China and Japan

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

With permission, I will update the House on my visit last week to China and Japan, where we delivered for the British people.

With events overseas directly impacting on our security and the cost of living, I made it a founding principle of this Government that, after years of isolationism, Britain would face outwards once again. This was an 18-month strategy to rebuild our standing and we have delivered: strengthening our US relationship with our world-first trade deal; resetting our relationship with the EU; striking a groundbreaking free trade agreement with India; and now, thawing our ties with China to put this relationship on a more stable footing for the long term.

China is the second biggest economy in the world. Including Hong Kong, it is our third biggest trading partner, supporting 370,000 British jobs. It is also an undeniable presence in global affairs. It would be impossible to safeguard our national interests without engaging with this geopolitical reality. Yet we inherited a policy from the previous Government not of engagement with China, but of hiding away and sticking their heads in the sand. While our allies developed a more sophisticated approach, they let the UK fall behind. We became an outlier. Of my three predecessors, none held a single meeting with President Xi. For eight years, no British Prime Minister visited China—eight years of missed opportunities. Meanwhile over that period, President Macron visited China three times, German leaders four times, the Canadian Prime Minister was there a few weeks ago, and Chancellor Merz and President Trump are both due to visit shortly.

[Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)]

They went on their feet, not on their knees. [Laughter.]

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

Thank you. Can we calm it down? I am sure you will want to catch my eye and I would like to hear what you have to say, so let us not ruin the opportunity.

[The Prime Minister]

In this context, refusing to engage would be a dereliction of duty, leaving British interests on the sidelines. Incredibly, some in this House still advocate that approach. But leaders do not hide. Instead, we engage and we do so on our own terms, because, like our allies, we understand that engagement makes us stronger.

Protecting our national security is non-negotiable. We are clear-eyed about the threats coming from China in that regard, and we will never waver in our efforts to keep the British people safe. That is why we have given our security services the updated powers and tools they need to tackle foreign espionage activity wherever they find it, and to tackle malicious cyber-activity as well. The fact is that we can do two things at once: we can protect ourselves, while also finding ways to co-operate. It was in that spirit that we made this visit.

I had extensive discussions, over many hours, with President Xi, Premier Li and other senior leaders. The discussions were positive and constructive. We covered the full range of issues, from strategic stability to trade and investment, opening a direct channel of communication to deliver in the national interest, enabling us to raise frank concerns about activities that impact our national security at the most senior levels of the Chinese system. We agreed to intensify dialogue on cyber issues and agreed a new partnership on climate and nature, providing much-needed global leadership on this vital issue.

I raised a number of areas of difference that matter deeply to this country. I raised the case of Jimmy Lai and called for his release, making clear the strength of feeling in this House. Those discussions will continue. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is in touch with Mr Lai’s family to provide further briefing.

I raised our human rights concerns in Xinjiang and Tibet. We discussed Taiwan, wider regional stability, Iran and the middle east. I called on China to end economic support for Russia’s war effort, including the companies providing dual-use technologies, and urged it to use its influence on Putin to push for the much-needed ceasefire in Ukraine.

I also raised the fact that Members of this House have been sanctioned by the Chinese authorities. In response, the Chinese have now made it clear that all such restrictions on parliamentarians no longer apply. I want to be clear: this was not the result of a trade. Yes, Members will want to see more—I understand that—but that is precisely the point: ignoring China for eight years achieved nothing. This step is an early indication, not the sum total, of the kind of progress that this sort of engagement can achieve through leader-to-leader discussion of sensitive issues, in standing up for British interests.

My visit was also about creating new opportunities for British businesses to deliver jobs and growth for the British people. We took with us a brilliant delegation of nearly 60 businesses and cultural powerhouses—the very best of British—as an embodiment of what this country has to offer. If anyone is in doubt as to why this matters, I urge them to spend a few minutes with any one of those businesses; they will describe the incredible potential there and the importance of getting out there and accessing the market.

We made significant progress, paving the way to open the Chinese market for British exports, including in our world-leading services sector. We secured 30-day visa-free travel for all Brits, including business travellers. We secured China’s agreement to halve whisky tariffs from 10% to 5%, which is worth £250 million to the UK over the next five years—a significant win for our iconic whisky industry, particularly in Scotland. That lower tariff comes into force today. In total, we secured £2.3 billion in market access wins, including for financial services, £2.2 billion in export deals for British companies and hundreds of millions of pounds-worth of new investments.

In addition, we agreed to work together in some key areas of law enforcement. Last year, around 60% of all small boat engines used by smuggling gangs came from China, so we struck a border security pact to enable joint law enforcement action to disrupt that supply at source. We also agreed to scale up removals of those with no right to be in the UK and to work together to crack down on the supply of synthetic opioids.

We will continue to develop our work across all these areas, because this is the start of the process, not the end of it. My visit was not just about coming back with these agreements, but about the wider question of setting this relationship on a better path—one that allows us to deal with issues and seize opportunities in a way that the previous Government failed to do.

Finally, I will say a word about my meetings in Tokyo. Japan remains one of our closest allies; together, we are the leading economies in the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership, and we are partners in the G7, the G20 and the coalition of the willing. Japan is the UK’s largest inward investor outside the United States and Europe.

I had an extremely productive meeting with the Prime Minister of Japan, where we set out our shared priorities to build an even deeper partnership in the years to come. Those include working together for peace and security, supporting Ukraine as we work for a just and lasting peace, and deepening our co-operation in cutting-edge defence production, including through the global combat air programme. We discussed how we can boost growth and economic resilience by developing our co-operation: first, in tech and innovation, where we are both leaders; secondly, in energy, where Japan is a major investor in the UK; and, thirdly, in trade, where we are working together to maintain the openness and stability that our businesses depend on. That includes expanding the CPTPP and deepening its co-operation with the EU. We will take all of that forward when I welcome the Prime Minister to Chequers later this year.

This is Britain back at the top table at last. We are facing outward, replacing incoherence and isolationism with pragmatic engagement, and naive posturing with the national interest. In dangerous times, we are using our full strength and reach on the world stage to deliver growth and security for the British people. I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Badenoch]

Mr Speaker, I am not worried about the Business Secretary; the entire business community thinks he is a joke and does not know what he is talking about.

As I was saying, of course we should engage with other countries, even hostile ones, but we need to do so with our eyes open and from a position of strength. That requires a Prime Minister and a Government who put our national interest first.

[The Prime Minister]

Let me see if I understand the right hon. Lady’s position. This is the Leader of the Opposition who said we should empty-chair the most important NATO summit for years, who would not turn up to the G7 and who would rip up our valuable trade deals with the US, India and the EU. This is the Leader of the Opposition who characterised Greenland as a “second-order issue”, and then undermined the Government’s position on sovereignty. When it comes to China, her policy is to stick her head in the sand, unable to influence anything. In a volatile world, that is not policy; that is an abdication of responsibility—no wonder members on her Front Bench are leaving in droves.

The Leader of the Opposition talks of the embassy. China has had an embassy in the UK since 1877. It is currently spread across seven sites. She is so busy trying to hold her party together that she has clearly not read the letter from the security and intelligence services. She claims great interest in the China embassy. She was offered an invite for a Privy Council briefing on the issue. What did she do? She chose not to attend. That is a dereliction of duty. Even worse, she sent in her place the shadow Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp)—that is a double dereliction of duty. Instead of taking up a Privy Council briefing, she took up a megaphone on the streets outside the embassy. I changed my party from a party of protest to a party of power. She is rapidly going in the opposite direction. Her reply this afternoon seems to be that we should engage with China, but not engage with China, and that, instead of leader-to-leader discussions where we raise all the opportunities and the difficult issues, each and every one of them, she would get a bag of sand and put her head in it and influence absolutely nothing. The Conservatives are so unserious about world affairs.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

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

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement, and I am pleased to see that his trip went so well. This morning, I was in touch with the Scotch Whisky Association, which wants me to convey its congratulations to the Prime Minister on securing reduced tariffs on exports to China. There is, of course, more work needed, however—a Prime Minister’s job is never done. The biggest overseas market for whisky is, of course, the US, where the tariff is still too high. Will the Prime Minister confirm that this will not be the end of his support for the Scotch whisky industry and that he will continue to be an advocate for it?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I can confirm that we are continuing to work with the US. Of course, the India deal we secured will also have an impact on whisky tariffs.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

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

With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I start by paying tribute to my friend Jim Wallace, one of the great Scottish Liberals. I offer our thoughts and prayers to his family and many friends. Jim devoted his life to public service, his Christian faith and the cause of liberalism. But his judgment was not always impeccable, for it was Jim who gave me my first job in politics. We will miss him.

I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of the statement. I listened to the Conservative leader, whose position now seems to be to oppose trade with the world’s biggest economies—so much for global Britain. With President Trump threatening tariffs again, just because of the Prime Minister’s trip, and with Vladimir Putin still murdering civilians in Ukraine, now more than ever the United Kingdom must forge much closer alliances with nations that share our values, our belief in free trade and our commitment to mutual defence. China shares none of those.

The Prime Minister’s main focus should be on the closest possible ties with our European neighbours, our Commonwealth allies and our friends such as Japan and Korea. Once again, he has made the wrong choice. However, unlike the Conservative party, we think he was right to go and engage. But just like with President Trump, he approached President Xi from a position of weakness instead of a position of strength, promising him a super-embassy here in London in return for relatively meagre offers from China.

The Prime Minister rightly raised the case of Jimmy Lai, whose children fear for his health after five years held in captivity, so will he tell us what Xi said to give him confidence that Mr Lai is now more likely to be released? Did he also challenge Xi on the bounties on the heads of innocent Hongkongers here in the United Kingdom, or the revelation that China hacked the phones of No. 10 officials for years? In other words, did he stand up for Britain this time?

Yet again, the Prime Minister had to spend time on a foreign trip responding to revelations about the vile paedophile and sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein’s relationship with Lord Mandelson. The Prime Minister has rightly said that Mandelson should resign from the other place, but since he has not, will he back a simple piece of legislation to strip him of his peerage? Surely this House could pass it tomorrow.

[The Prime Minister]

I start by offering my deep condolences on behalf of the Government in relation to Lord Wallace. He was a kind and decent man, and I know he will be sorely missed on the Liberal Democrat Benches. May he rest in peace.

Of course we need to build stronger alliances with our key partners, and that is what we have been doing, particularly with the EU. But the right hon. Gentleman is wrong: it is not a choice between doing that and engaging with China. One can do both, and that is what we are doing. Where there are opportunities, and where there are sensitive and really important disagreements, I think it is more important to have a meeting to discuss them.

The House is violently agreeing that there are issues that need to be discussed. The difference between us is that we think that having a leader-to-leader meeting to discuss those big issues is better than sticking our head in the sand, if we really want to influence them. So we can do both.

Yes, I raised the case of Jimmy Lai, and we have now spoken to his family about that discussion. Yes, I raised the case of Hong Kong. I raised a number of human rights issues, as I listed. The point is that, by being in the room and having the debate one to one, at leader-to-leader level, it was possible to raise those issues. There is frankly no point standing in this House shouting and screaming about issues if you are not prepared to get in the room to discuss them. It gets you absolutely nowhere.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Business and Trade Committee.

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

I want to welcome the Prime Minister’s serious engagement with serious power: it is essential to safeguarding our national interest. The complexities of China require from Britain a whole-of-society approach, which is completely impossible until the Government publish a clear China strategy to explain what is off limits and how we are going to rebalance competition with Chinese industry that is six times over-subsidised compared with our firms. Last week in Europe, I heard very clearly from our partners that they are worried that the lackadaisical approach to policing Chinese competition risks deeper integration with Europe. The EU has 143 trade measures in place against China; we have none. So will the Prime Minister now follow up his meetings last week and publish a strategy, co-ordinated with our allies, so we can take out the guesswork and put in place the guardrails for this important relationship?

[The Prime Minister]

Obviously, the general approach was set out in the Lady Mayor’s banquet speech I gave just before Christmas. My right hon. Friend made a really important point about Europe. As I mentioned, President Macron went to China just a few weeks ago and Chancellor Merz is due to go very shortly, and my right hon. Friend will not be surprised to learn that the three of us, as the E3, discussed in advance the approach we would take and agreed to discuss during our visits and afterwards the outcomes and how we go forward as a group of European nations.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

What absolutely unites everybody in this place is absolute outrage at the treatment of Jimmy Lai, a British citizen whose only crime is to campaign for democracy and to ask the Chinese to obey the spirit and letter of the solemn agreement that we made with them before the 1997 takeover. The Prime Minister said at the weekend that he had raised the case of Jimmy Lai “respectfully” with the latest Chinese emperor —“respectfully”? Does the Prime Minister not realise that the Chinese only accept strength—that everything is a deal—so why did he not say to them, “There will be no Chinese embassy until you stop spying on us in this House, you give an absolute assurance to us on Diego Garcia, and, above all, you free Jimmy Lai now”?

[The Prime Minister]

I raised the case of Jimmy Lai in terms with the President, as in fact I did, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, at the G20 when I met the President for the first time, and we have updated the family in relation to the progress we have made. But the position of the Conservative party seems to be that we should raise the case of Jimmy Lai by not going to China and raising the case of Jimmy Lai.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Defence Committee.

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

We must engage pragmatically with our allies and with others around the world when it serves the national interest. That is why I welcome the Prime Minister’s engagement with our close ally, Japan, as well as with our major trading partner, China. I also welcome his commitment to the global combat air programme, which, as the Defence Committee illustrated, is of vital strategic importance as we develop the next generation of fighter jets. But our Japanese and Italian friends are understandably nervous, because we have as yet not put pen to paper on the full contract for Tempest, as was planned last year. Can the Prime Minister clarify when that fully formalised contract on GCAP will be penned, and can he also confirm that the timeline and programme will slide sideways?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this very important programme. He will be pleased to know I did discuss it with the Prime Minister in Japan, and we will be publishing our defence investment plan shortly.

[Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)]

Mr Speaker, you have been stalwart in standing with those of us who were sanctioned by the People’s Republic of China all those years ago, and you have been very clear that we stand as one in this House. Do you not find it as surprising as I do that the Prime Minister has come back with a deal that lifts the sanctions on those six of us who are still in this House, but not the one who is not, nor the lawyers, advisers and academics who support the work of this House? Is this not a direct affront to the democracy of this place, and an attempt to divide and conquer that we have seen China play against the European Parliament and that, sadly, has tricked our Government too?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Member for raising this point—I know how much it matters personally to him and to the others that he referenced. I raised this point directly, and the response was that restrictions do not apply to parliamentarians. I accept the challenge and the point that we need to go further, but that does not mean that what we have achieved should be put to one side. I accept that we must go further, and I will work with colleagues across the House to do so. In order to go further, we have to engage, and we have to engage at the leader level.

[Tony Vaughan (Folkestone and Hythe) (Lab)]

Can I thank the Prime Minister on his grown-up approach to the UK’s engagement with China? Can I also congratulate him on the agreement for a crackdown on manufacturers of small boat engines and parts, which directly impacts my constituency? Given that the Conservative party would not have even gone to China, does the Prime Minister agree that the choice is between a Labour Government doing the hard yards to shut down the smuggler supply chains, and a Tory party that prefers posturing and permanent failure in the channel?

[The Prime Minister]

Sixty per cent of motors used to cross the channel are coming from China, so of course it is right to engage appropriately in China on this issue, and to get this agreement on information sharing and working to ensure that those engines cannot make their way from China to the north coast of France.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

I will have another try at the question asked by my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) in his original statement. Can the Prime Minister tell us what President Xi said about the case of Jimmy Lai, and what gave him confidence that we might see movement in the case soon? Can he also let us know what response he received on challenging the bounties put on the heads of dissidents here in the United Kingdom? Did he challenge the transnational repression that Hongkongers across the country fear? Is there any prospect of them being able to walk our streets without worrying about interference from the Chinese state?

[The Prime Minister]

As I have told the House, I raised the case of Jimmy Lai in terms. I will not go into the details of the discussions, save to say that we have subsequently spoken to Jimmy Lai’s family about that. In relation to the wider issues that the hon. Gentleman raises, including Hong Kong: yes, all those issues were raised.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

I want to thank the Prime Minister for his incredible leadership on an international scale, which has a direct benefit to us domestically, not least through the disruption of the supply chain for small boat engines. I just wonder, because it is not a silver bullet to solve the challenge with immigration through illegal routes, whether the conversation came up about TikTok being used as a platform to share disinformation and misinformation to encourage people to make dangerous journeys.

[The Prime Minister]

We raised a number of issues in relation to smuggling. The focus was very much on the engines for small boats because of the fact that 60% of them are coming from China, and we need to stop that supply chain if we are going to deal with the crossings.

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

In spite of the somewhat thin economic gruel with which the Prime Minister has returned, he was absolutely right to visit China. If I may return to the issue of human rights, particularly Jimmy Lai, did the Prime Minister say, as the whole House would have wished, that this British citizen—nearly 80 years old, held in solitary confinement and denied the chance to practice his religion—should surely receive clemency and be returned to the United Kingdom? Or did the Prime Minister merely deliver a written note?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

No, I did not deliver a written note. I engaged seriously on the issue, as the right hon. Member would have expected me to, and I went into the details of the case that I was making in the way that he would have expected me to.

[Rachel Blake (Cities of London and Westminster) (Lab/Co-op)]

My constituent, the journalist and democracy campaigner Jimmy Lai, was convicted under Hong Kong’s draconian national security law. I have listened carefully to what my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister has said, and we have heard that he raised the issue on his visit. Jimmy Lai is now desperately unwell—his health is failing. I have heard what the Prime Minister has to say, and I am grateful that the Foreign Secretary will be speaking to Jimmy’s family. Can the Prime Minister share with us his assessment of whether we will see Jimmy Lai free in 2026?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for all the work she does on behalf of her constituents. Yes, I raised this issue in detail and made it clear that we were calling for Jimmy Lai’s release, plus other details of his health and the situation he is being held in. I believe it is the right thing to engage at the highest level on issues of such concern and to have that conversation—I believe that is a far better strategy than putting your head in the sand, which is apparently the policy of the Conservative party.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

As you will be aware, Mr Speaker, when the Prime Minister was in China and Japan, he gave comment that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor should testify before Congress in the United States. What the Prime Minister chose not to do was to offer an unreserved apology to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein for appointing his other friend, Peter Mandelson, as the ambassador to the United States of America. Now that he is back from China and Japan, will the Prime Minister take the opportunity to do just that, and does he agree with me that Peter Mandelson should be subject to a police investigation for potential criminality while in public office?

[Mr Speaker]

There is a statement to come.

[The Prime Minister]

Only the SNP could go about this in this way—instead of welcoming the halving of tariffs on Scottish whisky, the right hon. Gentleman raises things that have absolutely nothing to do with China or Japan. Only the SNP has no interest at all in delivering for Scotland.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

Does the Prime Minister recall that during the time of Brexit negotiations, the Tories told us that we had more to gain outside of the EU than inside it and that, within days of Brexit, we would be signing trade deals with the US and China that would be bigger than the trade deals that existed with the EU? What we got was a botched Brexit that isolated us from our European neighbours, and now the Tories want to extend that isolation to a global scale. Does the Prime Minister agree that Britain would not be treated decently or with any confidence by our global neighbours and friends if we had adopted such an approach?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that period in our history, because of course, this was 2015 and 2016. The Conservative party had a manifesto in 2015 that dealt with the question of a referendum in relation to Brexit and also set out its position on China. I had a look at that very manifesto this morning; the Conservatives’ position was to

“strengthen our economic links with China”,

including seeking a free trade agreement. That used to be their position, then they veered to the other side of the road, and now they stick their head in the sand and pretend that they can influence events.

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

The Prime Minister’s position seems to be that if a bully is big enough, rich enough and powerful enough, the pragmatic thing to do is to pay into his protection racket. Can he at least show some sign of moral compass by accepting the fact that China is a repressive, brutal, communist, totalitarian state that dishonoured all the provisions of the Hong Kong agreement?

[The Prime Minister]

The Conservatives’ position seems to be that if one has concerns in relation to China, the pragmatic thing to do is to buy a bag of sand and put your head in it. I do not think that is going to influence anything—nothing said here has any influence if you do not have a meeting.

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

I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on last week’s handsome wins, including on visas in China—I just wondered whether the same issue arose in Japan. I did a brilliant visit to the Japan London school in my seat the other day, but that school is finding the dogmatic visa changes made by the Conservative Government burdensome. Will my right hon. and learned Friend look into that, and also praise the contribution of the Japanese in Acton, from sushi to bilingual education?

[The Prime Minister]

We had very productive meetings in Japan. Among the discussions was how we open up to more trade between our two economies.

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

The Prime Minister has said that this visit to China was good for British jobs. Having wrongly granted consent to the Chinese super-embassy, can he confirm that it will be built with brilliant British steel from Lincolnshire, as opposed to Chinese steel?

[The Prime Minister]

It was this Government who took the action on Scunthorpe to ensure we had British Steel at Scunthorpe—it is one of the proudest things I have done.

[John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)]

I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement, which faces into the world as it is. Des Browne, Baron Browne of Ladyton, is retiring from the other place after decades of distinguished public service as the Labour MP for Kilmarnock and the Defence Secretary and in his work on the prevention of the spread of nuclear weapons. China is a significant and growing nuclear power, with more than 600 warheads, and this week the US-Russia new START treaty comes to an end. Can the Prime Minister tell me if the UK is engaging with China at the highest levels to prevent the risk of nuclear weapons and combat nuclear proliferation?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I pay tribute to the contribution that Lord Browne has made. I assure my hon. Friend that our discussions with China did include how we derisk the risk in relation to nuclear weapons.

[Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)]

When John Major went to Beijing, he spoke clearly and said, “We will not forget Tiananmen Square.” In contrast, the Prime Minister refused to say Jimmy Lai’s name until he was wheels up. I have never said that we should not engage with Beijing; I have said that we should not give it a propaganda visit. It is extraordinary to abrogate the responsibility of the Chinese Communist party, whose actions we had to respond to, therefore pausing trade talks, as if it has done nothing wrong. Finally, the Prime Minister met with Cai Qi, the man responsible for running two spies who were undermining this Parliament, but he excluded that from his statement. Why doesn’t he tell us why he thought it was acceptable to meet this man and what he got out of it in the British interest?

[The Prime Minister]

This is so pathetic. At the highest level and one to one, I raised each of the issues of difference between our two countries—each and every one of them—in the way that the House would expect, and that is what the Opposition are criticising. They seem genuinely to believe that these issues can be progressed or influenced by doing nothing about them. You have to be in the room to have a discussion, and that is what we did.

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

It is right that the Prime Minister goes to China if he is acting in the best interests of all those living here. Last year, the Joint Committee on Human Rights undertook an inquiry into transnational repression. In front of us, we had Chloe Cheung, a young Hongkonger from Leeds who had a $HK1 million bounty put on her head. She told us about how she had been intimidated and harassed. Did the Prime Minister speak up for all the Hongkongers in the UK who have had bounties on their heads and who have been intimidated and harassed? Will he ensure that people living in the United Kingdom are safe from the Chinese regime?

[The Prime Minister]

That is exactly why we raised the issues of human rights at numerous levels on the visit.

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

I noticed that the mention of Japan took the Prime Minister one minute—the last minute—of a 10-minute speech on China and Japan. Japan is not only the largest inward investor into the UK, apart from the EU and US, but a vital liberal democracy in the Indo-Pacific and a key security partner in maintaining regional stability in the face of growing Chinese assertiveness. Given the growing security risks and strategic instability across the region, can the Prime Minister assure the House that engagement with Beijing will not weaken the UK’s alignment with Japan, which is one of our most important democratic partners?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I can assure the hon. Lady of that.

[Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)]

With respect to the statement following the Prime Minister’s visit to China and Japan, I thank him for being in the room and challenging China on its appalling human rights record and for fighting for British jobs. With respect to his visit to Japan, did the issue of Toyota come up? Toyota is a significant employer in Derbyshire and worth more than £5.5 billion to the local economy. Can we do more with Toyota, because it is really good for jobs here?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, we did discuss the car manufacturing going on at the moment and the potential for further work in that regard, along with other issues of trade broadening between our two countries.

[Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)]

The Prime Minister will be aware that some 80% of the sanctioned dual-use items that Russia needs for the drones and missiles it is firing at civilians and children on a daily basis come from China. He says that he raised that matter. Did he get any assurance that China will stop supplying Russia?

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Gentleman is right to draw attention to this issue. That is precisely why I raised it again in terms. I will not go into the details of the discussion, but I did raise it, for the very reasons that he sets out. Across this House, we are committed to a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. This has been an issue of concern for a considerable period, which is why I raised it.

[Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)]

I welcome the Prime Minister’s recent engagement in Tokyo and the strengthening of our relations with Japan as a key economic and strategic partner. Will he explain how small and medium-sized enterprises in Portsmouth, particularly those in maritime and defence such as Griffon Marine, alongside the creative industries, will benefit from deeper UK-Japan co-operation? My 18-year-old son Archie Cole is a professional wrestler, currently competing on Tokyo TV in “Magic Monday”, so I know at first hand how international engagement can open doors for individuals and Portsmouth’s local businesses alike.

[The Prime Minister]

I congratulate my hon. Friend’s son on his achievements. On SMEs and businesses, yes, we discussed how we can enhance our engagement and enhance growth and jobs right across all our constituencies, including my hon. Friend’s.

[Esther McVey (Tatton) (Con)]

Does the Prime Minister accept that in his rush to hoover up economic crumbs from President Xi because of his appalling handling of our economy, he is having to increase strategic dependence on Beijing? The public see the risks the Prime Minister is taking with UK security; does he?

[The Prime Minister]

The Conservatives crashed the economy, so lectures from them on the economy are not welcome. As I said in my statement, national security is at the heart of our approach to China, as it is to every issue that we take up. It is quite possible to have a discussion about the opportunities available to our country while also safeguarding our national security. That is what we are doing in a grown-up, mature way.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

Further to the question from my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne), the anti-dumping measures that we impose on Chinese goods coming into this country protect hundreds of jobs in Stoke-on-Trent, whether in the ceramic tableware manufacturing sector or in the retreading of tyres at the Michelin factory. Can the Prime Minister give a guarantee that as the economic work with China continues, those measures will not be junked? The anti-dumping measures are not abstract: they protect hundreds of jobs in the part of the country that most needs them.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that issue and I can give him that assurance. I know how much it matters, and that is the approach we have taken.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

Over the past weeks, thousands of Chinese fishing boats have been trapped, creating a blockage up to 300 miles long in the east China sea off Japan. This is seen by many as a strategy for a future blockade. Given the huge reliance on that route for trade, such action would cause a global economic shock, threaten thousands of jobs in Scotland and dramatically increase the cost of living. What explanation did the Prime Minister’s Chinese counterpart give for this behaviour? What subsequent discussions did he have with the Japanese Prime Minister about maintaining maritime security in the region?

[The Prime Minister]

That issue was raised in both China and Japan, because it is obviously a cause of concern. Regional instability matters not just in the region but globally, so I discussed it in both China and Japan.

[Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement, but will he tell the House what steps the Government are taking to protect parliamentarians and others in public life against foreign influence?

[The Prime Minister]

We have taken a number of measures, including the further powers and tools we have given to our security and intelligence services.

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

I echo the tributes to Jim Wallace. He was one of the most significant Scottish politicians of his generation and it was a privilege both to know him and to work with him.

We have established that the Prime Minister was in the room, but what difference will it make for people who were not in the room in Ukraine?

[The Prime Minister]

It will make a huge difference, which is why I discussed it with Volodymyr Zelensky before I went, in terms, and why I will discuss it with him again in the coming days, in terms.

[Alex Baker (Aldershot) (Lab)]

I welcome the Prime Minister’s leadership on his trip, including his words in Japan about the value of the global combat air programme, which is not only strategically important for global security and autonomy, but important for businesses that have grown out of my constituency, including BAE Systems and QinetiQ. Will the Prime Minister highlight the work he is doing to ensure that this critical endeavour makes progress?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for that question, because Japan is a key colleague and partner when it comes to defence and security, which is why, across a range of issues, we discussed what more we can do, including on GCAP.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

In an earlier answer, the Prime Minister mentioned Scunthorpe steelworks, where hundreds of my constituents are employed. We welcome the Government’s support to date. Was he able to discuss Jingye’s ownership with his Chinese opposite number, and can he give any positive assurances to my constituents about their long-term future?

[The Prime Minister]

May I give this assurance to the hon. Member’s constituents? We absolutely believe in the importance of steel being made in this country, and that is why we took the necessary measures, on a Saturday, as he knows, in relation to steel production in his constituency.

[Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)]

The Prime Minister will know that many excellent west midlands businesses export to China, including great car makers such as Jaguar Land Rover, the Morgan Motor Company and Aston Martin. Collectively, those car exports are worth more than those from any other region in the UK, I would say. Can the Prime Minister outline how the results of his trip to China, including the agreement on 30-day visa-free travel, will benefit those businesses and drive jobs and exports in our region?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that JLR was there with us on the delegation in China, and it is acutely aware of the difference that better trade and economic measures with China will make to its business, and to jobs in his constituency.

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

In 2023, the Intelligence and Security Committee reported:

“The UK’s academic institutions provide a rich feeding ground for China to achieve both political influence and economic advantage”.

Was interference in UK universities raised with President Xi?

[The Prime Minister]

I raised a wide range of issues of concern to this House with President Xi, as the hon. Member would expect.

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

Growing our relationship with China could boost our motor manufacturing industry. The Prime Minister will know only too well that small businesses in this sector are the engine of economic growth in my constituency and right across the west midlands. Can he set out how his visit will help small businesses in North Warwickshire and Bedworth?

[The Prime Minister]

This issue is so important, in terms of the opportunities that we have. That is why we had representatives from motor manufacturing with us. They are only too well aware of the great benefits that taking full advantage of the opportunities will have for her constituents and others.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The Prime Minister’s friend, Baroness Helena Kennedy, a sanctioned person, clearly believes that the juice was not worth the squeeze or, indeed, the price of the plane tickets, because she has described the returns the Prime Minister has secured as “meagre”. She is right, is she not?

[The Prime Minister]

I have known Helena for many years. We shared a room when we worked together in chambers. We agree on many things, but not everything.

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

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement, and for what he said about calling on China to end support for Russia’s illegal war effort. We cannot ignore the threat to our shores from Russia, as we know very well in Wales. Nathan Gill, the former Reform UK leader in Wales, is serving 10 and a half years in prison for taking bribes from Russia. Will the Prime Minister join me in condemning that treacherous activity, and reassure me that he will continue to push China on that important point?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I will, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the shocking case of Nathan Gill. As my hon. Friend rightly says, Nathan Gill got 10 and a half years for taking bribes in relation to Russia. The leader of Reform is not even interested enough to start an investigation to see whether that is the extent—which it will not be—of Russian influence in his party.

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

I just want clarification on the Members of this House who were formally sanctioned. The Prime Minister said:

“President Xi said to me that means all parliamentarians are free to travel to China”.

Does that mean that they are no longer legally sanctioned, and did he get that in writing?

[The Prime Minister]

That is my understanding in relation to all parliamentarians. I accept that in relation to others, we need to see how much further we can go.

[Matt Bishop (Forest of Dean) (Lab)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement. Does he agree that the security of this country is the Government’s first and foremost priority at all times?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I do. It is front and centre of everything we do, whenever we are acting on the world stage.

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

I want to follow up on the questions from the Chair of the Defence Committee, the hon. Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi), and from the hon. Member for Aldershot (Alex Baker), on the global combat air programme. The funding for the next round of GCAP is going to run out in a matter of months. That will affect Edgewing and the British phase of the programme. It has been reported that contract for the next phase of GCAP has been delayed, due to the delay to the defence investment plan. Will the contract be signed before the defence investment plan is published?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Member will be pleased to know that this was a matter of discussion in Japan, and the defence investment plan will be published very soon.

[Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)]

Mark Carney rightly challenged fellow middle powers to stop “living within a lie”, and to recognise the changes in the geopolitical landscape, because comfortable assumptions about the international order are no longer true, and the system that we once benefited from cannot become the source of our subordination. It was therefore important to hear the Prime Minister’s firm commitment to GCAP in Japan. Does he agree that investment in programmes such as GCAP is essential if we are to address this geopolitical challenge?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I do, and my hon. Friend is right to emphasise the changes in the geopolitical landscape; we have approached our relationship to the US, Europe, India and China accordingly.

[Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)]

In the Prime Minister’s discussions on what he somewhat mildly describes as “areas of difference”, did he raise the discovery of kill switches and hidden comms devices in Chinese-manufactured solar panels? If he did, can he assure us that, rather than politely asking for this practice to stop, he demanded that it stop?

[The Prime Minister]

We raised all the sensitive issues, and we did it in direct terms, and in the room. That, to my mind, is the right way to try to make progress on these very important issues.

[Richard Baker (Glenrothes and Mid Fife) (Lab)]

It was a privilege to serve with Jim Wallace in Holyrood, and I associate myself with the tributes to him.

We have had trade deals with Europe, China and India worth hundreds of millions of pounds to Scottish businesses, and defence contracts that secure thousands of jobs. Can the Prime Minister tell us how he will build on this success for Scotland? Does he agree that it is about time the Scottish Government showed the same ambition for Scottish businesses?

[The Prime Minister]

It is astonishing that the Scottish National party is simply not interested in the progress that we have made on the India trade deal, which is hugely beneficial to Scottish businesses, or in the halving of tariffs that comes into effect today in relation to China. Businesses in Scotland know exactly what that means to them, which is why they are celebrating. SNP Members cannot bring themselves to even welcome it.

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

I certainly acknowledge the tariff easement for Scottish whisky, and for the apparently superior Bushmills whiskey from my constituency, but will the Prime Minister’s visit do anything to address the proliferation of heavily subsidised Chinese vehicles, which are flooding our nation, particularly in the bus sector? We have 500 subsidised Chinese vehicles on the streets of our capital city, courtesy of Transport for London, whereas in Scotland and in my constituency, we build the highest-quality buses. Will there be any action to support British buses as a result of what the Prime Minister is seeking to do?

[The Prime Minister]

I see that we have opened a whisky competition, but the hon. and learned Gentleman is quite right: it is really important that we champion the building of buses and so much else in the United Kingdom. We have great examples of that, and we will always put the national interest first.

[Kevin Bonavia (Stevenage) (Lab)]

I welcome the Prime Minister’s report back from his visit to China and Japan. Previous Tory Governments refused to make such reports for many years. He says that the issues discussed included human rights, trade and security. I am particularly interested in what he had to say about the border security pact, because my constituents in Stevenage are very concerned about the small boats crisis. We already have international agreements with France and Germany, and this is a new one with China. How can I learn more about how this will work?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is right to put this as one package, because what we are doing on small boats with China is looking at the source of the engines; what we are doing with Germany involves the transport of those parts through Europe; and what we are doing in France is working with the French to tackle the crossings.

[Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)]

The whole House can see with its own eyes what is happening here. The Prime Minister, on paper, has the support of more than 400 MPs. If they want to show their support, they can fill every single seat on the Government Benches, as far as the double doors, but they are all drifting away as these exchanges proceed. Even at the start of his statement, the Prime Minister did not have the authority to command that they fill two or three Benches behind him. He is clearly on his way out. The problem is that in his desperation to shore up his position, he is trading away our national interests. Can he name a single tangible benefit that he has secured in respect of the rights of Hongkongers?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, we raised the issues of Hongkongers. [Interruption.] We raised the issues. I find the Conservatives’ position astonishing. They say that they take these issues seriously. They say that these issues are “of great concern”. They stay here and raise these issues, notwithstanding the fact that no one else is listening, and then they say, “This is so important to me, but the one thing I do not want you to do is go to China and have a discussion about it at the highest level.” It is a pathetic, unserious approach to foreign policy.

[Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)]

The Prime Minister may have noticed that the Japanese ambassador to the United Kingdom, Hiroshi Suzuki, was in Manchester recently, trying Boddingtons bitter. The Prime Minister will be aware of the importance of brewing to my constituency, and perhaps, in celebration of these trade deals, he would like to encourage the ambassador to come and sample some of the best beer in the brewing capital of Burton-on-Trent.

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I certainly encourage that, and I will take the first opportunity to do so.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

I am glad that the Prime Minister enjoys a dram as much as I do. For the record, I did welcome the Indian trade deal very publicly, so he may wish to correct the record on that. However, I want to focus on an issue that is important to employment in my constituency: the Ardersier site, part of the Cromarty Green freeport, in which Mingyang has expressed a significant investment interest. I fully understand the national security concerns that need to be addressed, but a decision is long overdue. The issue has been with the Government for a long time, and there is investor jitteriness. The supply chain is vexed about this, and the issue is certainly not helping with the just transition. It is putting important job opportunities at risk. When will the decision be made either to let Mingyang get on with it or to move on to another opportunity?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising this issue, which is of concern to his constituents across Scotland, and indeed the United Kingdom. No decision has yet been made, and I will update the House as soon as I can.

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

Last Thursday, I held a public meeting with the Hong Kong community in Bishop’s Stortford. We met to discuss the proposed changes to indefinite leave to remain, but there was real strength of feeling about the case of Jimmy Lai and democratic freedoms in Hong Kong, so I was very pleased to hear the Prime Minister raise the issue. Will he take this opportunity, for the benefit of my constituents, to set out the details of those discussions again? Will he also assure my constituents of this country’s commitment to those from Hong Kong who have made their home here, and reassure them that this Government will listen carefully to their views in the Home Office’s consultation on earned settlement?

[The Prime Minister]

Let me give my hon. Friend that reassurance for those from Hong Kong, in his constituency and throughout the country, on the support that we will put in for them.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

The SNP Scottish Government undertook a secretive trip to Beijing last year, and caught a case of renminbi fever while they were there. They are now blundering around on the world stage, desperate for Mingyang to put money into Ardersier. Notwithstanding the jobs issue, will the Prime Minister assure the House that he will take cognisance of national security issues? We do not want jobs at any cost, and we cannot allow wind farms to have Chinese kill switches fitted.

[The Prime Minister]

As the hon. Gentleman will have heard me say a moment ago, no decision has been made yet, but as I explained in my report back to the House, the overarching approach that we take to all matters involving China is that national security always comes first.

[David Taylor (Hemel Hempstead) (Lab)]

On behalf of the all-party parliamentary group on Japan, may I say arigato gozaimasu to the Prime Minister for his visit? I hope that he had a sugoi time.

I think that all of us in the House are proud of the global combat air programme, which holds great opportunities not only for global, regional and UK security but for British jobs. The Prime Minister mentioned that Japan is already one of the main investors in the UK; does he share my hope that this programme, just like the Concorde programme with France all those years ago, will have knock-on benefits for British jobs and innovations in our economy?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments, and for his message over the weekend. Japan is a key NATO ally, is a member of the G7 and, of course, the coalition of the willing, and, as he rightly points out, has key investments in the United Kingdom. That is why we discussed all those matters, and the GCAP, when we were there.

[Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)]

The Prime Minister mentioned his previous meeting with the Chinese President at the G20 in Brazil. One day later, 45 pro-democracy Hongkongers were sentenced. Uyghurs, Falun Gong, Tibetans, unregistered religious groups, human rights lawyers, pro-democracy campaigners, Hongkongers in this country and Jimmy Lai—what single, tangible difference has the Prime Minister made for their safety and security?

[The Prime Minister]

Of course there are concerns; they are aired in this House. The difference between our parties is that our position is that the mature and serious thing to do is to have leader-to-leader discussions about them, engaging with the issues. The Conservatives’ approach is to shout about the issues, get a bag of sand and put their head in it, and influence absolutely no one. It is so unserious. They will not be fit for government for many, many years to come.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

As the Prime Minister will know, many Japanese companies have their British home in my constituency of Bracknell, so I welcome his visit to Japan. Could he set out a little more about how we can further strengthen our relationship with our Japanese friends and allies, and what that will mean for my constituents?

[The Prime Minister]

I pay tribute to all those businesses in my hon. Friend’s constituency, of which there are very many, as he rightly says. Enhancing our trade and economic ties with Japan is in the interests of both countries, and that is precisely what we are focused on.

[Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

The Prime Minister has failed to stand up for Britain’s interests. From what we have seen, he could not even make it across Beijing’s red carpet without being guided along the way. What did the Prime Minister expect to receive in return for approving the Chinese super-embassy, and did the Chinese give it to him?

[The Prime Minister]

We have had a Chinese embassy in this country since 1877. It is currently over seven sites; it is now going to be on one. The security and intelligence services published a letter the day after the decision was made to say that it was better for security in this country, and I think that is the right approach.

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

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement and for his continued international leadership. I know, however, that wherever he goes in the world, he is always thinking about Harlow, so what difference will a productive relationship with the second-largest economy and our third-biggest trading partner make to businesses in my constituency?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is a champion for Harlow, and it has been so good to visit it so many times. We had 60 businesses in the delegation with us. They were enthusiastic about the opportunities that this visit would open up for them and for all the associated businesses—including in his constituency—that will be able to work with them on projects in the future.

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

It is widely reported in the media that the Prime Minister and his entourage had burner phones when they went to China. Could he confirm that? If so, was the reason that he was worried he was being spied upon?

[The Prime Minister]

We took appropriate precautions, as we do whichever country we visit.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

Like the Prime Minister, I am a musician and a strong advocate for the creative arts sector. Could he set out to the House a little more about why he took so many creative arts and cultural organisations with him to China? Does he agree that Britain is the best in the world at the creative arts, that they are good for trade, good for jobs and good for our young people in particular, and that the kind of visit he has been on will help with that, as will investment at home and abroad?

[The Prime Minister]

I agree with my hon. Friend; we are the best in the world. The people from the creative sector and the cultural institutions were with us on the visit because they could see the great advantage in better relations and better engagement, and not only in relation to the cultural aspects but because, of course, they are themselves really important businesses.

[Danny Kruger (East Wiltshire) (Reform)]

The Prime Minister is very full of the abstract virtue of engaging with China and getting in the room with them. He used to say that Britain should not even sign a trade deal with China because of the persecution of the Uyghur people. Having now got into the room with the Chinese leader, can he tell the House a single thing that he achieved on behalf of the Uyghurs, or indeed on behalf of the security of this country?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes. Engaging is really important for the security of this country. Just for clarity, we did not sign a trade deal on the visit; we simply looked at the ways in which we can open the opportunities for businesses. There were 60 big businesses with us on the visit, and they are absolutely clear about the advantages to them. I would much rather take their view on the advantages than the nonsense that is being spouted on the other side of this House.

[Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)]

China is helping to fund Russia’s war on Ukraine via the shadow fleet and Russian oil. First, can the Prime Minister unambiguously confirm that he brought up Russian oil and the shadow fleet, because they are not mentioned specifically in the statement? Secondly, what steps will China now take to end its importation of Russian oil, which is funding death and destruction across Ukraine?

[The Prime Minister]

This is a really important issue, which that is why I had a phone call with Volodymyr Zelensky the day before I left, and I will have a further discussion with him now that I am back. I raised the issue in terms during the course of the visit.

[Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)]

Further to that point, Russia has been able to triple its ballistic missile production because it has access to Chinese rocket fuel, Chinese machine tools and Chinese microprocessors. In return, China is receiving vast quantities of discounted oil, gas, aluminium and other natural resources. China is quite literally fuelling the war in Ukraine, so I ask the Prime Minister once again: what specific guarantees did he receive from the Chinese Government that they will work to de-escalate the conflict in Ukraine?

[The Prime Minister]

The reason I spoke to Volodymyr Zelensky was to have a discussion in advance on the precise terms in which we would approach this issue. I then followed through on that, and I will talk to President Zelensky about this again in the coming days. We are working hand in glove with the Ukrainians for the outcome that we all want: a just and lasting peace.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Prime Minister for his statement, and I welcome his successful trade missions to China and Japan. In particular, I am heartened by the strides made in Japanese co-operation. However, what steps forward remain in terms of the Chinese treatment of Christians, Uyghur Muslims, Falun Gong and other religious minorities? Was the Prime Minister able to use diplomatic soft power to bring about the changes required to provide human rights protection, to stop religious persecution and to enable successful trade between the two nations?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman is right to raise these really important issues. I raised them myself during the course of the visit, and I thank him.

Oral Answers to Questions

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Wednesday 21st January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab)]

Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 21 January.

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

In recent days, I have spoken extensively to our international allies, including European leaders and others, the US and NATO. We will continue to engage constructively to resolve issues, particularly those relating to international security, applying the principles and values that I set out on Monday.

In addition, this week, the Government have announced a landmark investment to support children with special educational needs, overhauled our water system, and today launched a £15 billion plan to create warm homes. At home and abroad, this Labour Government are delivering for the British people.

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.

[Dr Sandher]

We face an affordability crisis in this country. In the short term, our dependence on fossil fuels has led to a rise in energy bills, and in the longer term, the aftershocks of Thatcher mean that there are not enough good, non-graduate jobs. That is why today’s warm homes plan is such good news: batteries, solar, home insulation; getting bills down and wages rising; making life affordable. But we must go further, so can I ask the Prime Minister to do even more to make sure that life is affordable for my constituents—

[Mr Speaker]

Order.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend. I know how much he cares about making life affordable. We are taking £150 off energy bills. That is £300 for the 6 million poorest families, including almost 3,700 households in his constituency. The warm homes plan we are announcing today is the biggest ever public investment in upgrading British homes. It will lift 1 million households out of fuel poverty, tackling the cost of living. That is the difference a Labour Government make.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

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

I welcome the Prime Minister following our lead on children accessing social media. In particular, I thank the shadow Education Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott), 61 Labour MPs and the Greater Manchester Mayor for forcing him to think again.

The Prime Minister and I agree: the future of Greenland should only be decided by the people of Greenland. When the Prime Minister made that point to President Trump on Monday, did the President agree or disagree?

[The Prime Minister]

Engaging constructively on international security matters hugely, particularly when it comes to security in the Arctic, and that is the context in which this discussion about Greenland is going on. As we engage constructively, I have made my position clear on our principles and values. The first of those is that the future of Greenland is for the people of Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark alone. The second is that threats of tariffs to pressurise allies are completely wrong. We will continue to engage constructively. I have had many international calls in recent days, and the Prime Minister of Denmark is coming to the United Kingdom tomorrow for bilateral talks. I want to be clear with the House: I will not yield—Britain will not yield—on our principles and values about the future of Greenland under threats of tariffs, and that is my clear position.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I am very glad to hear the Prime Minister say that. We all know that the people of Greenland do not want to be ruled by America, but does he agree that just as those in Greenland should decide their own future, so should the Chagossians?

[The Prime Minister]

I made my position on Greenland absolutely clear on Monday and a moment ago. President Trump deployed words on Chagos yesterday that were different to his previous words of welcome and support when I met him in the White House. He deployed those words yesterday for the express purpose of putting pressure on me and Britain in relation to my values and principles on the future of Greenland. He wants me to yield on my position and I am not going to do so. Given that that was his express purpose, I am surprised that the Leader of the Opposition has jumped on the bandwagon. I had understood—[Interruption.] I had understood her position to be that she supported the Government’s position on the future of Greenland. Now she appears to support words by President Trump to undermine the Government’s position on the future of Greenland. She has chosen naked opportunism over the national interest.

[Mrs Badenoch]

We will note that when I asked him what the President told him, he could not tell us. Now he expects us to believe that he knows what is going on in President Trump’s mind. Let me remind him that his Deputy Prime Minister, then Foreign Secretary, used to say that if President Trump did not like the deal, it would not go ahead. Let us look at what President Trump actually said. The Chagos deal is

“an act of GREAT STUPIDITY”,

and a sign of “total weakness.” We did not need President Trump to tell us that; we have been saying that for 12 months.

Let us remind the Prime Minister: President Trump thought that the Prime Minister was doing this for money. The Prime Minister is giving away territory we own and paying £35 billion for the privilege. Why does he not just scrap this terrible deal and put the money into our armed forces?

[The Prime Minister]

The words from President Trump were expressly intended to put pressure on me to yield on my principles. What he said about Chagos was literally in the same sentence as what he said about Greenland. That was his purpose. The future of Greenland is a binary issue that is splitting the world at the moment, with material consequences. I have been clear and consistent in my position on the future of Greenland: the future is for Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark alone. The Leader of the Opposition has taken three positions in 10 days. Ten days ago she said that Greenland was “a second order issue”; four days ago she said she supported our position on Greenland; and now she is backing arguments intended to undermine our position—Britain’s position—on Greenland. This is an important national moment and yet again the Leader of the Opposition has shown that she is uncapable of rising to it.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I have already told the Prime Minister that we agree on Greenland; I am asking about the Chagos deal. That money—that £35 billion—should go to the armed forces. The world is changing and we are in a very different place—the most dangerous international environment since the end of the cold war. Last week, the head of the armed forces—not me, the head of the armed forces—warned that our military faces a £28 billion shortfall. Is he right?

[The Prime Minister]

I am proud that we are spending more on defence than at any time since the last Labour Government. [Interruption.] The strategic defence review has backed the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the cold war. That is £270 billion this Parliament, making defence an engine of growth. That is a stark contrast. Ben Wallace, the longest-serving Conservative Defence Secretary, openly admitted that under the Conservatives’ watch our armed forces were “hollowed out”. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Bowie and Mr Cartlidge, it is continuous, week in and week out. There are a couple on the Government Benches who will also be going out for a cup of tea with you. Please, calm it down or you know the consequence.

[The Prime Minister]

They shout on a Wednesday and they defect on a Thursday. The loudest shouter used to be the former shadow Justice Secretary. We should take a note of who is shouting most loudly this week.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister wants to talk about defections. Let me tell him that when I had someone undermining my party, I sacked him. If he sacked—[Interruption.]

[Mrs Badenoch]

We all know that if the Prime Minister sacked everyone undermining his party, his Front Bench would be empty. Jokes aside, these questions I am asking are about our national interest. We support our armed forces in every possible way. Later today, my party will vote to protect our veterans from unfair prosecution; he is ordering his MPs to vote against them. In our national interest, and for the sake of all the brave people in the armed forces, past, present and future, will the Prime Minister do the right thing and vote in support of our veterans, not against them?

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Lady is claiming strength. She read the guy’s defection letter and then at that point decided to sack him. What was she going to do? Correct the typos and give it back to him? [Hon. Members: “More!”] She should have sacked him when he made disgraceful comments about faces in Birmingham, but she failed to do so. And she smiles, saying it is a good thing she has cleared out—a good thing there are fewer Tory MPs. The rest of the country agrees with her completely in relation to that.

On the question of veterans protection, the last Government passed legislation that was struck down, leaving our veterans utterly exposed. We are putting in place proper measures to protect them.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister wants to talk about leadership. Three of his own Cabinet Ministers told The Times on Saturday that he needed to learn from me—[Interruption.]

[Mrs Badenoch]

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Back to the national interest. Instead of acting in it, the Prime Minister just tries to get through the day. On the Chinese spy hub embassy, he is too weak. On Chagos, he is too weak. On funding for the armed forces, he is too weak. On protecting our veterans from prosecution, he is too weak. I will support the Prime Minister when he does the right thing, but time after time, this Prime Minister has done the wrong thing for our country. Is it not the truth that he is too weak to stand up for our national interests?

[The Prime Minister]

I have spent the week working with our NATO allies to protect our national security and ensure we have unity in NATO. That is a matter of national importance, and the right hon. Lady has utterly failed to rise to the occasion and show the solidarity she could have shown in this House. She has spent the week trying to hold together what is left of the Tory party. She says I should learn from her. She has no judgment! Only a week ago, in relation to Greenland, she shrugged and said it was some “second order issue”. Terrible judgment! Then she flip-flopped with three different positions in 10 days on Greenland. She said Liz Truss’s mini-Budget was “100% right”. She said last week that she was “100% confident” there would be no more defections, just before the latest defection. I am beginning to think her judgment is not 100% reliable.

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

Q2. NHS waiting lists in Birmingham are down by almost a quarter under Labour, and they are still falling. That is more than 28,000 people no longer stuck waiting for essential treatments. Yes, there are challenges still, but they are being addressed and progress is being made. Does the Prime Minister agree that this progress must be sustained, including by reducing ambulance waiting times?

[The Prime Minister]

I am pleased to confirm that last week saw the second biggest fall in NHS waiting times for 15 years. Waiting lists are down by more than 300,000, an extra 2,900 GPs have been recruited, and ambulances are arriving nearly 15 minutes faster this winter than they were last year. There is much more to do, which is why we are delivering the biggest upgrade to our ambulance fleet for many years. That progress has been made possible by Labour’s decisions, which are opposed by the opposition parties.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

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

We remember how Tony Blair ignored warnings from these opposition Benches and tied himself to an unpopular American President and a disastrous foreign policy, while close allies such as Canada and France looked on in horror. With Donald Trump increasingly acting like a crime boss running a protection racket, threatening to smash up our economy unless he gets his hands on Greenland, will the Prime Minister avoid Blair’s historic mistake, take our advice this time and join Prime Minister Carney and President Macron in standing up far more strongly to President Trump?

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Member is clearly not listening. I said that I will not yield on the principles and values that I uphold, and that this country upholds, in relation to the future of Greenland. But the relationship with the US matters, especially on defence, security and intelligence, and nuclear capability, and also on trade and prosperity. While he is trying to get soundbites, we must not forget that a war is raging in Europe—it is in its fourth year. The Russians are raining bombs down on Ukrainian civilians day and night, the temperature was minus 20° in Kyiv last night, and 60% of the people there are without power. People are erecting tents to keep themselves warm. We have to work with our allies, including the US, on security guarantees to ensure that we can do what we must do in relation to Ukraine. That does not mean we agree with the US on everything, and I have been absolutely clear about my position on Greenland and my position on tariffs, but it is foolhardy to think that we should rip up our relationship with the US and abandon Ukraine and so many of the other things that are important to our defence, security and intelligence.

[Ed Davey]

Of course we are not arguing that; we are arguing that the Prime Minister follows France and Canada—our close allies. Here is one thing that we can agree on: that the UK should strengthen our defensive capabilities, as the Prime Minister said earlier. But the Government are going far too slow in investing in our defensive industries. They have not even published the defence investment plan that was promised last autumn. That delay is putting critical industries, such as helicopter manufacturing based in Yeovil, at risk. Putin is waging a war in Europe, and Trump is threatening to undermine NATO. We have to rearm fast. So why will the Prime Minister not just get on with buying Great British helicopters made in the west country? [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”]

[The Prime Minister]

That’s about the same cheer we hear across the whole country.

We are increasing defence spend to the biggest spend since the last Labour Government. We are doing that because of the decisions we took at the Budget in relation to the money that is available. The right hon. Member wants more money for defence spending, and he wants it faster, but what did he do at the Budget? Did he stand up and say, “I support this”? No, he voted against it, against the measures necessary to carry out the upgrade.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

Q3. Sadly, on Christmas day my constituent Beryl Barrett passed away after tragically falling into an unrepaired pothole. I am sure that the whole House will join me in sending my condolences to the family. In my constituency there are literally thousands of potholes in our roads, which Nottinghamshire county council is failing to repair. Does the Prime Minister agree that it is time that the council took action, and will he meet Beryl’s family so that we can work together to ensure that there are no more accidents like that?

[The Prime Minister]

I send my deepest sympathies to Beryl’s family, and I will make sure that the Roads Minister meets them at the earliest opportunity. This shows why tackling potholes really matters. We are investing £2 billion in the east midlands to fix the roads and improve local transport. We are also putting in place tough new standards so that councils must prove they are fixing roads properly, and I am pleased that many excellent Labour councils across the country are leading by example.

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

For decades, our rivers, lakes and seas have paid the price of a failing system. The water White Paper is a welcome first step in beginning to set things right, but there is a glaring gap: agricultural pollution contributes 40% of the pollution in our waterways but merits only a single page in this White Paper. Can the Prime Minister tell me why on earth this is the case? When will he start working with farmers to support river-friendly farming practices and treat agricultural pollution as seriously as sewage pollution?

[The Prime Minister]

We inherited a real mess on water, and we are taking the most effective and far-reaching measures to deal with it. I wonder what the hon. Lady, as someone who stood to lead her party, makes of how her leader is responding to this global uncertainty. He is saying that this is the time to withdraw from NATO; that this is the time to kick the US out of our military bases; that this is the time to negotiate—hear this—with Putin to give up our nuclear deterrent. I am sure that Putin would be very quick on the line for that one. It is as reckless and irresponsible as their plan to legalise heroin and crack cocaine. That is the Green party now—high on drugs, soft on Putin.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We do not ask the Opposition questions. These are questions for the Prime Minister, not the other way around.

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

Q4. West Dunbartonshire is set to benefit from record UK Labour Government investment: £60 million of local growth funding has just been announced for the Glasgow city region, to add to the £20 million for Dumbarton’s town centre regeneration, the £20 million Pride in Place funding for my home town of Clydebank, and the £1.5 million in impact funding. Does the Prime Minister agree that this is in stark contrast to the SNP, which abandoned our communities, and demonstrates the difference that a Labour Government make to West Dunbartonshire and to Scotland?

[The Prime Minister]

I am very pleased that we are backing my hon. Friend’s home town of Clydebank with £20 million of Pride in Place funding. Just this week we hosted a reception to meet people who are working hard to change their neighbourhoods across the United Kingdom. That is Labour delivering on national renewal. As my hon. Friend rightly says, compare that with the SNP, which is more interested in squabbling over independence than using a record settlement to fix Scotland’s public services.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

Q7.  Challenging economic inactivity and supporting the vulnerable across the country is something that we all want, so would the Prime Minister be surprised to learn that, in Northern Ireland, around 11,000 people previously supported by UK shared prosperity funding will see those programmes cut dramatically, compounded by 400 job losses? Does he support the cuts to those vital programmes, and will he arrange an urgent meeting for me, and the organisations that have been impacted, with the relevant decision maker in Government so that these changes and challenges can be resolved?

[The Prime Minister]

We delivered a record settlement for Northern Ireland in the Budget to strengthen public services and to kick-start growth. The local growth fund, designed in partnership with the Executive, will see £45 million every year to support local growth. I am very happy to make sure that Ministers meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss his particular concerns.

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

Q5. Some 1.5 million women in the UK live with endometriosis, which is a painful and life-changing condition. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on endometriosis, I met Jessica Smith and Endo Warriors West Lothian to discuss their campaign for a national endometriosis registry to capture and audit diagnosis, treatment and outcomes. Will the Prime Minister join me in commending the work of Jessica, Endo Warriors West Lothian and Endometriosis UK, and will he meet me to discuss creating a registry to improve the lives of women living with endometriosis?

[The Prime Minister]

I pay tribute to Jessica and all the women, and others, who are campaigning on these vital issues. Far too many women are left waiting for care in serious pain. That is why we are investing £8 million in research on diagnosis, treatment and pain management. I know that the Minister for women’s health will be keen to talk to my hon. Friend about her proposals on this issue, which I thank her for raising.

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

Q9. I have a constituent who, although not yet 30 years old, has just been diagnosed with a terminal illness. She has been told that she has a very short time to live. Because of her condition, she was given a retirement date—she is a civil servant—which was just last week. She has not received notification of any actual pension payment, and she has spent long hours trying to contact Capita. HM Revenue and Customs has claimed that all outstanding documentation was supplied to Capita in November. I have written to the Chancellor, and contacted the MPs’ hotline and Capita, but the issue remains unresolved. Will the Prime Minister, along with the Chancellor, help to get the issue resolved immediately?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Member for raising this case, and I am truly sorry to hear about his constituent. If he would not mind following up with the details of the case, I will make sure that it is dealt with urgently on behalf of his constituent.

[Neil Coyle (Bermondsey and Old Southwark) (Lab)]

Q6. Yesterday I welcomed Bermondsey PC Kevin Webster to Parliament, after his recognition as the Met’s Police Constable of the Year 2025. Will the Prime Minister commend Kevin for his local work, and that of Labour Southwark council’s amazing night time and antisocial behaviour team? Will he tell Members when they will have new powers under the Crime and Policing Bill, and remind the Met that its access standards require all local officers, like Kevin, to be a maximum 20-minute walk from their ward, which is a policy currently going unmet in Rotherhithe?

[The Prime Minister]

May I congratulate Kevin and thank police across our country who are working hard to protect our communities? The Conservative party decimated local policing, and we are restoring it. There will be 3,000 more neighbourhood police on our streets by spring, which is an example of the change that people will feel this year. Our Crime and Policing Bill will give officers more powers to tackle knife crime, shoplifting and antisocial behaviour. I want officers to have those powers as swiftly as possible; the Tories and Reform voted against them.

[Aphra Brandreth (Chester South and Eddisbury) (Con)]

Q14.   My constituents are deeply concerned by proposed cuts to police community support officers across Cheshire. The Labour police and crime commissioner, Dan Price, was silent on the issue, seemingly content to see numbers slashed across the county until residents and local MPs spoke out. Now he seeks to present himself as campaigning to save police community support officers, while proposing to substantially increase the precept, and all at the same time as planning to increase spending on his office by £513,000 next year. Does the Prime Minister agree that that represents a failure of leadership, and that that money would be far better spent on increasing the number of PCSOs on our streets?

[The Prime Minister]

That comes from the party that broke our criminal justice system, just as it broke our economy and our NHS. It hollowed out local policing; we are restoring it, with 3,000 new officers in the spring of this year.

[Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)]

Q8. The thug in the White House has shown that he does not listen to grovelling or sycophancy, and he will continue to harm British interests no matter how compliant we are. Like all bullies, he will always find the weakest link. Will the Prime Minister close ranks with our European allies and commit to retaliatory tariffs?

[The Prime Minister]

I have made our position clear. I have set out my principles, and I am not going to yield on those principles. As I said on Monday, of course we need to protect our national interest, and we will always protect our national interest, but simply hurtling into a trade war at the first opportunity would hurt working people and businesses across the country. That is why I am working hard to ensure that we do not get to that point, and I will continue to act in the national interest.

[Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)]

The Prime Minister may be aware that my local authority in the East Riding of Yorkshire is the lowest-funded per pupil for children with special educational needs and disabilities, and his local authority in Camden is the highest—an inequality that he has repeatedly pledged to end. Well, the results are in: next year, children in my local area will receive just under £1,000, and children in his local area will receive over £3,800. The gap is getting wider. Will he explain to the House why he thinks that children in my constituency are worth so much less than children in his?

[The Prime Minister]

We are applying their formula—the one that you put in place in government—[Interruption.] We are changing it—[Interruption.] Special educational needs are probably raised with me more than any other issue that is raised in the House. We are proposing reforms. The problem that the hon. Gentleman has highlighted—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am sorry to interrupt, Prime Minister, but Mr Holden, as shadow Secretary of State for Transport, you will be getting the express train out of here.

[The Prime Minister]

The right hon. Gentleman may be making himself the next candidate for the Thursday defections—[Interruption.] Oh, maybe it is someone else. Those that shout loudest end up on the Reform UK Bench—[Interruption.] Reform is supporting our recycling moves, because soon it will be a party entirely made up of—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Holden, I think you need to leave. I have had enough.

[Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford) (Lab)]

Q10.  Police officers in Greater Manchester are facing exceptional pressures as they work to keep our communities safe from horrific terror threats, hate crime, organised crime and regular mass protests. Despite that, Greater Manchester police received the second lowest percentage funding increase of any police force under the provisional settlement, leaving it £12 million worse off. I know that the Prime Minister will share my concerns, so will he urgently work with the Greater Manchester Mayor, the deputy mayor, myself and Greater Manchester MPs to ensure that GMP has the funding it truly needs to keep our communities safe?

[The Prime Minister]

I was humbled to visit Greater Manchester police after the Heaton Park synagogue attack. The professionalism and bravery that they showed was remarkable. We have boosted total police funding and Greater Manchester will receive up to £902 million, an increase of over £31 million. I reassure my hon. Friend that we will continue to work with her and local leaders to make our streets safe.

[Brian Mathew (Melksham and Devizes) (LD)]

My constituency of Melksham and Devizes does not have a minor injuries unit, leaving many to travel far afield, to Bath or Swindon, to access A&E services. Will the Prime Minister meet me to discuss the need for an expanded hospital provision in my constituency?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising this on behalf of his constituents. I will ensure he gets a meeting with the relevant Minister to talk through his particular concerns, so that we can seek to address them.

[Yasmin Qureshi (Bolton South and Walkden) (Lab)]

Q11. After 14 years of Conservative austerity, councils are finally getting the support that they need to deliver for residents. In my constituency of Bolton South and Walkden, under the leadership of Councillor Nick Peel in Bolton and Mayor Paul Dennett in Salford, increased funding has been turned into the restoration of frontline services, investment in town centres and support for families. Does the Prime Minister agree that councils needs serious leadership and long-term funding certainty to deliver, not short-term protest politics that put services at risk? Will he commit to continue that support?

[The Prime Minister]

Labour is boosting funding for councils that were chronically underfunded by the Conservatives. I pay tribute to Labour councils delivering results for my hon. Friend’s community, in stark contrast to the division and chaos we have seen from Reform councils, wherever they have been elected.

[Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)]

Tens of thousands of people across Kent and Sussex were without running water last week. While the response of South East Water was shambolic, the Staplehurst emergency help team got a bottled water supplier, set up a collection station and delivered water to vulnerable people. Using only volunteers, they supported local people, businesses, farms and care homes with 20,000 bottles of water. Does the Prime Minister think, as I do, that South East Water should be ashamed to be schooled in crisis response by the volunteers of the Staplehurst emergency help team? Has he, like many of my constituents and many of our colleagues, lost confidence in South East Water’s chief executive?

[The Prime Minister]

The situation is completely unacceptable. We welcome Ofwat’s investigation into the company—that is the right thing to do. The Environment Secretary met company bosses last week to stress the need for accountability, and Ministers are continuing to chair daily meetings, but the situation is totally unacceptable and needs to be fixed.

[Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)]

Q12. For too long, many of my constituents have not had access to good, secure, well-paid jobs. We made a commitment in our manifesto that we would change that. We cannot grow an economy based on insecure work where, from one week to the next, somebody does not know how many hours they will work or how much money they will be paid. Does the Prime Minister agree that all workers should have the hours that they actually work reflected in their contract so that we can give all working people the security to plan their finances and their lives and to build a future for themselves and their family?

[The Prime Minister]

I am proud of this Labour Government delivering the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation. We are ending exploitative zero-hours contracts and unscrupulous fire and rehire practices, plus we have changes to parental leave and sick pay. Workers will benefit from those rights in April, and they should never forget that Reform and the Tories opposed every single one of them.

[Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Reform)]

One of the last meetings that I took as shadow Justice Secretary was with the parents of Lenny Scott. Lenny Scott was an exceptionally brave prison officer who uncovered corruption in his prison. He left the service, and years later he was hunted down and brutally murdered. Because he died after leaving active service, there was never any compensation paid to the children he left behind. I know that the Prime Minister would want to right that wrong. I wrote to the Justice Secretary privately after I discovered this—I should say that Lenny Scott’s parents never asked for any support. Will the Prime Minister correct this, ensure that this brave man’s children have the support that they need as they grow up without the father they deserve, and join me in thanking all the brave men and women who serve us in our Prison Service?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this matter. I will make sure that it is looked into as a matter of urgency, given the circumstances that he has set out.

[Fred Thomas (Plymouth Moor View) (Lab)]

Q13.   I strongly welcome the Government’s decision to consult on introducing a social media ban for under-16s. That is something that the Tories did not do in office and did not even support until last week. The average 12-year-old spends 29 hours a week on a smartphone, with more than 500 children a day being referred to mental health services for anxiety. Those stats are not unrelated; parents, teachers and Members across these Benches can see the damage that social media is doing to our young, developing minds every single day. Does the Prime Minister agree that the scale of harm demands swift action and that this consultation must lead to timely decisions?

[The Prime Minister]

This is an issue of real concern to parents. As the father of two teenage children, I know just how much of a concern it is. That is why we will have a consultation to look at expert and international evidence to get this right, and we will respond by the summer. That includes looking at the question of the age at which children can access social media and at restrictions on addictive features. I am also concerned, as is the Education Secretary, about the screen time of those under the age of five. We will look at all those issues and make sure that Ofsted checks the enforcement of bans during school.

[Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)]

The Bertie Arms is a fantastic family pub, but because of the Chancellor’s tax raid on local business, it faces a 2,000% increase in its business rates by 2029. That means that the Treasury will lose £200,000 in tax take and Uffington will lose the heart of its community. The Prime Minister promised not to put up taxes on working people, so how does he justify a 2,000% tax attack on working family businesses like this pub?

[The Prime Minister]

We are working with the sector to put in the necessary support. I remind the hon. Lady that 7,000 pubs closed on the Conservatives’ watch, and she did not say a word about it.

[Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)]

Q15. Norfolk is a dental desert, which is causing real suffering for my constituents. I welcome Government action so far, including 21,000 extra urgent emergency appointments, but we are the only region without a dental school. The University of East Anglia is ready to open one. Can the Prime Minister set out what more we will do as a Government to tackle the dentistry crisis? Will he back our calls for a new dental school in our region?

[The Prime Minister]

Since day one, my hon. Friend has fought for her constituents on this issue, and I pay tribute to her for that. I agree that the University of East Anglia would be an excellent candidate for any future additional funded dentistry places available. We are also reforming contracts and making sure that dentists spend more time working in the NHS, delivering thousands of extra appointments to fix the failure we were left with.

[Mr Speaker]

For the final question, I call Gideon Amos.

[Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)]

Children with disabilities and special educational needs in Somerset will be severely hit if the Government go ahead with removing the remoteness uplift from authorities. Will the Government commit to ensuring that councils with the largest land areas—of which Somerset is one—are properly reimbursed for the costs of remoteness, so that children in my constituency do not suffer?

[The Prime Minister]

We understand the challenges in rural communities, and we will look at that as part of the work we are doing on reform.

[Dr Chowns]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I understood that the purpose of Prime Minister’s questions was for the Prime Minister to answer questions from MPs, yet—

Oral Answers to Questions

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 14 January.

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

May I start by condemning, in the strongest possible terms, the sickening repression and murder of protesters in Iran? The contrast between the courage of the Iranian people and the brutality of their desperate regime has never been clearer. We have called out this brutality face-to-face. We are working with allies on further sanctions and doing all we can to protect UK nationals.

Time and again under the Conservative party, towns and cities across the north were failed. Today, this Labour Government deliver change: a major new rail network across the north and a new northern growth strategy. That is the renewal that this country voted for.

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.

[Lincoln Jopp]

I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s remarks, particularly about Iran.

Visiting schools in my Spelthorne constituency is one of the great joys of this job, so I was, frankly, appalled to hear that the Labour Member of Parliament for Bristol North East (Damien Egan) was prevented from visiting a school in his constituency because he is Jewish. This is antisemitism and it is happening in plain sight. With all due respect to the Prime Minister, I do not want to know how he feels about this; I want to know what he is going to do about it.

[The Prime Minister]

Can I start by thanking the hon. Gentleman for raising this case, because it is very serious and very concerning? All Members of Parliament should be able to visit anywhere in their constituency, schools or other places, without any fear of antisemitism. We do take this seriously. We are providing more funding for security and support that we are putting in across the country, and we will be holding to account those who prevented that visit to the school.

[Anneliese Midgley (Knowsley) (Lab)]

Q2.  I thank the Prime Minister for his commitment to delivering the Hillsborough law, but it has been proven that MI5 spent six years misleading the public and concealing information following the Manchester Arena bombing. There was no risk to national security because it was a closed hearing, so will the Prime Minister deliver justice for those families and confirm that the Government will bring forward an amendment that will make robust the duties and responsibilities of candour for all parts of the state, including individuals in the security services, so we can finally say, “Never again”?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend. The Hillsborough law will right wrongs of the past, changing the balance of power to ensure the state can never hide from the people it should serve. I think some of the families are with us in the Gallery here today, and I will be meeting them later on this afternoon. I have always been clear that the duty of candour applies to the intelligence services. I made a commitment that we would not water down the Bill, and the amendments we have put forward strengthen it. It is right that there are essential safeguards in place to protect national security, and we have got that balance right. We will meet the families and outline the next steps on Monday in relation to that crucial balance.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Badenoch]

Yes, you did say that. My question to the Prime Minister is: does he agree?

[The Prime Minister]

I am determined to make it harder for people to work illegally in this country, and that is why there will be checks, which will be digital and mandatory. I will tell the Leader of the Opposition what this Government are doing: whether it is on planning, child poverty, employment rights or investing in our NHS, we are taking the right choices for Britain, but the Opposition oppose every single one. She talks about U-turns and consistency, but her party, which used to recognise the challenge of climate change, now runs from it; it promised to cut immigration, but then lost control of it; it once took great pride in our diversity, but now talks of deporting our neighbours to achieve “cultural coherence”. Don’t get me started on consistency: the Tories had five Prime Ministers, six Chancellors, eight Home Secretaries and 16 Housing Ministers—they had more positions in 14 years than the Kama Sutra. No wonder they are knackered; they left the country screwed.

[Mrs Badenoch]

A lot of waffle, Mr Speaker, but it is still a U-turn. The hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull East (Karl Turner)—this is so interesting—has said:

“Labour MPs must think very carefully before defending policy decisions publicly. This stuff leaves us looking really stupid.”

I am sorry to tell him that Labour MPs have been looking stupid for a long time. Let us look at some of the other things the Prime Minister did not get right the first time, starting with the family farm tax. Some farmers were so terrified that they sold their farms last year, only for the Prime Minister to U-turn two days before Christmas. Will he apologise for the misery he has caused countless farmers?

[The Prime Minister]

The principle we put in place on inheritance tax is the right one. We listened, and we made an announcement. What we are doing is turning the country around. [Interruption.] Yes, we have changed the country; we have changed the failed approach of the Tory Government, who crashed the economy and sent mortgage rates through the roof, left millions stuck on NHS waiting lists and presided over the worst Parliament for living standards on record. We are turning that around and changing that: inflation and interest rates are coming down, waiting lists are coming down and wages are up more in the first year of a Labour Government than in 10 years of a Tory Government.

I understand that the Leader of the Opposition is taking advice on change. She had in Nadhim Zahawi to ask his advice on how to change and how to save her party—please don’t tell me she listened to his accountant! The next day, after giving her advice, he jumped ship to Reform—the 23rd former Tory MP to do so. I do not know which is more pitiful: the flood of former Tory MPs deserting her sinking ship or the Reform party so desperate to launder any old failed Tory politician.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister does not need to worry about me—I’m all right. I did not hear an apology to the farmers; has he even apologised to the hon. Member for Penrith and Solway (Markus Campbell-Savours), who stood up for farmers only to have the Whip removed? The Prime Minister treats his MPs so badly. They follow his lead, and he hangs them out to dry every time.

Let us turn to another area that the Prime Minister has got wrong. His Budget doubled business rates for thousands of pubs. Will the Prime Minister tell us whether there is going to be any change to his business rates policy?

[The Prime Minister]

We are working with the sector to ensure that it gets the support it needs. I have to say that the Leader of the Opposition’s new-found concern for pubs will come as a surprise to anyone who remembers the 7,000 pubs that were closed under the Tories. As Business Secretary, she did not say a word about it.

We support business, and we also support workers, which is why we have passed our Employment Rights Act 2025. On Monday, the Business Secretary and I went to Croydon to discuss the Employment Rights Act with workers there, who were very keen on the paternity and maternity rights that the Leader of the Opposition opposes. While we were at Ikea, they showed me their new prototype: the Ikea shadow Cabinet. The trouble is that nobody wants to buy it, it is mainly constructed of old dead wood, and every time you lose a nut it defects to Reform.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister did not answer the question about business rates. It sounds like he does not know what his policy is. It has been a farce from start to finish. On Monday, the Business Secretary said that the Chancellor did not even realise the impact of her business rates policy—no surprise there—and yesterday the tax office said that it did tell the Government what the impact would be. Can the Prime Minister be clear? Did he understand the impact of his own policy on pubs?

[The Prime Minister]

We are working with the sector. The right hon. Lady has not explained why she said nothing about the 7,000 pubs that closed on her watch. We are doing other things on the cost of living to help people and to make sure that they can get out and spend money in pubs and hospitality. We are boosting the minimum wage. What did the Tories do? They opposed it. We are freezing rail fares and prescription charges. What did they do? They opposed it. We are taking £150 off energy bills. What did they do? They opposed it. She said nothing when pubs were closing and she opposes every measure now.

The right hon. Lady said a moment ago, “I’m all right.” She clearly did not listen to the advice of Nadhim Zahawi, because what he told her he has now made public. He told her that the Tories failed on mass migration and failed on our armed forces, and he told her that she is leading

“a defunct brand…that the nation…can no longer trust.”

No wonder he has joined the Tory migration to Reform—it is the second Boriswave.

[Mrs Badenoch]

I asked the Prime Minister whether he understood the impact of his own policy; he did not say yes. The reason why he U-turns all the time is because he is clueless. He is blowing around like a plastic bag in the wind, with no sense of direction whatsoever. Let us be clear: this mess goes beyond pubs. The whole hospitality industry—cafés, hotels and restaurants, they are all being clobbered by Labour’s tax hikes. There is an answer to this: Conservatives would abolish business rates for small businesses on the high street. [Interruption.] Government Members are all chuntering, but the Prime Minister is already agreeing with us on the family farms tax and he is already agreeing with us on digital ID; why does he not make it a hat trick and abolish business rates for the high street?

[The Prime Minister]

The Tories crashed the economy and now they want to give lectures. The right hon. Lady is wondering why nobody is listening to them—nobody is ever going to listen to them on the economy ever again. In 18 months, because of the decisions we have made, inflation is falling and the Bank of England says it is coming back down to target; we have had six interest rate cuts in a row; wages are up more in the first year of a Labour Government than under the first 10 years of the Conservative Government; and we beat the forecasts on growth for 2025. We are turning this country around after the appalling mess they left it in.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister says that no one is going to listen to us—who is going to listen to him? The winter fuel allowance? U-turn. WASPI women? U-turn. The two-child benefit cap? U-turn. Grooming gangs inquiry? U-turn. The family farms tax? U-turn. Digital ID? U-turn. Jury trials?

[Mrs Badenoch]

We hope so. I think that is going to be the next one. Week after week, the poor people sitting people sitting behind the Prime Minister have to defend the indefensible, only for him to U-turn a few days later.

One of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet Ministers told a journalist that

“What’s happening at the moment is extraordinarily bad.”

Another said:

“We’ve gone through a catastrophic series of mis-steps.”

Yet another Minister said

“we are so unpopular at the moment I’ve come to the conclusion it’s worth rolling the dice”

on a new leader. They are right, aren’t they?

[The Prime Minister]

Here is the difference: I changed my party, and that is why we stand here with a majority Labour Government. The Leader of the Opposition sits there with her party that lost two thirds of its MPs at the last election, and she is losing more every week. They are queuing up to join the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) and his laundry service for disgraced Tory politicians. Meanwhile, inflation is down, wages are up and waiting lists are down. Labour is turning the corner and changing this country for the better.

[Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab)]

Q4. Mr Speaker, I am sure that you, and I hope others across the Chamber, will agree that we need to recognise and celebrate achievements. I say that because across the country knife crime offences are going down. Of course, more needs to be done, and more should be done, but this week’s figures have shown that London has had its safest year ever under the London Mayor, Sadiq Khan. In fact, the homicide rate in London is at its lowest since records began. Reform and the Conservatives repeatedly talk down our capital city. Will the Prime Minister join me in saying that they are wrong? Will he applaud those achievements?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend draws attention to the important work of the Mayor of London. Nobody should be talking our country down or talking London down. She is right to say that since we came into office the number of knife crime offences is down, but there is more to do. We are introducing new powers to seize knives and increasing the penalty for selling knives to under-18s. [Interruption.] What did the Conservatives—they are chuntering—do? They voted against those provisions. What is obvious about London and Reform is that it has got a candidate for mayor who does not like London, a new ex-Tory recruit who struggled to pay his taxes in this country and a leader who spends more time in France than in his constituency.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

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

I associate myself and my party with the Prime Minister’s comments on Iran. I encourage him to go even further on sanctions and proscribe the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Sandra is 71. She has bladder cancer. Just after Christmas, she went into her local A&E. She had to wait 31 hours on a trolley or on a plastic chair to be admitted. Last year, more than half a million people waited for over 12 hours in A&E to be admitted—more than any year in the history of the NHS. This corridor care crisis was created by the Conservatives, but it has got worse under Labour. Will the Prime Minister end this scandal by taking up our plan to end all 12-hour A&E waits this year?

[The Prime Minister]

May I first say through the right hon. Member to Sandra that that is simply not acceptable for her or anybody else? I would appreciate it if he passed that on to her directly. We have put record investment into the NHS so that we can turn this problem around, and we are turning it around.

The right hon. Member puts forward his plans for change, but he never votes for the increase in investment and the measures needed to put them into practice. You cannot change things without investing in them. You cannot call for change and vote against a Budget that puts record investment into the NHS.

[Ed Davey]

We saw what happened to the last Government when they failed to improve the NHS, and if the Prime Minister is not careful, that will happen to his Government.

Last month I asked the Prime Minister to get a grip of South East Water, which had left thousands of people in Royal Tunbridge Wells without water. Now it has happened again, not only in Tunbridge Wells but in East Grinstead, Burgess Hill, Haywards Heath and other parts of Kent and Sussex. Families, pensioners, schools, care homes and businesses have been without any water since Saturday, and the water company bosses involved now stand accused of misleading Parliament over their failures. South East Water keeps failing its customers over and over again, so will the Government immediately strip it of its licence?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this, because the situation is clearly totally unacceptable. He will want to know that Ministers have chaired daily emergency meetings to hold the company to account to deliver on the change that is urgently needed in all the areas that he mentioned. We have also doubled the compensation rates for individuals and businesses and we are absolutely clear that the company must urgently invest in infrastructure. We will publish the water White Paper in due course, but we are holding those daily meetings to hold the company to account.

[Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)]

Q5. I am delighted by today’s Northern Powerhouse Rail announcement—a downpayment on the north of England’s future. Fulfilling Lord Blunkett’s rail plan for Yorkshire also included upgrades to the Penistone line train, the spine that connects South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire, coursing through eight constituencies and serving half a million people. When I was growing up, my dad opened Silkstone Common station as a Dodworth councillor. I want my legacy to be “Two trains an hour Tidball” for our Penistone line. Will the Prime Minister meet me to discuss how we can secure funding for the second phase of the Penistone line upgrade scheme to achieve two services an hour?

[The Prime Minister]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend as a dedicated campaigner on this and so many other issues. I am delighted that today we are announcing a transformation in journeys across the north. Of course, this was promised many times by the Conservatives but never delivered. We are taking action and delivering. We are working with Kirklees council to prepare the business case for the first phase of upgrading the line, and I know that the Transport Secretary will be happy to discuss the details of that with my hon. Friend.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

At question time last week, the Prime Minister seemed to intimate that the Government were bringing forward amendments to the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill. Within hours of him saying that, the Irish Government’s Minister for Foreign Affairs said that any “significant changes” must have the

“full agreement of both Governments”.

Is the Prime Minister intending to bring forward amendments to the flawed Northern Ireland Troubles Bill? Will he give me a reassurance that the Irish Government do not have a veto over legislation in this House?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that. I spoke to the Taoiseach about it in December, and I know that he is committed to delivering on this issue. The new legacy unit has been established in the Garda, and I am confident that the Irish Government’s other commitments will be delivered as set out in the joint framework. For the first time, information held by the Irish authorities is being shared with the reformed legacy commission, meaning that more families and victims of terrorism are getting information about what happened to their loved ones.

[Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab)]

Q7. I welcome the Prime Minister’s leadership and our Government’s clear commitment to tackling child poverty, recognising that high-quality education is one of the best routes out of poverty. However, young people in one of the most deprived areas of my constituency who are attending Churchill community college have been taught in temporary accommodation for over 16 months. Can the Prime Minister use his good offices to expedite funding from the Department for Education to support rebuilding that school?

[The Prime Minister]

I am proud of what we are doing on child poverty, lifting half a million children out of poverty. The Conservatives’ policy is to plunge them straight back into poverty, and they should be ashamed of that. The situation my hon. Friend draws my attention to is appalling. Parents and teachers are furious that the Conservatives left schools literally crumbling. We invested £20 billion to rebuild around 800 schools, and our aim is that all schools and colleges in England that are not being fully or substantially rebuilt are free from RAAC—reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete—by the end of the Parliament. I will ensure that a Minister meets her to discuss this issue.

[Mr Tom Morrison (Cheadle) (LD)]

Q3. I visited Stepping Hill hospital in my constituency where I met the incredible team. They are working in some of the worst conditions. Staff showed me wards where sewage is coming up through the drains on to the floors, and ceilings dripping water on to vital equipment. The hospital has a £130 million repair bill, and the Prime Minister is the man who can change this. Will he meet me, my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) and the hon. Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) so that we can talk to him about this issue, get some investment and get the hospital that my constituents deserve?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Member for raising that. He knows we inherited a terrible situation: waiting lists, missed performance targets and hospitals such as Stepping Hill left to crumble—the Conservatives should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. I am pleased that the new out-patients building is open, and because of our decisions, the local trust will receive £75 million in capital funding. Progress is being made. His local trust has seen waiting lists fall by almost 3,000, and the number of waits of over a year is down by 67%. I will ensure that he gets the meeting he wants to discuss the details further.

[Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)]

Q9. If reports are correct, Elon Musk has climbed down today under pressure from this Government. Let’s be clear: stripping women naked without consent in real life or online is abuse. However, we do not know whether to trust what X says today, and this is not just happening on X. Will the Prime Minister join me and men and women across this House and across our nation to say to any app or AI company that we will not tolerate any abuse of men, women or children in this country and that we will act on enforcement?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that. The actions of Grok and X are disgusting and shameful. Frankly, the decision to turn it into a premium service is horrific, and we are absolutely determined to take action. We have made it clear that X has to act and, if not, Ofcom has our full backing. We will introduce, and are introducing, legislation. To update the House, I have been informed this morning that X is acting to ensure full compliance with UK law. If so, that is welcome, but we are not going to back down. X must act. We will take the necessary measures. We will strengthen existing laws and prepare for legislation if it needs to go further, and Ofcom will continue its independent investigation.

[Llinos Medi (Ynys Môn) (PC)]

Q6. As someone with personal experience of AI-generated images, the recent AI images shared on X, particularly those of children, sicken me. Yet the Leader of Reform, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), continues to defend Elon Musk. Anyone who defends platforms linked to the sexual exploitation of children forfeits any right to give lectures about protecting women and girls. What will the Prime Minister do to stop any political party from putting tech billionaires ahead of protecting our children?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Member for raising that. It is astonishing that Reform defends Musk on this issue. I said that the images are disgusting; Reform’s position on this issue is disgusting. This is weaponising images of women and children and they should never be made, and that is why we are acting. Reform refused to do anything about it, but more than that, on the point she raised, it would scrap the Online Safety Act 2023, which stops children accessing pornography and content on suicide, self-harm and eating disorders. Reform is an absolute disgrace and knows nothing about protecting children.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Kevin Bonavia (Stevenage) (Lab)]

Q11. Many of my constituents in Stevenage were appalled to hear Reform MPs oppose the principle of deploying British troops to maintain peace in Ukraine. Our brilliant armed forces have defended democracy in Europe across the generations, so it is shameful that the leader of Reform opposes that today. That is not leadership; it is surrender. Does the Prime Minister agree that Labour Governments always have and always will defend British interests, not those of Russian dictators or oligarchs?

[The Prime Minister]

This is a question of values and freedom. I am proud of the British workers, including in my hon. Friend’s constituency, supporting our Ukrainian allies. Ukrainian soldiers are defending European values on the frontline every day. In the event of a ceasefire, a multinational force will carry out defence and deterrence operations and conduct training, planning, recovery and regeneration of Ukrainian forces. This week, the leader of Reform said that Russia had a casus belli—that means a justification for war—in invading Ukraine. He is a Putin apologist using Russia’s talking points.

[Lewis Cocking (Broxbourne) (Con)]

Q8. The world is becoming more dangerous every single day. The Ministry of Defence has said that it needs an extra £28 billion to keep us safe. Well, I know where the Prime Minister can find it: stop this nonsense Chagos islands surrender policy, and spend that money on protecting the United Kingdom. Will the Prime Minister commit to that, or will he continue to put the interests of foreign Governments and countries above our own?

[The Prime Minister]

Diego Garcia is a vital military base with important capabilities for our allies. It is integral to our security. Our decision was welcomed by our allies, the Five Eyes, India and the United States. It was opposed by our enemies, including Russia. Now we can add the Tories and Reform to that list. The Tories are following Reform; Reform is following Putin.

[Yasmin Qureshi (Bolton South and Walkden) (Lab)]

Q13. I offer my condolences to the families of the four people who died in the road traffic accident that occurred over the weekend in my constituency. Families in Bolton South and Walkden are already benefiting from this Labour Government’s actions—free school meals, free breakfast clubs, 30 hours of funded childcare and the scrapping of the two-child limit—which are taking nearly half a million children out of poverty. However, in Bolton South and Walkden and across the country, there is a chronic shortage of social housing and genuinely affordable homes. Will the Prime Minister now show the same ambition on housing, and commit to a major expansion of social housing?

[The Prime Minister]

My thoughts, and the thoughts of the whole House, are with all those so awfully impacted by the terrible road traffic accident in my hon. Friend’s constituency over the weekend. On her question, we are determined to restore the dream of home ownership. That is why there has been £39 billion of investment to deliver the biggest boost in social and affordable housing in a generation. Through planning reforms, the new homes accelerator and new towns, we are determined to deliver the homes that people need.

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

Q10. I welcome the Prime Minister’s commitment to the violence against women and girls strategy, but I and many others have concerns about stigmatising young boys, men and masculinity as inherently toxic, especially when suicide is the No. 1 killer of young men. Is it about time that we had a Minister for men and boys? This is about women and men, not women or men.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support for what we are doing about violence against women and girls. I agree that this is not about women or men, or boys or girls; it is about both. That is why I was very pleased to bring forward our men’s health strategy, one of the first of its sort, to deal with the challenges that young men in particular, in my view, have growing up, particularly to do with social media, and to go further on the question of suicide, which I know the whole House is prepared to work together on—and quite right, too.

[Carolyn Harris (Neath and Swansea East) (Lab)]

As trade envoy to New Zealand, I visited Eden Park in Auckland last year to hear about the exciting plans to bring the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo to New Zealand. Next month, that plan becomes a reality, and one of Scotland and the UK’s greatest military displays will take place in Auckland. That spectacular event is testament to the exciting and successful trading relationship between the UK and New Zealand. Will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating and thanking everyone who has made it a reality?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo, which is absolutely brilliant, as anybody who has seen it will attest. I am so pleased that it is heading to New Zealand. That is another example of Scotland’s unique contribution to our international image, our culture and our tourism. We all wish them the very best of luck in their performance. I know that it will be very well received.

[Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)]

Q12. The police fabricated intelligence to get Israelis banned from Villa Park, as demanded by Islamists. That is not an isolated case. Forces cut deals with dodgy mosques and refuse to arrest preachers who incite violence; the Crown Prosecution Service uses the Public Order Act 1986 as an Islamic blasphemy law; prison governors do deals with Islamists to maintain order; and we all know about the rape gangs. Will the Prime Minister launch a review on the corruption of our criminal justice system by Islamists and the politics of communalism?

[The Prime Minister]

I disagree, as the hon. Member knows, with the decision of the West Midlands police. The Home Secretary will today make a statement in relation to that. Home Secretaries used to have the power to remove chief constables. That power was stripped by the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011. The hon. Member knows who was making decisions in the Home Office at the time—it was he, working for Theresa May, who stripped that power away.

[Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)]

I wish you a belated happy new year, Mr Speaker. However, for the 4.8 million leaseholders across England, it is not a happy new year; they will receive large bills in a matter of weeks. They have been waiting patiently for us, a new Government who said we would deliver change, to bring forward legislation on leasehold and commonhold. When will we see that legislation, so that we can put those leaseholders out of their misery?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that important issue. We will bring forward proposals very shortly.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

Q14. Some 35,000 children, including my constituent Clover, live with uncontrolled, life-threatening epilepsy. Those who can afford it already benefit from prescribed medical cannabis, but families face endless delays, confused trials and a Home Office process designed for criminal misuse, not for healthcare. Will the Prime Minister meet me and affected families to discuss moving paediatric medical cannabis out of Home Office control, creating a pathway for proper trials, and NHS access, and ensuring that all children with life-threatening epilepsy get the care that they deserve, regardless of their family circumstances?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising the case of Clover. NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Research recently agreed funding for two world-first clinical trials relating to the use of cannabis-based products. That could help these medicines to become more routinely available in the NHS. I will ensure that she gets the meeting that she wants with the relevant Minister to discuss what else we are doing.

[Helena Dollimore (Hastings and Rye) (Lab/Co-op)]

The people I represent are fed up with Southern Water, when it comes to everything from sewage and broken pipes to water outages, even on Christmas day. In November, millions of plastic beads washed up on our beaches, and we discovered that they came from a Southern Water treatment plant. I am campaigning for water companies to stop using this outdated plastic bead method, and to bin the beads. We are really concerned about the impact on wildlife, and have a massive clean-up operation on our hands. More than 5,000 people have already supported my campaign with the Sussex Wildlife Trust. Does the Prime Minister share my horror about this dereliction of duty by Southern Water, and will he join me in calling for it to face the full force of the law for that terrible pollution incident?

[The Prime Minister]

I credit my hon. Friend with having helped to expose this scandal, and with working with everyone in her community to volunteer to clean up the beaches. That is the very best of who we are. People are right to be furious that, for far too long, water companies were allowed to get away with polluting our seas and beaches. The Environment Agency is leading a full investigation. More generally, we are ending unfair bonuses for polluting water bosses, abolishing Ofwat, and introducing tougher penalties to hold companies to account.

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

Q15. Ahead of the forthcoming consultation on local government reorganisation, last month Huntingdonshire district council voted for option E, a Huntingdonshire unitary council. That was a cross-party view, and the Prime Minister’s own Labour councillors voted in favour of it. There is a suspicion locally that the Government favour option D, proposed by the Labour eastern regional office, which would see Huntingdonshire, and my constituency, split in two and combined with Peterborough. Will the Prime Minister offer assurances to my constituents and people across Huntingdonshire that the decision is not already a done deal, and that the democratic will of Huntingdonshire district council will not be overridden to satisfy an unelected Labour regional office?

[The Prime Minister]

There are no done deals here; we are going through the proper process.

[Matt Turmaine (Watford) (Lab)]

The staff at West Hertfordshire teaching hospitals NHS trust, which operates Watford general hospital in my constituency, have been very busy bees. They recently won trust of the year and a performance recovery award at the 2025 Health Service Journal awards. Will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating the amazing team at Watford general, and thank them for all the hard work they have done to achieve this admirable accolade? Imagine what further achievements they will make when they have their new hospital and new facilities.

[The Prime Minister]

I will join my hon. Friend, and thank not only the staff in his hospital, but NHS staff across the country, who worked so hard over Christmas and new year, which is a notoriously difficult time.

Intelligence and Security Committee: Cloud Technologies Report

Keir Starmer Excerpts

Tuesday 6th January 2026 Written Statements

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

I have received the Intelligence and Security Committee’s closed report on cloud technologies.

I thank the Committee for the comprehensive report and their diligent work throughout this inquiry. I value the independent and robust oversight which the Committee provides.

The Government will share a formal closed response to this report with the ISC in due course.

[HCWS1223]

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.