposite is the case. The tax on Claire’s shop is going up, not coming down. Could the Prime Minister do Claire and many other shop owners the common courtesy of just admitting that their taxes are going up and not down?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman raises an important point; let me address it. At the heart of this issue is that temporary business rate relief was put in by the last Government during the pandemic. That was the right thing to do, and we supported it, but it was temporary relief. That is now coming to an end, and obviously there is a revaluation that goes with it. What we are doing is permanently lowering the rates for leisure, retail and hospitality, but because of the changes, we are putting in £4 billion of transitional relief. That means there will be a cap on increases for small businesses, and we are finding that by adjusting the burden between them and the online giants. It is the temporary business rates coming to an end that we have to adjust through this policy.

[Oliver Ryan (Burnley) (Lab/Co-op)]

Q4. I declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on multiple sclerosis and as the proud son of a lifelong multiple sclerosis patient—she joins us in the Gallery today. Neurological conditions such as MS and Parkinson’s affect one in six, but wait times for first and follow-up neurology appointments have increased by a huge 65% since 2020, risking delayed treatment and diagnosis at a critical time. I am proud that this Government are bringing down NHS waiting lists, cutting admissions and investing in care and equipment. Will my right hon. and learned Friend formalise these efforts, support an NHS modern service framework for neurology and get these wait times down?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question and for sharing his personal interest. We are focused on bringing down waiting lists and making sure every patient receives the best possible care. As he knows, the 10-year health plan announced a new modern service framework to help rapidly improve care, and I reassure him that we will consider whatever else we can do. In the meantime, we are acting to improve neurology care, and we have cut neurology waiting lists by over 15,000.

[Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)]

Q11. Allison in Oxford is threatened with new service charges by her housing association, Green Square Accord, for shrubbery she happily cut herself for 22 years and for cleaning a communal area that simply does not exist. Meanwhile, Rebecca’s charges have more than doubled over the last four years, with no explanation. Green Square Accord is not the only provider doing this. It is a wild west out there. Will this Government consider Liberal Democrat plans for a new regulator and a cap on these outrageous rip-off service charges?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising that. We are implementing the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, which is long overdue, providing homeowners with greater rights, powers and protections. Through that, we will strengthen regulation to protect leaseholders from abuse and poor service, which she has highlighted; bring the injustice of fleecehold to an end to protect up to 1.75 million households; and make sure that leaseholders receive standardised service charge documentation, making it easier for them to challenge unreasonable bills. The hon. Lady makes good points, and that Act will help to change things.

[Graham Stringer (Blackley and Middleton South) (Lab)]

Q5. This country can be proud of its history of religious tolerance and religious freedom. The quid pro quo for that is the right to criticise religion. Can the Prime Minister assure the House that there will be no introduction or reintroduction of a blasphemy law, either by statute, judicial overreach or a non-statutory definition of Islamophobia?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I can give my hon. Friend that assurance, and it is important that I do so.

[Lewis Cocking (Broxbourne) (Con)]

Q12. The best form of welfare in this country should be a well-paid job, but with unemployment up and this Labour Government choosing to raise taxes to spend even more on a bloated welfare and benefits system, is the Prime Minister happy with the message that sends to my hard-working constituents in Broxbourne and constituents right across the United Kingdom?

[The Prime Minister]

We have a broken welfare system. Guess who broke it? The Conservatives. We are bringing in reforms to change it and mend it. What did they do? They voted against them. Under their watch, they drove up welfare spending by £33 billion, so we need no lectures from them on welfare.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

Q6. As a lifelong Dale fan, I am delighted that Rochdale football club is top of the national league right now. But after 14 years of Tory cuts, sadly my town is also near the top of a league table that people do not want to be in: the child poverty league table. Does the Prime Minister agree that lifting 5,000 kids in Rochdale out of poverty, plus cutting every household’s energy bills by £150 and, crucially, expanding the warm home discount will mean that this Budget is a family Budget that reduces the cost of living for everyone in the country?

[The Prime Minister]

Let me start by congratulating Rochdale football club on being top of the league for the time being. [Laughter.] Well, I say that because I know who is top of the premier league, but it will be in March and April that we find out who actually wins.

My hon. Friend is right. Thanks to the actions in the Budget, every household will see £150 off their energy bills, and because we have now extended the warm home discount to 6 million of the poorest households, they will save an additional £150. In the north-west, that benefits about 280,000 households. That is huge cost of living support for families alongside freezing prescription charges and rail fares and boosting the minimum wage.

[Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)]

Q14. My constituent Tracey owns O’Briens, a lovely café in the heart of Eastleigh. She works tirelessly to make it a success, but spiralling costs including business rates, VAT and the hike to employer national insurance contributions mean that she has not been able to take a salary for four months. David, the owner of Steam Town Brew Co and Jayne, the manager of the Holiday Inn in my constituency, say that their businesses will be impacted by the Government’s stealth tax on our high streets. They feel let down. Will the Prime Minister look again at the Liberal Democrats’ call for an emergency cut in VAT for hospitality?

[The Prime Minister]

We put in place a strategy for small businesses, which was broadly welcomed by small businesses, because they contributed to it. That involves some of the key asks they made of us, including on late payments and greater flexibility when it comes to licensing for hospitality. We will always look at other measures that can help small businesses. We set out quite a lot of them in our small business strategy.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)]

Q8. At the weekend, I had the great privilege to join volunteers from Peterborough food bank at the Tesco in Werrington on their autumn food drive. I put on record my thanks to my constituents and those of other hon. Members who have supported that Trussell Trust initiative over the last week. One of the most significant challenges my food bank has consistently talked to me about is child poverty. Even though the Conservative party opposes our plans, nearly 9,000 children will be lifted out of poverty across Peterborough because of decisions that our Chancellor took in the Budget last week. Does the Prime Minister agree that that is not just the right thing to do for those children but an investment in our future and in growth?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that. I was in his constituency just the other week, and we could see the impact that this measure would have on children in Peterborough where, as he said, 9,000 children are living in poverty. In his constituency, 5,500 children are living in poverty. We are lifting them out of poverty, and that is the right thing to do.

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

It wasn’t last year.

[The Prime Minister]

The Conservative party shamefully dragged hundreds of thousands of children into poverty, and they will pay that price for the rest of their lives. Conservative Members should be ashamed of themselves.

[George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) (Con)]

I was recently the target of an AI deepfake video announcing my defection to Reform. As colleagues across the House will know, that is about as likely as Reform moving from pub populism to a coherent programme for government. I am delighted to reassure my Chief Whip and the House that I am and always have been a faithful—[Laughter]—a faithful Conservative. Does the Prime Minister agree that while satire has always been an important part of our politics, the rise of AI deepfake disruption is a serious threat to our democracy? Will he work with me and cross-party MPs to frame some appropriate reforms, as proposed by the recent Speaker’s Conference, to protect our democratic integrity?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising this important issue. We need to work cross party where we can on deepfake, on AI and on other issues that need to be addressed. I am afraid I missed his alleged defection to Reform. I would not have believed it if I had seen it, but I have to say that there are a lot of Conservatives going—I think three ex-MPs have gone this week. They talk about leaks. That is where their leaks are going: to Reform.

Talking of leaks, according to the front page of the Financial Times this morning, the leader of Reform apparently says he wants to merge with the Conservative party and sit down in here with them—an absolutely unholy alliance of austerity and failure.

[Mrs Elsie Blundell (Heywood and Middleton North) (Lab)]

Q10. This week, I have been speaking to warehouse workers at Tetrosyl in my constituency, who have been given an appalling ultimatum in the run-up to Christmas: they must either sign a new contract with reduced pay and breaks or lose their jobs. Can the Prime Minister advise me on what action can be taken against rogue employers such as Tetrosyl who take action against workers and seek to exploit them and undermine their rights?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for fighting hard for her constituents who are facing awful uncertainty, which is bad enough at any time of the year but really bad at this time of the year. Our thoughts are with the workers and their families who are facing the uncertainty that she has flagged. Our landmark Employment Rights Bill will strengthen workers’ rights and put them in a better position, including by ending unscrupulous fire and rehire practices. I thank her for fighting for her constituents.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

No religion, theology or philosophy is beyond critique or scrutiny, and we must protect freedom of speech at all costs. But Islamophobia is real, at least for Zainab Hussain in my city, who was run over not just once but twice, simply for being a Muslim. She survived. Not so lucky was Makram Ali, who was killed outside Finsbury Park mosque simply for being a Muslim, or Mohammed Saleem, who was stabbed to death simply for being a Muslim. When the Prime Minister was in opposition, a definition of Islamophobia was adopted, but in government it has been dropped. What has changed?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising those examples of hatred in his constituency. He is right to raise them and we should all condemn them. Hatred in all its forms should be condemned by all of us in this House, and that includes anti-Muslim hatred as well. We intend to act on it.

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

Q13. This week I met my constituents, Mike and Sue. Their autistic son Jimmy was imprisoned as a young man. The judge recommended a sentence of two and a half years. Jimmy is now in his 40s. He has been in prison for nearly 20 years on an indeterminate sentence for public protection. His doctors say that he is safe and well for discharge, and a supported living flat is waiting for him in Shipley. Will the Prime Minister please help by ending the injustice of these IPP sentences and help to get Jimmy home?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend raised this case with me in the Lobby last night. It is a really shocking case of two years leading to someone being in prison for over 20 years and not yet released, and with delays in the release process. The Justice Secretary will look into this case and meet her to discuss her concerns to see what more can be done. It is right that IPP sentences have been abolished, and we are committed to supporting the progression of all those who are serving such sentences.

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

I have a charming elderly constituent who, after a series of major medical interventions, has been left in excruciating, uncontrolled pain after her opioids were withdrawn, pushing her to suicidal ideations. Can the Prime Minister shed light on what plans His Majesty’s Government have to help people manage pain in order to live a happier and more comfortable life? Please can I have a meeting with the appropriate Minister?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising this awful case. We are putting in further protection and support, but I will take this up. It is important for her to discuss this with the relevant Minister, because the case that she has referred to sounds appalling.

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

Q15. Under this Labour Government, NHS waiting lists are coming down. I welcome the commitment to refurbish Truro Health Park in my constituency, one of the first new neighbourhood health centres in the country. Cornwall is already leading the way with new neighbourhood health teams, and upgrading Truro Health Park will help to deliver care for patients in their own communities. Will the Prime Minister confirm that this investment reflects decisions taken by this Government to prioritise community health care, and that services will not be removed before effective community replacements come online?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this, and I am delighted that her constituency will benefit from one of the 250 new centres. Neighbourhood health centres will provide simpler, more convenient access to a full range of health and care services on people’s doorsteps, and GP services will be protected before they come online. This is about early intervention, continuing to drive down NHS waiting lists and creating a more modern NHS that is fit for the future.

[Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)]

Could the Prime Minister give his assessment of the latest news that President Putin has again turned down terms for peace in Ukraine? In an extraordinary outburst designed to destabilise our understanding of the truth, he did say that Russia is ready for war with NATO. How ready are we?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising this; I updated the House last week on the attempts to get a lasting peace. We all know that Putin is the aggressor here. We all know that Putin is dragging his feet, not wanting to come to the table, not wanting to reach an agreement. We have to continue to put pressure on in every conceivable way—that is, in supporting Ukraine with capability and resource, but also ensuring that our sanctions, acting with allies, do as much damage to the economy in Russia as we can, and pressure that we can put on. We will continue to do so but the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise this, and I thank him for doing so.

G20 and Ukraine

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Tuesday 25th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

With permission, I will update the House on my recent international engagements and our work to strengthen the security of our continent and economy, starting with the situation in Ukraine, which is at the forefront of all our minds. Over recent days, I have had detailed discussions with allies; I met our partners in the coalition of the willing during the G20, and I have spoken a number of times to both President Trump and President Zelensky, who I spoke to again earlier this morning.

We are united in wanting a ceasefire and a permanent end to the horrendous suffering that this war has brought to Ukraine. I have always said that our aim must be a just and lasting peace, and those words “just” and “lasting” are both important. I welcome the continued efforts of the United States to end the war and stop the killing. The initial draft of the 28-point plan included points that were not acceptable, but it also included some important elements that will be essential for a just and lasting peace. For example, it sets out steps on security guarantees from the US and partners. That is very significant. The discussions in Geneva took important steps forward, with progress between the US and Ukraine on an updated peace framework. I can reassure the House that that work is ongoing to refine the plan.

We are clear about the fundamental principles: that Ukraine’s sovereignty must be maintained; that Ukraine should be able to defend herself in future; and that matters about Ukraine and its future must be determined by Ukraine. We are clear that Ukraine’s voice must always be at the heart of the process, and that elements relating to Europe and NATO will need the consent of Europe and NATO members. There is still a long way to go and a tough road ahead, but we are more committed than ever to the cause and to keep pushing forward on the process. That is why later this afternoon President Macron, Chancellor Merz and I will convene the coalition of the willing, which now has 36 members, to discuss how we can advance the peace process and how we can continue to keep Ukraine in the fight right now.

Ukraine continues to hold the line and Ukrainians continue to mount a fearless defence of their country. They deserve not just our respect but our help and support. After all, it is not just our values that are at risk here; it is our security, too.

In addition to targeting energy and food prices, Putin continues to seek to undermine our security, including by sending Russian ships into our waters. The Royal Navy has intercepted two Russian ships in our waters in the last two weeks. Let me assure the House that we are more ready and determined than ever to protect our territory and protect the British people. As we work towards that end, we will never let up on the support that Ukraine needs: the vital defensive capabilities that it needs to protect its people and the economic pressure that we must continue to mount on Russia to cut off the fuel to its war machine.

The urgent need to take Russian oil and gas off the global market was something that I discussed extensively at the G20. That is vital, especially now as winter begins to bite in Ukraine and Putin continues his barbaric attacks on civilians and civilian energy infrastructure. As the House knows, and the British people know, there is only one nation that wants this war, only one nation that launched this illegal invasion and only one nation that deploys a constant barrage aimed at murdering innocent civilians. We saw that again last night with Russia’s strikes on Kyiv. Indeed, in the last week before last night, Russia had launched over 1,200 drones and over 60 cruise and ballistic missiles at Ukraine, killing children, like seven-year old Amelia, a Polish citizen who was killed alongside her mother by a Russian missile in Ternopil last Wednesday in an attack that took 34 lives in total.

Last night, as a family we celebrated my daughter’s 15th birthday. Later, I saw images on the news of a young girl about the same age being pulled from the rubble of a building in Ukraine, where her mother had just been killed. It is abhorrent—it is beyond belief—yet Ukraine lives that same story every night in its cities and every day on the frontline, where so many Ukrainians are killed fighting for their freedom.

We should not forget that Putin’s aggression, his illegal actions and his total disregard for human life have taken a huge toll on his own people. Thousands of Russian soldiers are killed every single day; 100,000 have been killed attacking Donetsk. In total, more than 1 million Russians have been killed or injured all because of the depraved ambitions of one man. We say again that this country will never falter in our support for the Ukrainian people. We will maintain a unity of purpose with our allies and we will focus on delivering the calm, serious leadership that is needed to advance a just and lasting peace for Ukraine and indeed the whole of Europe.

Let me turn to my broader discussions at the G20. I took the opportunity in South Africa to raise the ongoing and utterly horrifying situation in Sudan. We are working with our partners to break the restrictions on humanitarian aid and demand accountability. We must rally global pressure to stop the slaughter, achieve a sustained ceasefire and ultimately deliver a transition to civilian rule.

In South Africa I also chaired the Global Fund replenishment alongside President Ramaphosa, leading the charge in the global fight against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. That work has already saved over 70 million lives, yet malaria still kills a child under the age of five nearly every minute, 4,000 adolescent girls and young women still contract HIV every week and TB remains the world’s single deadliest infectious disease, even though we have had a cure for nearly a century. We will keep driving that project forward because it is the right thing to do and because it helps protect the United Kingdom from future pandemics and health emergencies.

A central priority at the G20 was delivering economic security and opportunity, as it is at every international meeting I attend. A strong economy allows us to be strong in the world. Economic security is national security. I can tell the House that we delivered for the British people this weekend, including through deals with South Africa for British firms to upgrade their railways and submarines, a £370 million deal for Rolls-Royce to supply jet engines to Algeria and a £4 billion deal with Indonesia for new ships, delivering 1,000 jobs in Rosyth, Plymouth and Bristol, and, if I may say, delivering another rebuke to all the people who prematurely wrote off British shipbuilding. We can only achieve those things—we can only deliver for the British people—by working with our partners. I think this is a moment to raise our sights.

The House will recall that it was when the global financial crisis struck that the G20 showed its full potential, with my predecessor Gordon Brown marshalling a global response to that crisis to protect the savings and finances of the British people. In this moment of growing fragility and crisis around the world, it is time once again to take a more purposeful, unified approach, focused on global growth and stability. I called for a response based on the right balance of investment and fiscal discipline, open markets, reforming the global trading system and tackling the cost of living crisis. That approach was echoed by the leaders’ declaration from Johannesburg.

I am also pleased to say that the summit confirmed that the UK will take on the presidency of the G20 in 2027—the first time that it has returned to the UK since 2009. It will be a proud moment for our country and part of our work to restore Britain’s international leadership, which was neglected for so long. We will use the presidency to drive the agenda I have been talking about today: to drive growth and opportunity, to create jobs, to cut the cost of living and to fundamentally strengthen the economic security of the British people. That is what we are doing at home and abroad, and I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

[Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)]

I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement.

We are proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine and our support remains unwavering. Ukraine is battling the most flagrant breach of territorial integrity in Europe in recent times. We must never forget that the war was started by Putin, who is trying to extinguish a democracy on our own continent. It is important that we stand together to defend the principle that aggressors should not succeed.

The previous Conservative Government led Europe in support for Ukraine. We were the first country to provide modern, western-made battle tanks and to gift munitions and Storm Shadow missiles. We led the way on sanctions and trained tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers on UK soil. It is now incumbent on this Government to leverage British influence at this crucial time for the west. Putin’s relentless bombardment of Kyiv and KGB-style negotiating tactics show he is not serious about peace, which is why Russia must not be welcomed back into the international fold without a comprehensive peace agreement. Will the Prime Minister rule out support for readmitting Russia to the G7?

We all want this terrible war to end, and as the Prime Minister rightly said, elements of that draft 28-point plan were unacceptable. Conservatives are clear that the blanket surrender of Ukrainian territory would mean rewarding Putin’s unprovoked aggression. What is the Government’s position on reports that Ukraine’s territorial integrity is on the table? If Putin is seen to emerge stronger from these negotiations, all our potential adversaries will be emboldened. Let us be in no doubt, the axis of authoritarian states is collaborating to destabilise the west, aided by China, with Iran providing weapons and North Korea providing troops for Putin.

It is precisely for these reasons that the Government must continue to work extremely closely with the US and to understand its objectives. Parties such as the Lib Dems and the Greens, who are encouraging us to decouple from the US, are putting their anti-American prejudice above national security. Also, given that in the last fortnight the Royal Navy has intercepted two Russian ships in our waters, and with Russian spy ships pointing lasers at RAF pilots, it is a disgrace that Reform is still blaming NATO for Russia’s aggression, although perhaps it should come as no surprise when its former leader in Wales was sent to prison last week for taking bribes from Putin.

Earlier this year, many countries came together to form the coalition of the willing, pledging to strengthen support for Ukraine. Can the Prime Minister update us on the planning and readiness of the coalition of the willing? What is its scope and terms of mission? What can he tell us about a counter-proposal that is reportedly being submitted by the EU?

To stand with Ukraine, we need to know that we can also stand on our own two feet. Last week, the Commons Defence Committee warned that Britain was unprepared for a major attack and that the Government were making “glacial” progress towards conflict readiness, so it is concerning that reports indicate that the Ministry of Defence faces a potential budget cut this financial year of £2.6 billion. Can the Prime Minister confirm whether this is true or false? Meanwhile, the EU is reportedly demanding nearly €7 billion for the UK to buy into its defence fund. Conservatives warned that this would happen. At the time the UK-EU reset deal was being negotiated, the shadow Defence Secretary said that Labour had given away 12 years of British fishing rights in exchange for nothing. He was right. Will the Prime Minister rule out paying the EU for access to the Security Action for Europe—SAFE—programme?

It is extremely disappointing that Europe is still buying Russian oil and gas. Moscow should be denied safe harbours for its tankers and profits, and Europe should ban Russian oil and gas sooner than its current 2027 deadline. I believe that the Prime Minister agrees with that sentiment, so what pressure will he put on European countries to stop them buying Russian oil and gas?

The UK’s genuinely world-leading support has made a material difference to Ukraine’s ability to fight back against Russia’s illegal invasion—support that I remind the Prime Minister began under the Conservatives. Let us not forget that, in 2022, Russia thought it could capture Kyiv and subjugate Ukraine within days. So let us wake up and face that threat from Russia. Will the Prime Minister reassure the House that we will be boosting our own defence capabilities, as well as using our influence to ensure that secure future for Ukraine?

[The Prime Minister]

May I start by thanking the right hon. Lady for her support on Ukraine? It is really important that we stay united in this House. I readily acknowledge the role of the previous Government in leading on Ukraine and in bringing the whole House together on this issue, which they did for a number of years. This allowed us a platform on which to build the support that we are now putting in place.

In relation to membership of the G7 or G8, the focus at the moment is on a ceasefire so anything along those lines is a long way off. We have to remember that Putin is the aggressor here. He is the one who started this war. On territorial integrity, the sovereignty of Ukraine is paramount. That is why any questions about the future of Ukraine must be determined by Ukraine, and that is why I have been speaking frequently to President Trump and President Zelensky. I have spoken to President Zelensky probably five or six times in the last two or three days on a whole range of issues.

May I join the right hon. Lady in her comments about Reform? It is shocking that a senior official, its leader in Wales, has been jailed for over 10 years—a very significant sentence—for pro-Russia bribes. That is extraordinary. That is why I say again that the Reform leadership should have the courage to launch an investigation. How on earth did that happen in their party, and what other links are there? Today, this statement and the questions across the House will reinforce once again that Reform with its pro-Putin approach would have absolutely no role in bringing allies together on important issues across the globe.

The right hon. Lady asks about the coalition of the willing. Nine months ago, President Macron and I brought the coalition of the willing together. There are now 36 like-minded countries that meet and discuss frequently and align our positions and our support. That is a considerable achievement, and we have plans for security guarantees in relation to air, sea and land. On the text of the agreement that is being worked on in Geneva, there was, as she would have expected, an intensive discussion about this at the G20 involving a number of key allies, including the E3+3 and coalition of the willing allies. The strong consensus was that we should work with the text that is in existence—unacceptable though some parts of it are, because other parts are essential—rather than with a different text. That is the process that is going on in Geneva, and I think that is the right approach.

On defence spending, I have made my position clear, and it goes with the strategic review of defence as to how we take that forward. The SAFE negotiations are going on with the EU in the usual way, and one commitment I made in relation to our reset with the EU was that we would do it by quiet diplomacy, rather than by shouting from megaphones across the channel. The right hon. Lady asks about oil and gas, and this is really important. We are taking every opportunity to have extensive discussions to take Russian oil and gas off the market. This has to be done across Europe and beyond Europe, and I have had discussions beyond Europe on this issue. It is vital that we press ahead and we are taking every opportunity to do so.

May I return to where I started? I genuinely think it is important that we in this House are united on Ukraine. The only winner, if we divide on party political grounds, will be Putin. I again recognise the work and the lead that the previous Government took, which I was proud to support in opposition and I am proud to take forward as Prime Minister. I am grateful for the support that we are getting from the Opposition.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)]

May I begin by complimenting the Prime Minister on his work on the international stage? Is he aware that a statement was put out yesterday by the Chairs of Foreign Affairs Committees of 22 Parliaments across Europe, in which we made it clear that we are united in the belief that Ukraine’s sovereignty is vital not just for brave Ukrainians but for the continued security of Europe? We are therefore pleased to hear the Prime Minister assure the House that any plan that is to be agreed will be “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine”, but can he also assure the House that there will be “nothing about Europe without Europe”?

[The Prime Minister]

I can reassure my right hon. Friend that I did see that letter that was put out yesterday. She is absolutely right to say that this conflict affects not only Ukraine and its sovereignty but the whole of Europe, including the United Kingdom, in our values and our security, and materially in relation to things like the cost of living and the price of energy. Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine, nothing about Europe without Europe and nothing about NATO without NATO are key principles that sit behind the work that we are doing.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)]

I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement. If this is the end game for Putin’s illegal and murderous war, we have one chance to get it right and to safeguard the future of Ukraine and Europe. The stakes could not be higher. Many of us fear that President Trump is gearing up to betray the rights of Ukrainians, who have fought valiantly in the face of war crimes, torture and the abduction of thousands of children. The White House has tried to deny that Trump’s original 28-point plan was a Russian wish list, but that is precisely what it was.

We Liberal Democrats welcome the statement from the Prime Minister that Ukraine’s sovereignty must be maintained. When the Prime Minister speaks with the coalition of the willing this afternoon, will he relay that all major parties in this House agree with him on unequivocally ruling out any proposals that would limit Ukraine’s sovereignty to defend itself now or in the future, including its right to join defence alliances such as NATO? Will the Prime Minister also offer his support and that of the coalition of the willing by joining President Zelensky for any future negotiations with President Trump, so that President Zelensky does not have to suffer the indignity of being bullied by Trump on his own once again and so that Europe can show a strong and united stand?

The Prime Minister is absolutely right to request that Reform UK conducts an investigation into pro-Russian bribes. Will he also commission a second Russia report into Russian interference in our democracy? My hon. Friend the Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) has brought forward a Bill enabling the unilateral seizure of Russian state assets in the UK. Will the Prime Minister confirm whether in his discussions with G20 partners he has secured any progress on plans to seize those frozen Russian assets, and if not, why not?

Will the Prime Minister use his role as the penholder for Sudan to take the lead at the United Nations to secure and enforce a country-wide arms embargo?

Finally, the Prime Minister did not mention China, despite reports that he met the Chinese premier at the G20. The apparent imminent approval of the Chinese super-embassy would be a moment of shame for this Government. Will the Prime Minister block this application and summon the Chinese ambassador to make clear that we will not accept Beijing’s efforts to spy on our Parliament, or to intimidate and harass Hongkongers in our communities?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Member for her support in relation to Ukraine—support which is important. Certainly, I will make a point this afternoon of expressing to the coalition of the willing how united this House is on the key principles. We are, I think, the closest respected and trusted ally of Ukraine, and that is why I have not only spoken intensively and extensively to President Zelensky over many months and years, but I have done so in particular over the past few days—a number of times a day, sometimes—including this morning, to do what we can to guide this into the right place.

I completely agree with the hon. Member’s comments about Reform. It is extraordinary that, in this Chamber, we are having a debate about a war which Russia has perpetrated on Ukraine, and a senior member of Reform has been convicted of pro-Russian bribes. Interference with democracy is of deep concern. We are having extensive discussions, including at the G20 and elsewhere, about what more can be done on the assets, and we are making progress. It is not straightforward, as she will know, but it is the subject of very extensive discussions to see what more we can do.

On the Chinese premier, let me just be clear: I said hello and shook the hand of the Chinese premier at the G20. We were in the leaders’ lounge together. It would have been a little bizarre and discourteous not to have done so, but we did not actually engage in any substantive discussion. The hon. Member raises the question of the embassy. That is obviously a quasi-judicial decision that will be taken in accordance with those processes.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the chair of the Defence Committee.

[Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)]

I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement updating the House, but let us be under no illusions: President Trump’s originally proposed peace plan is humiliating and unpalatable to the Ukrainians, would be detrimental to our own European security and would reward the invading, annexing aggressor. That is why yesterday the cross-party House of Commons Defence Committee issued a very robust statement calling on the Government urgently to give full moral and practical support in whatever way they could, especially diplomatically, to our Ukrainian friends. Does the Prime Minister agree that at this critical juncture it is imperative that the UK, along with its European allies, shows clear and determined leadership and is actually around the table to negotiate, so that we can be a voice for our Ukrainian friends, because if we are not at the table, we will be on the menu?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his questions. In relation to the original plan, clearly there were elements that were unacceptable, and that is why I am pleased that progress has now been made in relation to it. I can assure him that we are giving support to President Zelensky and Ukraine at every level, and extensively, as my hon. Friend would expect. He is quite right that part of the reason we can have influence with our allies is that we are present at the international table in a way that we have not been over recent years.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

The Prime Minister has done a pretty good job of getting close to President Trump. Can he convince the tyrant bear that to reward him with land he has already taken would be bad enough, but it would be utterly egregious and appalling to allow him—the ruthless bear—to take land he has not even taken yet, in fortress Donbas? That would make Ukraine utterly defenceless, just as we allowed Czechoslovakia to be utterly defenceless when we forced it to give up the Sudetenland 85 years ago.

[The Prime Minister]

I agree with the right hon. Member. The very idea of negotiating land that has not been taken in nearly four years of a conflict and has cost tens of thousands of lives is so obviously unacceptable that it should not be put forward or seen as a serious proposition. I agree with him wholeheartedly on that.

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

I once more thank the Prime Minister for his unstinting support for Ukraine, and for saying that nothing can be done for Ukraine without Ukraine. In the last few moments, a media source in the US has reported that Ukraine has agreed to the peace proposal brokered by the Trump Administration. I know the Prime Minister will not have the detail of that, but if that is the case—I know that he is making a statement now—will he come back and give the House the full details of what has been agreed by Ukraine, the US and potentially Russia?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, of course I will. From my discussions with President Zelensky this morning, I will need to look precisely at that, but I suspect it will not be the whole of the agreement that needs to be reached, because obviously the discussions so far have been predominantly Ukraine/US. Obviously, there are European elements that are important and NATO elements that are important which need further discussion, and of course none of this has been back to the Russian side yet. I will have a look at the report and look behind the headline, and if there is anything material to report, I will of course do so. My sense is that it will probably be progress on the Geneva exercise rather than the agreement of all elements.

[Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)]

Does the Prime Minister agree that, if Ukraine has agreed to a proposal that has been brokered by the United States, it must be made acceptable to Russia and that we need to exert every possible pressure on Russia through increased military support, sanctions and the use of frozen assets to make Russia accept a ceasefire?

[The Prime Minister]

I certainly agree with that wholeheartedly. We will see; I suspect it is the version that emerged from Geneva yesterday that is being talked about, but of course the next step is Russia, and we need to exert every pressure, whether that is capability, the assets, or oil and gas, on which we have been bearing down for a considerable period of time.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

[Ms Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I think we all understand that this is a breaking situation. In such an uncertain world, we know that allyship is integral to our security. The post-war generation created the NHS and NATO because they understood the power of collective solidarity. I am pleased to hear the Prime Minister talk about the importance of the Security Action for Europe negotiations, because our work with Europe is not about replacing our relationships with NATO but about strengthening them. Did he raise the SAFE negotiations with the President of the European Commission? This situation reminds us that we must get the European defence industry into a shape in which it can address the threats that we face from Russia. The UK must be part of those conversations.

[The Prime Minister]

I can assure my hon. Friend that negotiations are going on in the ordinary way in relation to SAFE and a number of other issues.

I am endeavouring the get the best information I can in relation to what is developing, and I will weave it into an answer if I get anything that will help the House.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

And will you come back?

[The Prime Minister]

I will certainly come back, but if I am able to update the House as we go along, I will endeavour to do so, so that others can ask questions about it.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

I welcome the Prime Minister’s commitment to ensuring that decisions about Ukraine are not taken without Ukraine, and to upholding Ukraine’s sovereignty. Yet we know that Russia is trying to use this negotiation to undermine the future security not only of Ukraine but of Europe. In the light of the ongoing negotiations, will the Prime Minister confirm that any future deal will reject Russia’s references to

“ambiguities of the last 30 years”—

code for unravelling NATO back to 1997—and reject attempts to determine which nations may join NATO or where NATO may put its military assets?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that, because we must always remember that this is about Europe as well as Ukraine. Putin’s ambitions are not limited to Ukraine, as the bordering countries are intensely aware. It is therefore important that we see this for what it is, and act accordingly as European allies.

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

I appreciate that this is a developing situation, but we know that at least 19,546 children from Ukraine have been stolen by Russia and sent to more than 400 locations across eight time zones. We know that 1.6 million children in the occupied territories are being subjected to militarisation and indoctrination. We know that 200 military training camps turn Ukrainian children into Russian soldiers. And we know that one in 10 of the Ukrainian children rescued from Russia have reported that they have been sexually abused. Will the Prime Minister remind President Trump that behind every one of those figures is a child? Will he assure the House that any peace plan agreed will deliver the safe return of all the Ukrainian children who have been stolen, and that Russia will be held to account for the war crimes that it continues to commit?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for her campaigning and all her efforts to keep a constant light on that appalling situation. It is shocking that Russia is treating those children as a weapon of war, kidnapping and subjecting them to all sorts of abuse and ill treatment. We are doing and must do everything we can to safeguard those children and get them back to their families, where they belong.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

May I ask the Prime Minister to focus on the question of effective security guarantees? Security guarantees deter aggression only if there is no doubt that the guarantor will act in accordance with the guarantee that he has given. Therefore, if there is a security guarantee to unoccupied Ukraine, it is absolutely essential that the guarantor has some forces on the ground, because otherwise a guarantee to an unoccupied region that is a strategic vacuum can lead to a wider war by miscalculation by the killer in the Kremlin.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question. That is why we have done so much work with the coalition of the willing on the capability and planning for land and sea; detailed plans are now as advanced as they can be until we know the next stage of the proceedings. It is also why I have worked so hard with the US to get a US security guarantee going alongside the coalition of the willing, so that the two go together. He will have seen that that is part of the discussion in Geneva, on which we have managed to make some progress.

[Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)]

I join many others here in welcoming the recent progress on the war in Ukraine at the G20, in Geneva and most recently. Putin is continuing to circumvent sanctions via other countries. Will the coalition of the willing work with those other countries, as the Prime Minister has explained will happen, to ensure that that money, which is continuing to fuel the war, is cut off? That will enable a just and lasting peace and the rebuilding of Ukraine.

[The Prime Minister]

The question of sanctions is absolutely vital, as is bearing down on any individuals trying to circumvent those sanctions. That is why we put in place the sanctions and the measures behind them. We work with allies to make them enforceable.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

I think it is important to begin by stating that those on the far right who parrot the views of Putin, and those on the far left who seek to undermine NATO, are no friends of Ukraine. I was pleased to hear in the Prime Minister’s statement his unequivocal approach to responsibility in this regard—he rightly pinned it on one person: Vladimir Putin. The Prime Minister did, however, equivocate in response to the Leader of the Opposition with regard to the G8. Kaja Kallas of the European Union was very clear in her comments this morning that Russia cannot be in the G8—she said, “definitely not”. Surely he agrees?

[The Prime Minister]

Russia is the aggressor here. Obviously these are questions for the G7 to determine, but I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that the focus is very much on the process at the moment, which is to get a ceasefire and an end to this conflict.

I join the right hon. Gentleman in his point about those on the left. The Green party, of course, says that we should pull out of NATO—at a moment like this. It also says that it would make renting out a property—landlords—unlawful, but make selling drugs lawful, outside the school gate. I have to say, I find that a little odd.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

Last week in Rochdale, I joined our proud Ukrainian community to mark the Holodomor, which was Stalin’s forced famine of millions of Ukrainians in the 1930s. There is a modern-day Holodomor going on in Ukraine through the drone strikes and air strikes by Putin’s regime. Does the Prime Minister share my absolute disgust at the treacherous actions of the former leader of Reform in Wales, who lined his own pockets with cash from the Russian regime, and does he agree that Reform UK’s refusal to carry out a full investigation proves that they really are Putin’s poodles?

[The Prime Minister]

I agree. This is clearly a really serious case. Any other party would want to investigate to assure itself of how this could happen. This is not a minor transgression; it has now been visited with a 10-year sentence because it undermines our country. Surely the Reform leadership want to know how that happened on their watch, and what other links there are between their party and Russia. No wonder they are Putin-friendly. How on earth could they respond to a situation like this? There is no point in standing up and saying that you support Ukraine if within your own party, you are pro-Russian.

[Sir Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)]

The Prime Minister’s role in marshalling European co-operation is essential and very welcome, but would it not be obscene and unconscionable for any country—indeed, one of the permanent five at the United Nations—to invade its neighbour and murder its citizens, and to get away with it and profit from it, let alone to rejoin the G7? Have we not seen this film before? Do we not know how it ends?

[The Prime Minister]

I am grateful to the right hon. Member for raising this. That is why it is really important that we make the case for, and ensure that it is, a just and lasting peace—because we have seen this before. We have seen agreements brokered before without security guarantees, with the inevitable result that Putin will go again. That is why, in relation to all the principles I have been operating on, in setting up the coalition of the willing and in all my discussions, it has got to be a just and lasting peace. It has got to be one that actually deters Putin from doing this again, because we know that without that deterrence and those consequences, he has the ambition to go again, and he will go again, and we must guard against that.

[Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his steadfast leadership on Ukraine. My constituent Roksolana is one of tens of thousands of Ukrainian people with a loved one “missing under special circumstances”. These families do not know whether their loved ones are detained, a prisoner of war or even alive. It is likely that Russia has not notified the International Committee of the Red Cross on the status of thousands more prisoners of war. On behalf of Roksolana and all the Ukrainian families I met this weekend at St Mary’s Ukrainian school who are seeking answers about their loved ones, can the Prime Minister assure this House that the UK will support every effort to ensure that Russia complies with international humanitarian law regarding the treatment and identification of prisoners of war?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this and for her work bearing down on this, in particular the meeting she had at the weekend. This is a really serious issue. We are raising it with our allies. It is further evidence of the total disregard that Russia has for any of the principles of war, even in an unjust war, and we will continue to bear down on it.

[Gavin Robinson (Belfast East) (DUP)]

Over the past 18 months, the Prime Minister has shown himself to be influential and purposeful at significant times in this crisis, so I thank him for that. While events may be superseding the statement this afternoon, there are some principles that should not change. Aggression must not be rewarded. Violence should not pay. There has always been an alternative to violence. But when the Prime Minister says, rightly, that there should be a “just and lasting peace”, does he recognise that it may be difficult to sell a lasting peace to the people of Ukraine if so-called allies are forcing President Zelensky to accept an encroachment on his sovereign territory, and that those allies should be robustly defending Ukraine, rather than allowing so-called friends to allow the loss of territory?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Member and give him my assurance that I am acutely aware of the need for this to be a lasting peace for Ukrainians. A large part of my discussion with President Zelensky is how we bring that about, but I am extremely mindful of the fact that this has to be just and lasting for the Ukrainians, who did not start this war, do not want this war, have suffered hugely under this war and need to be reassured that if there is a peace, it is going to last and they are not going to be subject to the same thing in just a few years’ time.

[Dame Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)]

I commend my right hon. and learned Friend’s efforts to engage our allies in support for Ukraine. Does he agree that resolve, unity and support from the west are vital to give Ukraine the guarantees it needs for a lasting peace? How optimistic is he about the resolve and commitment he will secure from the coalition of the willing later today?

[The Prime Minister]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I am very confident about the assurance from the coalition of the willing, because we have already agreed plans between the countries in the coalition of the willing that are as advanced now as they can be until we know the next stage of the process. Obviously, I want to ensure that that is forged or welded together with US guarantees alongside the coalition of the willing, which will then be the strongest possible guarantee.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

The Prime Minister welcomed the inclusion in the 28-point peace plan of security guarantees. Point 10 of the proposed plan says that if Russia invades Ukraine, it would lead to

“a decisive coordinated military response”.

Who would co-ordinate that response, and what does the Prime Minister anticipate would be the UK’s part in it?

[The Prime Minister]

Without going into the details, the plans that the coalition of the willing have drawn up are about capability, co-ordination and command structure. A huge amount of military work has gone into exactly how that would operate in practice. These are not simply countries saying, “Here’s some capability that we’re prepared to put on the table,” as it were. They are military plans capable of being put into effect when they are needed.

[Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for all his efforts on ramping up the economic pressure on Putin, including through oil and gas and the shadow fleet. On the $300 billion-plus of Russian sovereign banking assets in the west, we know there are a few holdouts in the European Union that do not want to mobilise a loan backed by those assets as a downpayment on reparations. Could he update us on what progress has been made to get that over the line and get that money moving?

[The Prime Minister]

A proposal has been put forward in relation to how the assets could be used. Obviously, that requires a high level of agreement by various interested parties. That is why extensive discussions are going on as to how we can make that progress. There is no pretending that it is simple and straightforward—it is not—but that should not stop us trying to make further progress.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

I understand that the order of the day when dealing with Mr Trump is flattery. I am afraid that 42 years of experience in this House have not yet qualified me for that level of sycophancy. The presentation of a Kremlin wish list by the White House as a peace plan is risible, which the Prime Minister indicated rather more elegantly than I have. Will the Prime Minister seriously consider—if necessary, unilaterally—ensuring that legislation goes through so that the frozen Russian assets can be used to support the Ukrainian war effort?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

On the assets, I do want to make progress. My strong view is that if we are to make progress, it is better that as many countries as possible act at the same time. That is what we are trying to achieve. If we do that, obviously, we will take whatever steps are necessary. At the moment, my focus is on trying to progress this discussion, which has been difficult and fraught with risk. None the less, there is a willingness, I think, to move forward on it. Other discussions I had in the margins of the G20 were with countries outside of Europe to see whether they will act at the same time along with us if we get that far, because I think it is important to do so.

[Mr Alex Barros-Curtis (Cardiff West) (Lab)]

I am very proud to represent Cardiff West in this place. Nathan Gill, the former leader of Reform UK in Wales, was elected to serve the people of Wales in the European Parliament, but as we now know, he served not only himself but the interests of Russia. Having admitted not one, not two, but eight counts of bribery, he is now serving 10 and a half years’ imprisonment. I know the Prime Minister will join me in condemning that treachery, but will he also join me in demanding that the leadership of Reform UK—who, typically, cannot be present here today—launch an independent investigation into this act of treason?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend puts the point very powerfully. It must be uncomfortable for the Reform party to hear this. This is completely undermining our national security. It cannot be right for a political party represented in this House to simply close its eyes and ears to this. There has to be an investigation. There has to be a level of reassurance that there are not other links to Russia within the Reform party, and on how this came about in the first place. His question is very good. It should be deeply uncomfortable for Reform MPs to hear this, knowing that they are sitting on their hands and doing absolutely nothing about it.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

May I remind the House that last year I personally donated a five-figure sum, bought a pick-up truck, filled it with first aid supplies, drove it with friends and colleagues to Ukraine, and donated it to the brave soldiers of Ukraine. My support and Reform’s support for Ukraine has been rock-solid throughout, Prime Minister.

It is important that this House is united, which it is. Last week, when the 28-point plan emerged, we rejected it immediately. Just yesterday, I was with a Ukrainian delegation, and we were talking specifically about the leverage that European nations have with regard to the frozen assets, the majority of which are here in Europe. I urge the Prime Minister, among all the noise, to utilise that leverage, because that, I think, is one of the most powerful negotiating points that the west has against the vile dictator, Putin.

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman could have said that Reform has seen sense and decided that it will have an investigation into what happened in the bribery case. I do not doubt that he drove that truck and personally committed that support, but the simple fact is that you cannot be pro-Putin and pro-Ukraine; you have to decide between the two, and Reform is pro-Putin—

[Richard Tice]

Rubbish!

[The Prime Minister]

Well, a Reform politician has just been convicted and given a 10-year sentence for taking pro-Russian bribes, so the case could not be clearer than that. There is an unwillingness for Reform to say, “We need to investigate how on earth that happened.” Can the hon. Gentleman not see the inconsistency in what he is saying?

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is feared that the brutality in El Fasher will only intensify and spread to Tawila and beyond if international action is not convened and focused on the resolutions that are needed, not least to stop the incursions with drones supplied via the United Arab Emirates and mercenaries. Will the Prime Minister say more about what happened in South Africa to put the necessary focus in place, and about the next steps to stop the expansion of the atrocities we are witnessing in Sudan?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising Sudan, because what was an appalling situation has become even more appalling over recent days and weeks. We discussed it pretty extensively at the G20. We support the work of the Quad that is aimed predominantly at a ceasefire, the provision of humanitarian aid—it is the worst humanitarian situation in the world—and bringing about a better resolution.

Madam Deputy Speaker, may I do my best to update the House in relation to the latest news about Ukraine? It is coming to me second hand, so if it turns out to be not entirely accurate, I hope that the House will forgive me and I will come back to correct the record. My understanding is that there is not a new agreement, but Ukraine has confirmed that it is happy with the draft that emerged in Geneva yesterday, which does not cover the question of territory. My best understanding is that this is a confirmation of what came out of Geneva, not a new set of proposals or agreements—I think that is what it is—but if I get more information, I will update the House and we can discuss it in due course.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

The Prime Minister talks of having extensive discussions about limiting the export of oil and gas from Russia—the engine driving the Russian war machine. Danish waters could offer the key to killing the shadow fleet. An international convention regulating shipping going through those straits would stop the shadow fleet and stop a significant part of its activity supporting Russia. It would also drive environmental support through stronger regulations set out in such a convention. What considerations have the Prime Minister and his colleagues given to this?

[The Prime Minister]

We regularly discuss how we deal with the shadow fleet. The Danish authorities do a lot in their waters, as do the authorities in Norway and other countries in the region, and we are looking at what further we can do in relation to the shadow fleet. His underlying point about the oil and gas that are fuelling Russia’s aggression is hugely important. We need to ensure that that oil and gas is taken off the market, and that can only happen if we deal with the shadow fleet, among other things.

[Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his continued support of Ukraine. Going back to the announcement about the £4 billion deal with Indonesia at the G20, may I thank the Prime Minister for his efforts in securing that maritime partnership programme for Babcock? It will benefit people in my constituency and secure hundreds of jobs. Does the Prime Minister agree that the partnership is testament to the skills and experience of the workforce at Rosyth, and will he continue to do everything he can to support shipbuilding in Scotland, and at Rosyth in particular?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. Winning such deals, whether they be the Indonesian deal, which we finally concluded while we were at the G20, or the frigate deal with Norway, means competing against others in the world—we competed against France, Germany and the United States for the frigate deal—and that is only possible for us as a country because of the quality of the workforce, their professionalism and their commitment to delivering on time. After the frigate deal with Norway, I went up to the Clyde to see the workforce and to thank them for putting me in a position where we could secure that deal. I would be grateful if he passes those thanks on to his constituents.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (Wetherby and Easingwold) (Con)]

Signals matter. Right now, Putin thinks he is getting his own way but, as a point of principle, would the Prime Minister sit around a table if the indicted war criminal Putin was sitting at it?

[The Prime Minister]

No, I would not. When I was at the United Nations Security Council last year, I took my first opportunity as Prime Minister to be very clear about where I stand. In that case, it was in relation to the Security Council, but the principle applies elsewhere. Leaders cannot subscribe to international law and the UN charter if they are in breach of it through this illegal war.

[Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for his work to secure peace in Ukraine and for his very good comments about BAE Systems, which is partially located in my constituency of Glasgow West. Point 24 of the Trump plan indicates that

“all civilian detainees and hostages will be returned, including children.”

The kidnapping of children is heinous and a war crime in and of itself. Surely, as a mark of good faith, Putin should not wait for any agreement on this or other plans, and should release those children immediately. In saying that, I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter) for her work over many months on this issue. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that point 26 of that plan, that

“all parties involved in the conflict will receive full amnesty for their actions during the war and will agree not to make any future claims or pursue any grievances”,

cannot be tolerated?

[The Prime Minister]

I agree with my hon. Friend on both fronts. Of course those children should be released straight away. They should never have been taken in the first place and it is heartbreaking, as well as intolerable, that they are held for a moment longer. As for amnesty, no, I do not agree with amnesty for Putin and others for their illegal acts.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

I am deeply concerned that it appears that American negotiators have been listening more to the unreasonable demands of the Russian aggressors than to the security needs of the Ukrainians. Will the Prime Minister assure me that in his conversations with President Trump he has made absolutely clear that the voices of Ukrainians have to be front and centre in securing any just and lasting peace?

[The Prime Minister]

I assure the hon. Lady that the principles that I have set out to the House—that matters on the future of Ukraine must be for Ukraine—have been the guiding principles in all our discussions and in everything that we have done.

[Olivia Blake (Sheffield Hallam) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement and actions. If we achieve peace, as we all hope, the efforts to rebuild Ukraine cannot be only about infrastructure. They also have to focus on rebuilding people’s lives, from those who have been devastatingly injured or have lost loved ones, to civil society, which has been really tested. What will the UK Government do to ensure that funding and support is in place to allow not only the rebuilding of buildings, but the rebuilding of civil society?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is right. This will not just be about rebuilding infrastructure; it will be about the rebuilding of society. That is why I was really pleased last year to sign the 100-year agreement we have with Ukraine, which was intended to and does show that this is not just an agreement for the duration of the conflict, but something that goes well beyond the conflict to the lasting relationship that I hope our two countries will have.

[David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)]

I was very pleased that the Prime Minister mentioned Sudan; we cannot be blind to Russia’s malign interest there or across the Sahel. What discussions has he had with Prime Minister Modi about his approach to Russian oil and what appear to be his overly friendly social media posts towards President Putin?

[The Prime Minister]

I will not disclose all the details of my discussions, but the right hon. Gentleman can rest assured that the principles I have set out to the House guide me in all those discussions.

[Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement and for updating us all—this is obviously a fast-moving situation. Last week, at the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, we harrowingly heard from our Ukrainian counterparts how 20,000 children have been abducted by Russia since this war began. May I ask him to reiterate that in the just and lasting peace we all seek, they are at the centre of all this? Will he send a clear and immediate message to say, as Pink Floyd might have put it, “Hey, Putin! Leave those kids alone!”?

[The Prime Minister]

I agree with the principle that my hon. Friend puts forward; I am not sure I would put it in quite the terms that she does, but the sentiment is shared. This is just shocking—the idea of kidnapping children as an act of war and a weapon of war is just so disgusting, frankly. We should do absolutely everything we can to ensure not only that the children are safe, secure and returned, but that there is full accountability.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement, but if I may, I will caution him. I understand that the reports referred to by the hon. Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) are from a single source—an unnamed US official. I think we might be falling into a trap here, which others want us to fall into, of bouncing the Ukrainians ahead of an arbitrary deadline of Thanksgiving day. We need to ensure that officials and all of us are able to verify sources and corroborate them, even if they are reported in the mainstream media and repeated in the United Kingdom.

I believe I am still allowed to ask a question. What reassurance can the Prime Minister give to the people of this country and of Ukraine that President Trump’s very bad 28-point plan will not now be replaced by a bad 19-point plan? We all know from history that Ukraine, Europe, the United Kingdom and even our allies, the United States, will rue the day that we roll over for Putin. If we reward the aggressor, history tells us and we know that they come back for more.

[The Prime Minister]

My instinct is with the right hon. Gentleman on the breaking news. I spoke to President Zelensky about four hours ago—I have obviously spoken to him extensively, so I have a pretty good sense of where he is at on this matter—and I intend to speak to him again this afternoon.

[James Cartlidge (South Suffolk) (Con)]

Will there be another statement?

[The Prime Minister]

My instinct is that this probably is not anything of greater significance than what was coming out yesterday. If it is, of course I will make another statement. I spoke to President Zelensky this morning and got a very clear sense of where he is at, and I intend to speak to him again this afternoon. We have the coalition of the willing, and if there is anything, I will of course update the House.

The right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) is right to caution, and he is right in the underlying point he makes. We must hold to the principle that matters about the future of Ukraine are for Ukraine. That means that we must engage as extensively as we are doing with the President and the Ukrainians to ensure that, every step of the way, we are taking into account in a practical sense that matters for Ukraine must be for Ukraine, and that can happen only if we are talking to them in the way that we are.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, and I thank the Prime Minister for the leadership he has shown on Ukraine.

Year 6 students from St Margaret Clitherow Catholic primary school in Bracknell have written to me to express their deep concern about the ongoing crisis in Sudan, so I thank the Prime Minister for his leadership at the G20 on this conflict. What message does he have for those students who are concerned about this deep tragedy?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

Will my hon. Friend please pass a message back to them to say, “Thank you for raising this”? It is important that they have done so. The fact that they raised it with him means that it has now been raised through him on the Floor of this House, so they are directly inputting into our democracy and accountability. I assure them that we are working with partners to bring about an end to the appalling situation in Sudan. It has been the biggest humanitarian crisis in the world not just in recent days and weeks, but for a very long time—it is simply worse and more intense. Will he reassure the students that we are doing everything we can with partners to bring an end to this awful situation and thank them for their input?

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

The Prime Minister referred to Putin’s barbaric attacks on civilian energy infrastructure. What discussions has he had with his G20 counterparts about learning from Ukraine’s experience to protect energy supplies and infrastructure from hostile Russian action?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising that issue. The attacks on energy supplies are intended to inflict damage on civilians in Ukraine, as they do on a regular basis, particularly as we go into the winter. We are doing two things: we are working with the Ukrainians on what more support we can give them to safeguard their energy supplies, and of course with allies we are looking at whether there are any issues we need to address in relation to any vulnerabilities we may have.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his updates on the G20 and, in particular, for his commitment to the Global Fund, which we should be really proud of. I was also very pleased to see Sudan referenced in the joint declaration of the G20 leaders—as the Prime Minister has said, it is the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, but we are also hearing appalling accounts of war crimes. What more will the Prime Minister now do with global partners to secure a ceasefire, protect civilians and hold the warring parties to account for their crimes?

[The Prime Minister]

In particular, the Global Fund is so important—my hon. Friend heard the statistics that I went through. In relation to the wider situation, the focus is very much on a cessation of hostilities and on humanitarian support, which is desperately needed.

[Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)]

Does the Prime Minister agree with many assessments that make it clear that Russia is actually in a far weaker position than President Putin pretends, so long as we continue to support the war effort in Ukraine? That depends on us developing more independent, non-American capability, and the best way to do that is to fund the Ukrainians to develop their own capabilities so that they can continue to defend their own country.

[The Prime Minister]

It is important that we make it clear that Russia is in a much weaker position than it pretends. We should always remember that the early briefings and intelligence in relation to this conflict indicated, at the very beginning of the war, that Russia would achieve its end in a matter of a few weeks. Here we are, nearly four years in, and because of the fearless defence of the Ukrainians, supported by others, that has not been the case.

In relation to the damage being done to Russia’s economy by sanctions and other financial issues, we can see that they are doing real damage if we look at the inflation rate and the impact on its economy. The hon. Gentleman’s central point is really important. The plans of the coalition of the willing are premised on Ukraine having the capability that it needs, around which the plans that we have put in place would operate—not as a substitute or an alternative, but based on the Ukrainians having the ability and capability within Ukraine to do what it needs to do to safeguard and self-protect.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

Trains, planes and submarines—the Prime Minister put the pride of Derby manufacturing front and centre at this G20. Millions saw him halfway around the world in Johannesburg on a train made in Derby, showing the world what our city is famous for. Will he tell us more about what the deals he has secured mean for my constituents who work at Rolls-Royce and in the rail sector? Will he continue his focus on winning international deals for more high-productivity, high-skills and high-wage jobs?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is an incredible champion for Derby. It was incredible to be in Johannesburg, sitting in a train that had been made in Derby. It is significant that countries around the world want to do deals with the United Kingdom because of the quality, professionalism and commitment of our workforce, whether they are in Derby in her particular case, or in other places across the country. Those particular trains will be used for the run to the airport and back, so they will be heavily relied upon in South Africa. I am proud that other countries are saying that it is the UK they want to do deals with, whether that is in relation to frigates, submarines or trains. She should be very proud of the workforce in Derby. If she could pass on my thanks to them for allowing us to do this work, I would be grateful.

[Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement. The draft deal states:

“It is expected that Russia will not invade neighboring countries”.

To say it is “expected” is wholly inadequate, given that we cannot place our trust in the words of leaders such as Vladimir Putin. What steps is the Prime Minister taking to ensure that this agreement includes clear, enforceable safeguards? What measures are being implemented to strengthen the UK’s resilience against Russian interference?

[The Prime Minister]

On the security guarantees, planning has taken place with the coalition of the willing. That needs to be put together with the US guarantee to ensure that it is not an expectation that Putin does not invade Ukraine again, but that there is an absolutely clear message that if he does, there will be consequences. It is only if that is in place, with strong guarantees and credibility, that we will be able to deter Putin. Without those guarantees, he will, as we have seen in the past, simply breach any agreement that was reached in due course. We need to bear down on Russian interference in our democracy, and we will continue to do so.

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

My friend the Scottish journalist Jen Stout has just returned from the grey zone between Russian and Ukrainian forces, where to try to evacuate the wounded or even to wander outside for a moment is to invite death from the sky by drones. The message she brings back from Ukrainians on the frontline is that they will not give up this territory that they have defended for years. Will the Prime Minister ensure that the message that comes from here—apart from the Lord Haw-Haws paid by Putin—is that their frontline is our frontline, that Ukrainian sovereignty must be respected and that we will stand with Ukraine?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The change in the use of drone warfare over the past three to four years has been accelerated and intense, to the point that now, as he reflects, if you are seen, you are dead. That is the effect of drone warfare, and everybody on the frontline understands that. Tens of thousands of lives have been lost defending particular lines, particularly in Donetsk. I will never forget visiting a hospital in Kyiv where I met those who had been burned very badly on the frontline. They were receiving treatment in those hospitals, and it was a poignant reminder of the impact that the war is having on Ukrainians. It is no wonder that they are not going to give that up after so much sacrifice.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

What indication was there that Putin would accept even the earlier iteration of this agreement?

[The Prime Minister]

I am not able to say, because I have not been involved in any discussions with Putin, as the right hon. Gentleman would expect. The main thing is to be clear that the draft was not acceptable in a number of respects, but it did have essential elements that will be required. That is why work is being done to ensure that we get to a place that is acceptable to Ukraine and that can then be used as a basis, I hope, for some sort of negotiated outcome.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

I strongly welcome the Prime Minister’s emphasis on a just and lasting peace. Does he agree that while it is noble to want the fighting to stop, that can always be achieved in any conflict by giving in to the aggressor’s demands? History shows that that is not peace, but appeasement. Does he further agree that Ukraine must not be forced to give up its territory and long-term security needs, not only for its defence, but because it would weaken the very principles of sovereignty and the rules-based system, endangering us all?

[The Prime Minister]

I agree with the principles that my hon. Friend sets out. I assure him that at the meeting of the coalition this afternoon, I will make the point that I always make when we meet: while we are working for peace and trying to put in place security guarantees, we must not let up on keeping Ukraine in the fight now. That would be a big mistake, and I worry that because of the hope of peace, it is always possible that the focus goes off the fact that Ukraine needs support now to stay in the fight. We must never lose that focus.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

The Prime Minister’s statement says that Putin continues to seek to undermine our security. Can the Prime Minister give this House an assurance that when a deal is done to the satisfaction of Ukraine, our preparations for our security and defence against Putin—and he will not give up—will continue.

[The Prime Minister]

I can give the hon. Member that reassurance, but we will not wait until there is some agreement in place; we are taking those measures now.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

On behalf of my constituents, I congratulate the Prime Minister on demonstrating UK leadership by supporting the Ukrainian Government and President Zelensky in turning the 28-point peace plan, which very much appears to have been authored by Russia, into a much more acceptable 19-point peace plan, which clearly needs to be built on. Does the Prime Minister agree with me, and with the majority of my constituents who contact me, that it is vital that the UK and Europe remain steadfast in their support for Ukraine to achieve a lasting and just peace?

[The Prime Minister]

I agree with my hon. Friend and his constituents. We are doing everything we can to ensure that. It is remarkable that through the coalition of the willing, which is mainly European countries but not just European countries—Japan, Canada and Australia were centrally involved in our discussions over the weekend—there has been such a singular purpose in supporting Ukraine.

[Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)]

I appreciate that this statement might be being outpaced by events outside this Chamber, but negotiating this peace deal with Russia seems to be at odds with nearly four years of steadfast military support. The overriding message is that the rules-based order means nothing, that we will acquiesce to countries that breach sovereign borders, and that actions no longer have consequences. The Prime Minister may as well be waving a piece of paper at Heston aerodrome. The message this sends to our adversaries, and specifically to China, is that the west will be too weak to take action if China invades Taiwan. The Prime Minister mentioned earlier that Russia will face consequences if it invades again. When he talks about a just and lasting peace, what consequences will Russia face for its current actions, or can it act with impunity?

[The Prime Minister]

We had a pretty good tone up until now. I am not here waving some piece of paper; I am working with Ukraine and with other countries to try to bring about a just and lasting peace for Ukraine. We all want a just and lasting peace, but it will not happen if we do not have negotiations. We have to have those negotiations with clear principles about accountability and with strong security guarantees. The hon. Member is not doing this House a service by undermining a serious effort by international partners to bring about a just and lasting peace. It is very easy to speak in this House; it is much harder in practice to negotiate an end to a conflict on just grounds. We will do so, as we have done from beginning to end—and as the last Government did, in all fairness—by being clear that we are the closest ally of Ukraine and the most supportive country. I am proud that that is the approach we have taken in this House.

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

The Prime Minister rightly said in his statement that Putin continues to seek to undermine our security. Those efforts were aided and abetted by Reform’s Nathan Gill when he took Russian bribes. He is a traitor to this country. How plausible does the Prime Minister think it is for that just to have been an isolated incident? Does he think that Reform’s refusal to investigate its own party and find out how many more Putin puppets and traitors lurk there tells its own story?

[The Prime Minister]

The way I would put it is this: if the leadership of Reform were confident that there are no other pro-Russia activities and links in their party, they would surely want to have the investigation. The very fact that they will not look at this tells me that they are not confident of that, and they do not want any of us to know about it.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

Will the Prime Minister reassure my constituents that he will oppose any peace deal that rewards Russia for its aggression, whether that means carving up Ukraine’s territory or allowing Russia to join the G7? If Putin gets what he wants, this will never end.

[The Prime Minister]

I can reassure the hon. Gentleman’s constituents that we will absolutely fight for a just outcome and a lasting outcome. He can tell his constituents that we are working very, very closely with the Ukrainians on this, as we always have, and supporting them for as long as they may need that support.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement today, and for his continued leadership on a global scale, particularly in respect of Ukraine. I also welcome what he said about the investment that the Government will put into the Global Fund, because I recognise the importance of tackling HIV, malaria and tuberculosis. However, may I put in a personal plea for my constituent Anne Strike, a Paralympian and a polio victim, and ask that we continue to lead on the world stage in the eradication of polio? We are so close, but global conflicts such the one in Ukraine will obviously lead to more instances of polio in the future.

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is a proud champion for Harlow, and I am pleased that he has raised polio in that context, linking it to his constituency. We must not lose sight of the devastating impact of polio, HIV/AIDS and TB. They are having a devastating effect across the globe, and they will be a threat to us as well if we do not act.

[Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)]

I, too, thank the Prime Minister for reaffirming his commitment to the Global Fund. I secured a Backbench Business debate about the fund last week, so we really do appreciate that.

The Army Training Regiment Winchester trains about 20% of new recruits, putting them through basic training. I was there last week to see the passing-out parade. However, it is scheduled to close next summer, and the replacement facility at Pirbright is not due to open until 2030 at the earliest, although we have heard that the opening will be delayed. Will the Prime Minister review that decision? A four-year gap between one facility closing and another opening, at a time when we are rightly trying to increase troop numbers, does not really make sense to anyone.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that issue. I do not have the details to hand, but I will ensure that I provide a full response in writing to the point he has raised.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

Many of the Ukrainian refugees in my constituency have welcomed the continuity between the last Government and the current Government in respect of their support for Ukraine. President Zelensky is under great pressure from some within the American Administration to accept an unreasonable deal. Will the Prime Minister assure us that he will give his commitment to the President of Ukraine to ensure that he does not have to give in to the unreasonable demands for land surrender, for a restriction of Ukraine’s ability to defend itself in future, and for Russia not to pay for the crimes that it has committed in Ukraine? That is important for Ukraine, but it is also important to send Russia the message that we will not reward the aggressor.

[The Prime Minister]

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman, and I can give him that reassurance. That is why we are working as closely as we are with the Ukrainians, particularly with the President but at all levels.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as the host of a Ukrainian.

Given the growing instability around the world and the absence of the US President from both the G20 summit and COP30, how will the Prime Minister use the close relationship between the UK and America to ensure that Trump does not undermine the ability of global partnerships and agencies to keep us all safe from all types of problems in the future?

[The Prime Minister]

It is very important that we make the case for multilateral work across the globe, whether it is done by the G20 or by COP30. We will constantly make that case, because it is important for a rules-based system throughout the world—of which the United Nations is one part and the principles of war are another—but it is also in our own interests as the United Kingdom.

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

The Prime Minister has told the House today that he and the United Kingdom will never falter in support of Ukraine. Does that mean that the United Kingdom is not part of the pressure on Ukraine to concede territory that is already occupied? How could the ceding of territory be anything other than the rewarding of aggression and the whetting of the appetite of the aggressor?

[The Prime Minister]

The approach that we have taken is based on the principles that I have set out to the House, and is absolutely rooted in what the Ukrainians want out of this. That is why we are speaking to and working with them so extensively in relation to these negotiations. All matters involving the future of Ukraine must be for Ukraine, and that is the guiding principle in everything that I have been doing.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

I was pleased to see that Sudan was included in the G20 consensus. Will the Prime Minister set out what that will look like in practice, given that the atrocities of El Fasher seem likely to be repeated in Kordofan? What protections will be in place for the safe passage of civilians and humanitarian workers, what will be done about the assistance funding gap, and, importantly, what conversations are taking place with or about states that are said to be funding the belligerents and keeping the war going, including the United Arab Emirates?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising that issue. I can reassure her that we are having extensive conversations with the Quad, which is driving this forward, on all fronts but most immediately about the humanitarian situation, and we will keep the House updated.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Prime Minister for all that he does for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and, indeed, for the western world. It is appreciated by many.

There is a plan that we all hope can end the war in Ukraine and stop the devastation and the killings. Our eyes are focused on that plan. I think of the innocents killed, the women and children targeted, and the massacres carried out by Russians. I think of the children as young as eight and women as old as 80 who have been raped by Russian monsters, and of the massacres in Bakhmut, where more than 200 people were found in a mass grave. And there is more: we can watch video of Russian soldiers torturing people and murdering people. I suggest that whatever peace will bring, it must ensure that the Russians who have carried out those terrible crimes are held accountable, so can the Prime Minister confirm that there will be retribution? As a Christian, I know that there will be retribution in the next world, but what I want to see is retribution in this world, and eternal damnation for the rest of their lives.

[The Prime Minister]

That may have been the last question, but it is a very important one, given the atrocities and the impact that this has had on all Ukrainians. I remember, in the early days of the conflict, seeing the images of civilians handcuffed and shot in the head, lying in the streets just outside Kyiv. It was shocking. I went to visit those communities when I was over there, and talked to the individuals. It was their brothers, their sisters, their families and their colleagues who had had their hands tied and been shot in the head, and it fell to them to pick the bodies up, put them in shopping trolleys, wheel them to their church, and try to give them the best burial they could in the circumstances. We should never lose sight of the human impact that these atrocities have, not only on those individuals but on all of us, myself included.

Covid-19 Inquiry Report: Modules 2, 2A, 2B and 2C

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Written Statements

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

The chair of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry has today published the inquiry’s “Modules 2, 2A, 2B, 2C” report, which examined core UK decision-making and political governance.

The chair recognises the appalling loss of life and devastating socio-economic consequences as a result of the pandemic. I would also like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the pain and suffering the pandemic caused.

However, the chair has also concluded that the Government pandemic response was repeatedly “too little, too late”, and that lessons were not learnt and mistakes repeated—exacerbating the impact of the pandemic. The chair has found that the Government fell short, with advice lacking proper economic and social modelling, the impact on vulnerable people not sufficiently considered, and the culture in the centre of Government described as “toxic”.

The chair has noted that decisions were being taken in the context of the UK being ill-prepared to deal with a pandemic. Since then, improvements have been made to the way the Government would respond to a major crisis. That said, it is clear that local government and our public services, including the NHS, are under immense pressure and in many cases have not fully recovered from the pandemic. The cost of the pandemic still weighs heavily on the public purse. This is why this Government are committed to driving growth in the economy and reforming of public services, so that when we face the next crisis, we do so from a position of national resilience.

I would like to thank Baroness Hallett and her team for their thorough work on this report. The Government will carefully consider all of the findings and recommendations of the report and respond in due course.

I have laid a copy of the report before both Houses of Parliament.

[HCWS1081]

Oral Answers to Questions

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Wednesday 19th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)]

Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 19 November.

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

Let me start by congratulating Scotland on its magnificent victory last night. It qualified for the World cup for the first time since 1998—[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I did not realise that you were all Scottish MPs!

[The Prime Minister]

Scotland qualified with fantastic goals, including a cracker from former Arsenal player Kieran Tierney, who was always a favourite with the fans.

My thoughts are with the communities across the country affected by severe flooding, particularly in Monmouthshire. I have been liaising with the First Minister of Wales, and I thank all our emergency services for their response.

My thoughts are also with the family and loved ones of Royal Fleet Auxiliary member James Elliot, who has sadly been lost. I know the contribution that the personnel of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary make, and the risks that they take in the line of duty. My thoughts and, I am sure, the thoughts of the whole House are with those who knew him at this tragic and difficult time for them.

Last Thursday, I visited Anglesey to announce the construction of the country’s first small modular reactor. That is the biggest investment in north Wales in a generation, creating more than 6,000 jobs.

On Monday, we introduced the largest overhaul of the asylum policy in modern times, restoring control and fairness, and creating safe and legal routes.

Today, I am pleased to announce that inflation is coming down. There is more to do, but it is an important step. This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

[Kit Malthouse]

Many of us are becoming concerned that technical or procedural manoeuvres outside this House may be used to prevent Parliament from reaching a decision on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. The Government are neutral on the Bill itself, but I presume they are not neutral on the issue of democracy or the primacy of this Chamber. Will the Prime Minister reassure the House that the decision of elected Members—and, indeed, the wishes and hopes of the vast majority of the people we serve—will not be frustrated in this way?

[The Prime Minister]

I know the right hon. Gentleman feels strongly about this issue. As he says, the Government are neutral on the passage of the Bill. It is a matter of conscience; there are different and respected views across Parliament, and it is for Parliament to decide in the end on any changes in this Chamber. Scrutiny of the Bill in the Lords is a matter for the Lords, but the Government have a responsibility to ensure that any legislation that passes through Parliament is workable, effective and enforceable.

[Jon Trickett (Normanton and Hemsworth) (Lab)]

Q3. When the Conservatives were in government, they said that they would level up the country, but in fact they left the country divided. Austerity, de-industrialisation and stagnant wages all ripped the heart out of mining communities like the ones I represent. Everywhere we can see the legacy that the Conservatives left. How can it be right that the hard-working, loyal people in my constituency earn £400 a week, or £20,000 a year, less than people who live in Kensington? Will the Prime Minister declare that it is the Government’s moral purpose to eliminate economic injustice—starting, in the Budget next week, with an announcement of massive investment in the north, and wherever else poverty and low pay raise their heads?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important issue. [Laughter.] Conservative Members laugh, but working people paid a very heavy price for 14 years of economic failure. Austerity damaged the economy and decimated public services; the botched Brexit deal stifled growth; and the reckless borrowing of the mini-Budget saw mortgages and the cost of living soar.

My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue. We are determined to tackle inequality; he will be pleased to know that under this Government, wages are up, but we need to do more. We have had a pay increase for the 3.5 million lowest-paid, and the Chancellor will deliver a Budget based on Labour values.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

[Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)]

I associate Conservative Members with the remarks the Prime Minister made about James Elliot.

Can the Prime Minister tell us why his Government are the first Government in history to float an increase in income tax rates, only to then U-turn on it—all after the actual Budget?

[The Prime Minister]

I can inform the Leader of the Opposition that the Budget is actually next week. She only has one week to go, but I can tell her that it will be a Labour Budget with Labour values. That means that we will concentrate on cutting NHS waiting lists, cutting debt, and cutting the cost of living. Because of the decisions we have already made, inflation is down this morning, the Bank of England has upgraded growth, and we have a record £230 billion of investment in this country under this Government.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister says that the Budget is next week, but we read all about it in the papers. This is the first Budget to unravel before it has even been delivered. I am afraid that the Chancellor’s cluelessness is damaging the economy now. The Prime Minister needs to end this shambles, so can he confirm today that he will not break another promise by freezing income tax thresholds?

[The Prime Minister]

The Budget is one week today, and we will lay out our plans then. I have said what we will do, in terms of protecting the NHS and public services; what we will not do is inflict austerity on the country, as the Conservatives did, which caused huge damage. What we will not do is inflict a borrowing spree, like Liz Truss did, which also inflicted huge damage. Have the Conservatives learned anything? The Leader of the Opposition apparently has a golden economic rule—it is very important, this golden rule. It is £47 billion of cuts with no detail. No wonder the Institute for Government says that they are on very shaky foundations. They have not listened, and they have not learned.

[Mrs Badenoch]

It is quite clear that the Government are going to freeze thresholds; we did not get a clear answer from the Prime Minister, but this is really important. In her Budget speech last year, the Chancellor said:

“I am keeping every single promise on tax that I made in our manifesto, so there will be no extension of the freeze in income tax and national insurance thresholds”.—[Official Report, 30 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 821.]

Why was freezing thresholds a breach of the manifesto last year, but not this year?

[The Prime Minister]

Every week, the Leader of the Opposition comes along and speculates and distorts. Last year, the Conservatives predicted a recession, and what did we get? The fastest-growing economy in the G7 in the first half of the year. They opposed NHS investment, and what did we get? Five million extra appointments in the first year of a Labour Government. The Conservatives tried growing the economy with millions on NHS waiting lists, with our schools crumbling and holes in our roofs. It did not work. What do they want to do now? Go back to the same failed experiment.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister talks about speculation. The only people who have been speculating are his Government, every single day for the last three months. He mentioned inflation in his last answer; inflation has nearly doubled since Labour came into office. He wants a round of applause because it has come down a little bit, but I will remind him that food inflation is up to 4.9%. That is making life miserable for all of those people out there.

[The Prime Minister]

The Leader of the Opposition talks about inflation, but it went to 11% and the country is still paying the price. Inflation is down this morning, wages are up and we have had five interest rate cuts, and that is because our fiscal rules are iron-clad. She and the Conservatives have no credibility on the economy. She was a Treasury Minister during the worst decline in living standards on record. She said that Liz Truss got the mini-Budget 100% right. There is not much room for flexibility there—100%; that is full marks. She might want to tell us whether that is still her position—100% right for Liz Truss.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I was a Treasury Minister at the height of the pandemic, and we cleaned up that mess. Perhaps the Prime Minister will clean up some of his own mess. I will repeat what the Chancellor said, because it is clear that the whole Labour Front-Bench team have forgotten:

“I have come to the conclusion that extending the threshold freeze would hurt working people. It would take more money out of their payslips.”—[Official Report, 30 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 821.]

That, however, is what Labour is planning to do next week. All this speculation is having real-world consequences. Just this morning, the UK chair of ExxonMobil said:

“The Government needs to understand that the whole industrial base of the UK is at risk unless they wake up and realise the damage their economic policies are doing.”

Can the Prime Minister tell us whether the loss of UK industry is the price that the country has to pay for having a clueless Chancellor?

[The Prime Minister]

On ExxonMobil, it is a difficult time for the workforce there, and we must focus on supporting them. We have been meeting the company for more than six months and explored every possible reasonable avenue. It has been facing losses for the past five years. [Interruption.] It is best to do the detail before you chunter. The site is currently losing £1 million a week. The Leader of the Opposition talks about policy and approach. On energy policy, she follows Reform. On the European convention, she follows the man who wants her job. When her shadow Minister said that we should deport people who are lawfully here to achieve cultural coherence, she pretended that it did not happen. I could go on. She was the Trade Secretary who did not sign any trade deals. She was a cheerleader for the mini-Budget and a cheerleader for open borders, and when the Conservatives were crashing the economy, botching Brexit and running down the NHS, she was right at the centre. She has not got an ounce of credibility.

[Mrs Badenoch]

On energy policy, what we are doing is listening to industry. [Interruption.]

[Mrs Badenoch]

Just this morning, we heard from the chair of one of our largest energy companies. Last week, I had a roundtable with energy companies, and what they had to say about this Prime Minister and his Energy Secretary is unprintable. They are absolutely furious. Our oil and gas industry is dying, and the Prime Minister is standing there, saying he has had meetings. People out there are struggling and the Budget chaos is causing real anxiety. People are not buying houses, businesses are not hiring and they are cancelling investment decisions. Two weeks ago, the Chancellor called a ridiculous press conference to blame everyone else for her having to raise income tax, then last week she U-turned on her own U-turn. We can see that they are instead planning to freeze income tax thresholds, which she said last year would be a breach of their manifesto. They are making it up as they go along. Does the country not deserve better than government by guesswork?

[The Prime Minister]

Either we renew our country with Labour, or we go to austerity 2.0 with Reform and the Tories. The Tories left waiting lists at record highs and almost a million more children in poverty, and they wrecked our public services. The Leader of the Opposition comes here to talk down the country; we are turning the page, with more NHS appointments, free breakfast clubs, free childcare, more homes and better public services. That is what we are fighting for: a Britain built for all.

[Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)]

Q4.  Standing in the heart of Weymouth, the Rectory is an iconic building. Formerly a theatre, once a bustling cinema and then a popular pub, it has stood empty for more than a decade. We want to turn the building into a thriving centre for arts and culture, hosting exhibitions and celebrating everything that makes Weymouth unique. Will the Prime Minister work with me and all the key players on the ground to revitalise the Rectory and reopen this fantastic building for our town?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is a brilliant champion for South Dorset, and he is right to champion the revitalisation of our high streets. The Heritage Minister will be delighted to discuss how we can get this iconic building reopened, as he wants. I am pleased that Weymouth secured £20 million in Pride in Place funding, giving his community the power and resources to make a real difference to people’s lives.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)]

May I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s opening remarks? May I also join him in congratulating Scotland on their amazing win against Denmark, and wish them well in the world cup? I hope that Wales will qualify to join England and Scotland.

Every year, there are more than 300 suicides related to problem gambling. It affects hundreds of thousands of families, tearing them apart. Meanwhile, online gambling firms are taking in record revenues of more than £7 billion a year. ITV News is reporting that one of them, Sky Bet, is moving its headquarters to Malta so that it can save tens of millions of pounds in corporation tax. Does the Prime Minister agree that it is time we taxed those firms on their UK profits so that they do not escape, wherever they are registered for tax?

[The Prime Minister]

I join the right hon. Gentleman in wishing Wales well, as well as Northern Ireland—I should like to see all four nations in the finals.

The right hon. Gentleman has raised the very important issue of suicide, in men’s health awareness month. I think that the whole House would want to work together on anything that can prevent it. If all of us think about individuals we may have known who lost their lives through suicide, we will recognise that it is something that touches almost every one of us and all our families as well. We will of course look at the link between suicide and gambling, and take whatever measures we can to reduce suicide. It is a very important issue.

[Ed Davey]

I thank the Prime Minister for his reply, and we look forward to the Government’s taking action on that.

Let me raise another domestic matter. Next to the River Cherwell in Oxfordshire, a field is now covered in an enormous mound of rubbish, 150 metres long and up to 12 metres high. The water is now lapping against the waste and carrying it into the river. It is just one of many sites where organised criminal gangs are illegally dumping their waste on our countryside and getting away with it. This is a shocking environmental emergency, so will the Prime Minister instruct the Environment Agency to clean it up now?

[The Prime Minister]

These are utterly appalling scenes. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, a criminal investigation is under way and specialist officers are tracking down those responsible. The Environment Agency will use all available powers to ensure that the perpetrators cover the cost of the clean-up that must now follow. We have boosted the agency’s budget for tackling waste crime by 50% and given councils new powers to seize and crush fly-tippers’ vehicles, and lawbreakers can now face up to five years in jail.

[Damien Egan (Bristol North East) (Lab)]

Q8. Immigration is the No. 1 issue on the doorsteps of Bristol North East: most people will ask me about it. They want a firm but also fair approach, but they have been let down over many years. Controlling our borders and knowing who comes here is essential, not least to integration. What can the Prime Minister say to my constituents that will give them an assurance that the reforms that he and the Home Secretary are proposing—which I support—will be firm, but also fair?

[The Prime Minister]

I am proud to lead an open, tolerant, generous country. To maintain that principle, we must restore order and control, fix the utterly broken system left by the Conservatives, and end the division that others seek to exploit. That includes creating safe and legal routes and recognising those who contribute, integrate and strengthen our society, while at the same time reducing the number of illegal arrivals and removing those with no right to be here. That is a fair, progressive system which meets modern challenges.

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

The Governments of France, Germany and the United States have all extracted compensation from Libya for their citizens who were affected by Gaddafi-led terrorism across the world. Why are the British Government continuing to fail citizens of the United Kingdom who suffered to a huge extent through the importation of arms, and, in particular, the tonnes of Semtex that Gaddafi supplied to the IRA, giving rise to Enniskillen, Warrington, the Baltic Exchange and multiple other incidents? Why is no compensation being extracted from Libya for our citizens when it can be done for others? Will the Prime Minister at least meet representatives of the almost forgotten, but still campaigning, families of those affected by Gaddafi’s terrorism?

[The Prime Minister]

So many suffered from Gaddafi’s actions, and the hon. and learned Member is absolutely right to raise this really serious issue. We are working hard on it, and I will absolutely make sure that the meeting he asks for is set up with the relevant Minister, so that we can give the full position and take onboard what the families have to say.

[Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)]

Q9. On International Men’s Day, and in the spirit of Movember, I want to be open about my own past mental health challenges, in the hope that it might encourage other men to do the same. During the traumatic birth of my first son I nearly lost my wife, and a dark cloud settled over me—a cloud that lifted through conversation and support, and through the safe arrival of my second son. Bright days lie ahead. In the Public Gallery today is Mike from Menfulness, a fantastic charity in York giving men a place to talk. Will the Prime Minister, as a dad himself, agree that strength as a man means being open about our emotions, and that we should never face challenges on our own?

[Hon. Members]

Hear, hear.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his honesty. It is never easy to stand up and say what he has, and I hope he understands just how important that is for others who are suffering, who will be inspired to talk openly about their experiences, and, importantly, to get the help that they need.

I am really proud to publish the first-ever men’s health strategy today to tackle challenges that disproportionately affect men, including certain cancers and suicide, which is tragically the biggest killer of men under 50. We will invest millions in helping more men access mental health support, in better care for former miners, and in rolling out at-home blood tests to tackle prostate cancer. I thank my hon. Friend for speaking out; I think it is so brave and important. It has been done across the House—this is not a party political issue—but it is always very powerful. It is a model for all of us.

[Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)]

Q2.  Given the Government’s desire to improve our children’s educational outcomes and wellbeing, they are ignoring the elephant in the room. This morning I hosted a powerful roundtable with three secondary headteachers who spoke about the transformational effect that a complete ban on smartphones in their schools had had—improved behaviour, increased focus, far fewer safeguarding issues, and, most importantly, happier children. But for them the ban has been hard won, and it has sunk a huge amount of time. Will the Prime Minister tell me, and the thousands of headteachers out there who are crying out for this change, why his Government will not back them with a ban on smartphones in schools?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Member for her important question. I have teenage children in secondary school, and I know this is an issue for concerned parents and teachers. The reality of the statistics is that the majority of schools already ban smartphones—[Interruption.] They allow children to bring their phones to school but they ban them in schooltime and lessons. Of course we will always keep this under review, but we have got to take steps that will be effective. I agree with the sentiment of what the hon. Member is putting to me, but we need to deal with it effectively.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)]

Q11. One of the worst legacies of the last Conservative Government was the collapse in apprenticeships for young people in places such as Peterborough, shutting a generation out of opportunity. My city is determined to turn that around, with places such as Peterborough College—like many of our colleges—leading the charge. While I welcome the Government’s reforms, I still talk to too many young people who cannot access the training they need to rebuild Britain. Will the Prime Minister set out what more we can do together to ensure that Peterborough’s young people get the good jobs and apprenticeships they deserve?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend’s dedicated campaign means that Peterborough has one of the first youth guarantee pilots in the country. We inherited an awful situation where almost 1 million young people were neither earning nor learning, and we refused to accept that. That is why we are delivering the new youth guarantee, investing a record £3 billion into apprenticeships and increasing the national minimum wage for 16 to 20-year-olds. Reform and the Tories say that the minimum wage is too high, but they are totally wrong. We are going to focus on every young person to give them the chance to succeed.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lee Anderson]

Our Reform-led councils have already identified savings of more than £330 million in the first six months.

[The Prime Minister]

indicated dissent.

[Lee Anderson]

The Prime Minister may shake his head, propped up by his gullible Back Benchers, but here is a challenge: will he guarantee that all the cancelled elections from this year and the proposed local elections for next year will go ahead in May 2026? Go on—be a man.

[The Prime Minister]

I did not realise the hon. Gentleman was quite so good at stand-up comedy. He talks about dog whistles. Last week, the leader of his party, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), said that he did not have time to condemn the racist comments of his fellow MP, the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin); he also said he did not have time to condemn members of his party calling children in care “evil”. He did not have time for that. I wonder if the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) could ask his party leader, sitting just next to him, whether he has time to give an explanation of the stories in today’s papers.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

Q14. Over the summer, large quantities of illegal cigarettes were seized in shops in my constituency. However, many of those shops were reopened the very next day. Does the Prime Minister agree that we have to make it easier to shut these shops down permanently so that we put these criminal networks out of business forever?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this matter. There has been a surge in response to illegal shops selling products they should not be selling and not paying their taxes—this is very important. Raids in October saw more than 900 arrests, almost £11 million of criminal profits seized and almost £3 million-worth of illegal gear destroyed. We need to go further to protect our high streets, which is why we are giving councils powers to prevent certain shops from even opening, supporting them to deal with unwanted shops and, through the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, cracking down on rogue retailers who break the law.

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

Q6.  Eastbourne resident Pam was given a cheque for £125,000 by her terminally ill partner, which she went on to cash in. However, an error by the bank, Barclays, meant that only £125 was deposited. Barclays admitted the error, and then said it would compensate her with £250 for the inconvenience caused. Will the Prime Minister work with me to ensure that Barclays bank pays Pam the compensation she needs and deserves? While we are here, will he commit to imposing a windfall tax on the excess profits of banks like Barclays to bring bills down for struggling residents?

[The Prime Minister]

The case of the hon. Gentleman’s constituent Pam is staggeringly bad—absolutely terrible. If he could provide me with the full details, I will make sure that the Government join him in doing whatever we can in his constituent’s case.

Before I sit down, I will take a moment to send my warmest congratulations to the hon. Gentleman on getting engaged on Thursday, I believe. The proposal was right here in Parliament—you never know what you might find in this Dispatch Box, Mr Speaker. On behalf of my party and, I am sure, the whole House, I wish him and Connor a lifetime of happiness.

[Hon. Members]

Hear, hear.

[Connor Naismith (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab)]

Q15. Crewe railway station is the gateway to the north, and indeed the shop window for my constituency, with an average annual footfall of 4.5 million people. I am working with Cheshire East council on ambitious plans for Crewe360 to deliver much-needed investment into the station and the land around it. We want to adopt the Railway Industry Association’s station investment zone proposals, which could deliver much-needed improvements in transport, housing, regeneration and economic growth. Does the Prime Minister agree that Crewe would make a perfect pilot for those proposals, and will he work with me to bring Departments round the table to make these plans a reality?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. Because of our actions, house building near stations like Crewe will now be a default yes. That means tens of thousands of homes delivered far sooner for families, with great transport links as standard. I will make sure that he meets the relevant Ministers to drive forward growth. Every step we have taken to deliver more homes has been opposed by the parties opposite. They are the blockers; Labour are the builders.

[James McMurdock (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Ind)]

Q7. It is an open secret that the gig economy is a magnet for organised crime and illegal workers. As Christmas approaches and demand increases, so do the associated risks. Will the Prime Minister please explain why enforcement in this area is so low and what he will do to restore order?

[The Prime Minister]

We are delivering a record crackdown on illegal working in the gig economy, and expanding right-to-work and facial recognition checks, which are really important. We are also introducing a new criminal offence of trespassing with intent to commit a crime through the Crime and Policing Bill.

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

Based on their reaction today, Conservative Members may not care or remember, but every day I see the cost to my constituents in Bournemouth West of years of cuts to public services—youth services gone, neighbourhood policing decimated and no NHS dentist appointments. Can the Prime Minister confirm that there will be no return to austerity under this Labour Government?

[The Prime Minister]

I certainly can. The austerity that the Conservatives imposed on the country destroyed our public services, and we are still paying the price. We will be cutting waiting lists, cutting the debt and cutting the cost of living—fair choices to secure Britain’s future, not a return to the failure of the Conservative party.

[Jack Rankin (Windsor) (Con)]

Q10. The Prime Minister has expressed “sincere regret” for appointing David Kogan as Independent Football Regulator. Will he now put on record the full amount that Mr Kogan has donated to his leadership campaign and his party, any hospitality he has received, and whether he declared these interests before appointing him?

[The Prime Minister]

They were all declared properly.

[Liam Byrne (Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North) (Lab)]

This Friday we commemorate the 51st anniversary of the Birmingham pub bombings, where 21 people lost their lives in what is still the largest unsolved murder in our history. The families do not believe that the approach set out by the Government will discover the truth, and they think that only a public inquiry will do. Can we now have the meetings in order to hear the families’ concerns directly, and agree an approach that will not just command confidence but find the truth about who bombed Birmingham?

[The Prime Minister]

My deepest sympathies remain with the bereaved and survivors of the horrific pub bombings in Birmingham in 1974. We believe that the most appropriate route is through the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery, but my right hon. Friend has raised this issue directly with me and of course I will ensure that the relevant meeting is set up, so that he and the families can put their point of view for us to consider.

[Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD)]

Q12. Mr Speaker, you and the Chamber will be well aware that I represent the biggest and most remote constituency in the UK, and I am bound to say that bank branches there are becoming rarer than sightings of the Loch Ness monster. We have no banks at all in the huge county of Sutherland. We have legislation that provides for access to cash, but what we do not have is legislation that provides for face-to-face banking services. I would be deeply grateful if the Prime Minister asked Treasury Ministers to meet me to discuss how we might update the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 to include some form of access-to-cash provision that will preserve face-to-face banking for my constituents and those in other remote areas.

[The Prime Minister]

I know how important face-to-face banking is to local communities. As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are rolling out banking hubs. Decisions over locations are taken independently, but they should be rolled out wherever there is a need for one, and of course there is more to come. In answer to his question, I will make sure that he gets the meeting that he requests, so that we can have a look at his proposal.

[Afzal Khan (Manchester Rusholme) (Lab)]

As the Prime Minister is aware, November marks Islamophobia Awareness Month. This Labour Government have shown a steadfast commitment to supporting Muslim communities, particularly through consulting on the definition of Islamophobia. Given anti-Muslim hate is at a record level in the UK, can the Prime Minister outline the steps this Government will take to tackle the rising level of racism and xenophobia against Muslims in Britain?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important issue. He has always been a strong champion on this. Anti-Muslim hatred is abhorrent and has no place in our society. The increase in incidents must be addressed. It is why we are increasing funding to protect mosques and Muslim faith schools across the country. It is why we have announced a new fund to monitor anti-Muslim hatred and support victims, and we continue to work on the definition of anti-Muslim hatred.

[Mike Wood (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire) (Con)]

Q13.   Everyone who cares about media independence and freedom will be relieved that RedBird has recognised that it cannot run The Telegraph, but there are serious concerns that it will burden the paper with unsustainable debt if the title is sold for less than half a billion pounds. Will the Prime Minister step in to prevent this from happening and enable a sale, at a lower price if necessary, without this toxic debt burden?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Member raises a serious issue. I am not quite sure what he is asking the Government to do—to step in and nationalise it I do not think would be the right thing.

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

Meur ras, Mr Speaker. On 5 March at the Dispatch Box, the Prime Minister said these words:

“We do recognise Cornish national minority status—not just the proud language, history and culture of Cornwall, but its bright future.”—[Official Report, 5 March 2025; Vol. 763, c. 278.]

Since then, I have repeatedly asked Ministers for Cornwall’s unique place on this island to be recognised through devolution. When the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill comes back to the House next week, will the Prime Minister help me explicitly enshrine Cornish devolution and Cornish national minority status in that Bill?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. Of course, he has raised this issue with me on a number of occasions already. He is a great champion for Cornwall. We will ensure that Cornwall’s national minority status is safeguarded in any future devolution arrangements. We have provided half a million pounds to support distinctive Cornish culture, including the Cornish language.

[David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)]

The Prime Minister knows that, last week, nine four-star generals made it plain that yesterday’s Northern Ireland Troubles Bill is doing harm to the British Army already. The most acute damage is being felt by the Special Air Service. It is already affecting its recruitment, retention, morale and operational effectiveness. As a result, lawyers acting for the SAS Regimental Association have sent a letter before action to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. I know of no precedent for this in the entire history of the British Army, and this reflects—because it is so important—how important it is, so may I make a plea to the Prime Minister? Will he involve himself personally to ensure that 60, 70 and 80-year-old soldiers, who have carried out actions that most of us would view as heroic, are not persecuted in the coming years, because now it is a matter not of national security, but of national honour?

[The Prime Minister]

May I thank the right hon. Member for his question and reassure him on the protections that he seeks for veterans? It is a very important issue, and he has continually and rightly raised it. There will be protection from repeat investigations, so the commission does not go over old ground without compelling reasons. There will be protection from cold calling, and protection in old age, so that elderly veterans are respected. Those who do contribute to the legacy process will have a right to anonymity, a right to stay at home to give evidence remotely and a right to be heard through the commission. That is the work that we are doing, and I am happy to discuss it further with him.

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

When the Prime Minister next meets the President of the United States, will he ask him if he knows any reasonably priced hotels near the MetLife stadium in New Jersey, where the world cup final is to be held, and, as we are about to provide the biggest boost to whisky exports since our trade deal was signed, will he gently ask the Chancellor to consider excise duties next week so that we Scots can continue celebrating at reasonable prices?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. It is important that we do everything we can to support whisky. I am really pleased with the progress we are making with the United States, and of course with India under that trade deal, and I will continue to discuss what more we can do with my hon. Friend.

Cabinet Committees

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Wednesday 19th November 2025 Written Statements

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

Today I am publishing an update to the Cabinet Committee list. I have placed a copy of the new list in the Libraries of both Houses.

[HCWS1073]