Rewiring the State

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The First Secretary of State (Louise Haigh)]

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the work of the newly formed Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the change it will bring.

On the steps of Downing Street six weeks ago, the Prime Minister set out the priorities that will guide this Government. He was clear that 40 years of overly centralised decision making and over-privatisation have stripped power and resources away from communities in every nation and region of this country; that public control over the things that matter so much to people’s lives has been systematically eroded and become a barrier to businesses wanting to start and grow; and that a broken economic and political model has cost good jobs and opportunities in many parts of the country, while delivering sky-high prices in exchange for poorer customer services.

The Prime Minister was clear that this Government will be the circuit breaker that our country needs: a Government who will take power from Westminster and Whitehall, and put it in the hands of the communities who are best placed to use it; who will rewire Britain, so that our politics and our economy work for every person and every place. On a bedrock of fiscal discipline, we will build a pro-business culture and an innovation-led economy that delivers good growth in every postcode.

We have wasted no time in delivering on that commitment. In the newly formed Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, we are rewiring the machinery of government so that the Prime Minister has the resources and levers he needs to deliver on his priorities. By stripping out many of the bureaucratic functions of the office, we have created a stronger, more focused Department that is capable of driving forward the Prime Minister’s agenda. This Government recognise that for far too long there has been a disconnect between the Cabinet Office and No. 10, and it is that lack of joined-up thinking that has hampered the ability of successive Prime Ministers to drive forward their own agendas across Government.

We have had a dichotomy at the heart of Government: the most centralised state in the G20, with one of the most underpowered centres. In the newly established OPMC, we are ensuring that the Prime Minister has the support and resources he needs to deliver the change that the public are impatient to see. From that office, we will drive forward work across Government to put the essentials, such as water, transport, energy and housing, under greater public control, in order to regenerate our communities, breathe new life into our high streets and give people more room to breathe through action on the cost of living.

That work of change has begun. Working closely with the Prime Minister and the Cabinet Secretary, we have begun the work of shifting power and resources away from Whitehall. Through our devolution blueprint and the establishment of No. 10 North, we have created a new engine of regional economic growth that will empower places that have been overlooked by Westminster for too long. We are granting new powers to strategic authorities to take more control over the future of their regions: a greater share of locally generated revenues, beginning with business rates; and more control over housing, public transport and infrastructure. For the first time, local leaders will have the power and resources they need to invest in the things that matter most to their communities.

This Government are filling in the map to bring an end to the system of two-tier devolution, so that by the end of 2028 we are able to extend to all parts of England the same offer that the rest have enjoyed for many years. This is how we can empower communities, drive local economic growth, create new jobs and deliver maximum benefit to the people who live there. This is devolution by design and devolution by default, and by working across Government we will build a new economic model that begins to put life’s essentials back under stronger public control and make them affordable for people again.

Working with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster Central (Sally Jameson)—and building on the strong foundations laid down by my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bristol North West (Darren Jones), whom I thank for his work—we are delivering a once-in-a-generation rebalancing of power in this country. This is what a rewired state looks like: one that is relentlessly focused on delivering for the people of this country, with empowered communities and good growth in every postcode. These are the tests against which our decisions will be measured and the metrics by which our actions will be judged.

Last month, the Chancellor and I announced reforms to public procurement that will cut red tape and unleash a new wave of British job creation. Too often, small and medium-sized businesses have struggled to navigate complicated procurement processes that seem to prioritise everything. When we prioritise everything, we prioritise nothing, so we are making the process simpler and doing things differently. From next year, businesses seeking to win a share of £90 billion in central Government contracts will be left in no doubt about what we want from them: creating good jobs and giving young people the skills they need for the future. These new rules will ensure that the £90 billion spent each year through Government contracts supports British jobs, skills and people in every postcode.

We are going further in our reforms to public procurement to ensure that taxpayers’ money is delivering more for our communities. For the first time since 2020, we are removing the defence exemption from social value. That means billions of pounds of defence contracts will soon give weighting to jobs and skills for young people across Britain. This is how we back businesses in every part of the country. In my ministerial colleagues, Parliamentary Secretaries to the Cabinet Office my hon. Friends the Members for Gateshead Central and Whickham (Mark Ferguson) and for Chipping Barnet (Dan Tomlinson), businesses looking to build and grow here in Britain—creating those good jobs and driving that good growth—will have strong advocates in this Government.

The work of my Department in strengthening our national resilience and co-ordinating the Government’s response to emergencies remains central. Over the summer, we saw communities across the country impacted by unprecedented wildfires precipitated by one of the hottest and driest summers on record—a reminder of the very real and present threats to the UK posed by climate change. During the third week of August, four major incidents were declared across south Wales, Hampshire, Cambridgeshire and the west midlands. By 13 August, fire and rescue services were tackling 47 wildfire incidents, and 79 separate requests for additional equipment and resources were made by fire and rescue services. In south Wales alone, more than 200 military personnel were deployed to tackle 14 separate incidents.

Such was the extent of support provided across the country that almost every service was impacted or involved in the response, and some of the most stretched services faced the prospect of having to deprioritise certain call-outs due to the pressures on the system. The day before the national alert was issued, close to 12,000 999 calls were recorded in a single day, which is six times the average call volume. Many services were stretched to breaking point, but continued to work around the clock to protect lives, communities and properties. I am sure everyone in the House will join me in thanking our emergency services and military personnel, who put themselves in harm’s way to keep us safe.

On 14 August, when the Government received direct requests from fire and rescue services for urgent Government intervention, we took decisive action. A national emergency alert was issued to provide the public with clear guidance on the steps they should take to avoid inadvertently contributing to an already dangerous situation. It should come as no surprise that the British public did their bit. Within 48 hours, there was a 42% decrease in the number of 999 calls, falling from 12,000 to 5,200, and by Monday morning the number of live wildfire incidents had fallen from 47 to 27. This gave our fire and rescue services the breathing space they needed to tackle existing fires and keep us all safe.

Over the coming weeks, I will continue to work closely with Cabinet colleagues to ensure the Government’s response meets the scale of the challenges we face. I will also be working closely with my right hon. Friend the Minister for Security in ensuring that this Government take a long-term and strategic approach to the country’s preparedness. The Government will continue to work closely with our frontline services and local resilience forums to mitigate the risks posed by extreme weather and drought, including a £100 million increase in funding for the fire services and a £65 million boost in support of our farmers.

In the interests of brevity, I will touch briefly on the work that is happening elsewhere in my Department. I have been delighted to welcome my right hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Kanishka Narayan) not only to his role as the Minister for Artificial Intelligence, but to join us around the Cabinet table. The Prime Minister has been clear that he sees harnessing the potential of artificial intelligence as a central part of our country’s future, and the elevation of this role reflects the ambition this Government have to make Britain a world leader in these advanced technologies.

I am also pleased to welcome the Minister for Intergovernmental Relations and European Relations to his role. My right hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer) has wasted no time in the vital work of building stronger ties with our closest neighbours and allies. I was very grateful to him for interrupting his honeymoon to come home and be appointed to the post.

My Department is also bringing forward a programme to modernise the operation of the state. We are taking public control of the way Government work—cutting out the unnecessary processes and needless reviews that slow decision making and stifle innovation. At the heart of this agenda will be the restoration of Ministers’ responsibility and agency to deliver the change they promise, with increased accountability to Parliament and the public for the direction they set and the decisions they take. We will bring forward new methods of public deliberation in policy development and do away with box-ticking consultation with the usual suspects. Fewer decisions will be delegated to unelected bodies, and the way decisions are made will be scrutinised in Parliament, not in the courts, ending the warm bath of constructive ambiguity that politics has been too happy to soak in for far too long.

I am aware—I am deeply honoured—that I am the first woman to hold the role of First Secretary of State since the late, great Barbara Castle. I am confident that if I can channel even a fraction of the energy and determination that she brought to this role, collectively we can change our country for the better. For too long, too many places have been written out of our national story; their contribution ignored and their potential overlooked. People feel like the system just does not work for them. That is why in 2024 they voted for change. This Government are on a mission to ensure we can deliver on the Prime Minister’s and the public’s priorities. This is a collective endeavour, and together we will deliver the lasting change that people deserve. I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow First Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Louise Haigh]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and my constituency shares that exact same problem: in the east, there are fewer sixth-form options than in the wealthier west of the constituency. That is huge issue for educational inequality for our constituents, and I will take it away and look at it with the Education Secretary. My hon. Friend will also note that we have committed to devolution of 16-to-19 funding as well.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

I thank the First Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement, and warmly welcome her to her place. The Liberal Democrats strongly agree that the political system is overly centralised. We believe that the best decisions are taken closest to the people they affect, but renewing communities must also mean giving councils the powers and resources that they need to revitalise our high streets, support independent businesses and improve local public services. After years of severe financial pressure, devolution cannot simply mean transferring responsibilities from Whitehall without the funding necessary to deliver them.

The First Secretary mentioned national resilience. That is about whether the lights stay on, whether the shelves stay stocked, and whether a family in Hazel Grove can get through a week or more of serious destruction without losing their livelihood. The covid inquiry was blunt: it found that we were ill prepared for an emergency, never mind a pandemic. Those failures cost lives, and people deserve to know that lessons have been acted on, rather than filed away.

There is certainly progress to welcome. We have the resilience action plan, the UK Resilience Academy, and Exercise Pegasus, which was the largest pandemic exercise this country has ever run. Those are steps that my party has long called for, but announcements are not preparedness. I would welcome hearing from the First Secretary what plans she has to improve public awareness and understanding of what the whole of society needs to do to be ready. We are in an increasingly uncertain world, so will the Government think again on digital sovereignty, so that the critical systems that our constituents rely on are not dependent on suppliers that this country cannot control?

 I strongly agree with the First Secretary that this country has a broken political system. Later this afternoon, we will debate the Representation of the People Bill, which is meant to fix that. It takes some steps in the right direction, but fails to rise to the moment. Does she agree that there is still so much more to do, starting with halting the scourge of big money that is poisoning our democracy by capping political donations and bringing in a fairer voting system? We need to fix our politics so that we can get on with fixing the country. I have heard her talk previously in this House about moving fast and fixing things. I urge her to crack on.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Kinnock]

I think it is fair to say that Plaid Cymru Ministers are still finding their feet. I am hugely proud of what our new Labour Prime Minister has achieved for Wales in his first six weeks—it really shows what a leader can do when they roll up their sleeves, listen to our people and communities, and deliver on their priorities. The Prime Minister’s visit to Wales and his commitment to reindustrialising our communities comes after a summer of announcements that will benefit communities across Wales—real action delivering for people right here and now.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

I welcome the right hon. Gentleman to his place and wish him and his team well in this important role. As a former Health Minister working on the NHS in England for the past two years, he will know the challenge of tackling hospital waiting times in the face of rising corridor care. As I think we have heard from the Secretary of State, the time for devolving and forgetting has long since passed, and all nations in our precious Union need fair treatment. Will the Secretary of State do more than simply watch from the sidelines—like his predecessor, sadly—and instead take action for the people of Wales, who have been waiting far too long for proper care under devolution?

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Kinnock]

Just to be clear, this is not about staying out of the issue; it is about respecting the devolution settlement, but being prepared to work constructively where we can in partnership with the Welsh Government. The hon. Lady will be aware that health is devolved and, as such, Welsh Government Ministers have powers under the Inquiries Act 2005 to initiate statutory inquiries into devolved areas. Given the clear lines of responsibility and accountability between the Welsh Government and the devolved health service in Wales, I do not feel it would be appropriate for the UK Government to intervene in this matter.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

I welcome the new Secretary of State to his place. Many of my constituents are reliant on cross-border healthcare, particularly in Hereford hospital. Indeed, many of them will end up stuck in Hereford hospital because we do not have enough community hospital beds in Powys. Powys teaching health board acknowledges that it needs 400 beds, but we only have 148, and it is considering cutting that number further. Can he please outline what are his priorities for fixing cross-border healthcare issues?

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Kinnock]

I absolutely agree with the sentiment of the hon. Member’s question. Let us look at what the Welsh Labour Government delivered: breakfast clubs offering free, healthy breakfasts for children in primary schools; baby bundles; more than 50 million meals served since the introduction of universal primary free school meals; an expanded childcare offer; free prescriptions; and hospital parking to help with family finances. That is the difference a Labour Government make.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

In the past 100 days, we have all witnessed the Plaid Welsh Government in Cardiff Bay having failed to publish costings and properly explain how their flagship childcare policy will work. Perhaps Plaid just wants higher taxes and higher hand-outs, like the welfare party that is Labour sitting across from us. Does the Secretary of State agree that hard-working families deserve to know whether those plans will mean higher taxes? What discussions have occurred with the Welsh Government to ensure that those election commitments are properly delivered for struggling families?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

May I start by paying tribute to my right hon. Friend for everything she has done to stand up for her constituents, but more so for Wales, particularly in her role as Secretary of State for Wales? I understand the point she is making: big cities outside London, particularly a capital city, face extra pressure that is not faced by other police forces. We are reviewing the funding formula as part of a wider programme of police reform. I would be happy to engage with her on that very issue as part of the review. We have ensured that forces, including South Wales police, are receiving a boost in their funding, but I understand the position of cities that are, if you like, the focal point that many people travel towards and the extra pressure that that results in. I know that from my previous job, and that is why I will pay very close attention to what she is saying.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend and pay tribute to his campaign on this issue. I was talking about getting an innovation-led economy going in all parts of the country, and that applies to research, including into life sciences. I strongly believe that we must address all barriers to high-quality research in the life sciences. I am happy to look at my hon. Friend’s amendments, and I will ask a Health Minister to meet him to discuss them. Of course, any changes must be evidence-based and proportionate and must maintain our safeguards.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

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

The Prime Minister said yesterday that Brexit ushered in

“a decade of low growth and stalled regeneration.”—[Official Report, 1 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 27.]

He is right. Our economy is stuck in this mess thanks to the Conservatives—and the leader of Reform UK—and their terrible Brexit deal. Unless we grow the economy, there is no way that we can end the cost of living crisis or cut the cost of borrowing for the Government. The answer is staring the Prime Minister in the face: join the single market, get a new deal with Europe, and cut costs for families, businesses and Government. It is the bold step our country desperately needs. Will the Prime Minister take it?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

We certainly will do that. I am in no doubt over the importance of good transport connectivity to young people’s life chances, and I will ask No. 10 North to make contact with my hon. Friend so that we can get that scheme back on track. More broadly, we do need to change the way we support young people, and I have already announced a change to education so that we have a technical path for young people from 14—so that we give young people a path towards good T-levels, BTECs, work placements and degree apprenticeships and we support them with travel costs, which is something that I did in Greater Manchester. Bringing back hope very much starts with our young people—give them a clear path from school towards a good job. That is something that the current education system that was put in place by Michael Gove has sadly failed to do.

[Mr Speaker]

May I say to the Prime Minister that I admire his answering questions in detail, but my problem is I am not going to get through the list, and then we will both be in trouble with Back Benchers?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

It is about getting a balance, isn’t it? Yes, we need to protect green belt where we can, but we also need to build the homes that people need, and it is about striking a balance. In Greater Manchester, I always took a brownfield-first approach, and that is what I will do. I have asked the Chancellor to work with my Cabinet colleagues to release more public land so that we can build more homes on brownfield land, but I understand the concerns that the hon. Member is raising. I will ask the Housing Minister to meet him, to see if we can further build some common cause, but there is a balance to be struck. I say to Conservative Members that it is important that they do not turn their face away from building the new homes this country needs.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Kim Leadbeater.

[Kim Leadbeater (Spen Valley) (Lab)]

Q9. Thank you, Mr Speaker, and welcome back. I also welcome the Prime Minister to his role. We have many shared passions—sport, music, and a deep sense of community. I know we both have a strong desire to ensure that everyone in our country has a sense of pride, identity and belonging—that everyone feels safe and no one feels lonely—but sadly, that is not always the case. What steps is the Prime Minister taking to support people in communities such as Spen Valley who may feel isolated or are dealing with antisocial behaviour such as speeding and dangerous driving, inappropriate use of e-scooters and offroad bikes, and fireworks, to give residents confidence that their concerns are being taken seriously?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

That is exactly what I mean when I talk about supporting an industrial transition so that we can reindustrialise Scotland and other parts of the country. It must be done in a pragmatic way so that we can make the transition work rather than being too ideological about it, as other parties are, so I will work with the hon. Gentleman. I intend to visit Scotland soon to look in detail at the issues in the Aberdeen community, because I know that people have struggled with the impact of transition. Let us see what we can do to build common cause, and let us also look at Grangemouth, which could be the home of sustainable aviation fuel. I am interested in making progress on all those issues, and I will work with the hon. Gentleman on that.

[Mr Speaker]

With the final question, I call Samatha Niblett.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

I congratulate the Prime Minister on his first Prime Minister’s questions; this is my first Prime Minister’s question too.

I want to declare an interest: I chair the all-party parliamentary group on sexual and reproductive health in the UK. The campaign for lifelong sex education that I launched with Cindy Gallop has received a tremendous response and support from many, including professionals in occupational health, medicine, nursing, public health and academia, the National Education Union and the police. I have discovered that the shame, guilt and embarrassment around talking about sex—and body parts like penis and vagina—are even leading to late diagnoses of health conditions including illnesses such as cancer for many people in my South Derbyshire constituency and across the country. I have discussed that with the Eve Appeal and with my constituent Louise Clarke, a GP who specialises in cancer of the vulva; they are really great for my campaign. As September is Gynaecological Cancer Awareness Month, and as the summer of sex comes to a close, will the Prime Minister agree to meet me to talk about the campaign?

Direction of Government

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Tuesday 1st September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

We now come to the statement from the Prime Minister. There has been a lot of speculation over the recess, and I just say that this is in accordance with the rules of government. The ministerial code is clear. For those who have asked why I have not commented, it is because it is within the rules, which I do not make. It is this House that abides by them.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

What I bring back to the House after 10 years away is a clear diagnosis of what has gone wrong. Let me lay it out clearly, particularly for the right hon. Gentleman, since he asked.

From the 1980s, this country took a series of wrong turns. Political power was centralised, economic power privatised and the country deindustrialised. Austerity followed, hollowing out councils and depriving them of the agency to act to reverse any of it, and then Brexit compounded the damage, ushering in a decade of low growth and stalled regeneration. [Interruption.] Change begins with honesty, and I am not hearing much of it this afternoon. Unless we are blunt about what went wrong, we will not turn things around. Far from “taking back control”, the combination of those policies took control out of the hands of communities up and down Britain.

For 40 years, too many places have been drifting. Too many British high streets tell the story of this decline. People yearn to see them restored to what they once were, as the Communities Secretary and I heard on our visit to Ilkeston in the summer, but they see no hope if we continue on the same path with a failed economic model, which does not trickle down much to places like theirs and instead allows wealth to be extracted and siphoned out. Britain’s water industry stands as a leaking monument to that approach—a country run in the private rather than public interest. That is now abundantly clear to voters of all parties, including the Conservative party.

The Government I lead will be relentless in giving people and places what they were promised 10 years ago: ownership and control. From that control over their destiny comes change and growth. I say this with confidence. [Interruption.] I do, and let me explain why. It is backed by a decade of personal experience of turning around one of the UK’s former industrial heartlands and turning it into the fastest growing city region in the country, bucking the low-growth trend. It has given me a clear theory of growth and I will apply it to all parts of the UK, learning from what has been achieved in Greater Manchester. For a long time the country did not have ambitions for its regions outside of London. It even talked of the “managed decline” of Liverpool. It took the devolution of power out of this place to allow our big city regions the ability to set new ambitions for themselves. Now, I want every single place across our regions and nations to be able to do the same, creating the conditions for good growth in every postcode.

In that spirit, I was glad to meet the Liberal Democrat leader of Cornwall council, with my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham), on my recent visit. I know, like many rural economies across the UK, that Cornwall lacks a basic level of infrastructure, which in turn harms growth and holds back living standards and life chances, and I heard the cross-party call for a devolution deal. I understand concerns in this House about the potential emergence of a two-tier England—those with devolved power and those without—and I will not ignore them. So, I have asked No. 10 North to begin work with Cornwall council and its six MPs on a devolution deal with or without an elected mayor.

I today extend the same offer to all parts of England without devolved power. The First Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh) will today write to every Member of this House setting out how they can engage No. 10 North in the service of the places they represent. I extended the same offer to the First Ministers of Scotland and Wales, and the First and Deputy First Ministers of Northern Ireland when I met them over the summer. As they rightly pointed out, their situations are different, but there is interest in what a local model of devolution could look like in each of the home nations, and we will discuss that with them at a special meeting of the National Economic Council next month.

This Government will oversee the biggest redistribution of power this country has seen. In July, we published a statement on the next stage of English devolution. It will include powers long requested by mayors, such as: post-16 technical education; employment support; and fiscal devolution, starting with the ability to set an overnight visitor levy to commence towards the end of the financial year 2027-28. The driving force behind it all will be No. 10 North. It will oversee the rewiring of the British state, the rebuilding of resilience in our communities and the reindustrialisation of our regions. The creation of No. 10 North was one of the first acts of this Administration and I believe that in time it will be seen as one of its most significant. It is a clear answer to the question with which this country has long wrestled: who, in government, drives growth? My theory of growth requires it to be driven with the full authority of the very centre of Government, in close partnership with HM Treasury.

No. 10 North has been set up with that full focus; the single front door on which regions can knock to get quicker, joined-up decisions from Whitehall, and through which power and resources will be passed to them. Resources will include human resources. This is because a state that has grown too large at the national level now needs to redirect civil service capacity regionally and locally, repairing the damage of austerity and making the service of place the state’s first priority. We can already see what is possible. I am glad No. 10 North was able to stand behind Mayor Richard Parker when he took urgent action in August to prevent the collapse of bus services across the west midlands, and I congratulate Mayor Steve Rotheram who this weekend, after four decades of deregulation, will see the first buses return to public control in the Liverpool city region. Taking back control of essential services such as transport is an enabler of a more productive economy, because it allows local areas to grab hold of the levers of power for themselves.

But driving growth demands we go further. It is taking far too long for businesses to get grid connections and they are being quoted prohibitively expensive sums of money if they try to bring those dates forward, as I heard on my visit to a farm near Truro. Household energy bills are the highest in Europe, and the cost of energy is impacting business and inward investment. Too many areas have seen water supplies disrupted this summer due to a lack of reservoir capacity. Our tourism industry is damaged by too many sewage spills. [Interruption.] “Why?” the Opposition say. It is a question they should ask themselves. This summer has shown us very clearly that water companies are failing to rise to the climate challenge. It cannot go on. Later in the year, our 10-year plan for Britain will set out plans for stronger public control over these essentials, making them work for people and places again.

Alongside that, we will empower all areas to expand the public housing stock, building on the first allocations from the social and affordable homes programme announced by the Communities Secretary last week. Bringing forward the biggest council home building programme since the post-war period is the Labour way to get the welfare bill down, as is reforming our education system, so that it balances academic and technical, and offers a path in life for all young people. Michael Gove calls this “bringing back stupid”, when in fact, for too many young people written off by his reforms, it is bringing back hope. Allowing mayors to shape technical pathways and provide work placements for young people, building back into colleges and schools from the needs of the regional economy, is the way to support more young people into work. So is prioritising more accessible, community-based mental health services, as we announced in the summer.

That will be a major part of our response to the forthcoming Milburn report, which will follow its publication in the autumn. For it to work, a more intentional approach to the reindustrialisation of Britain is required. We will support all parts of the country to take more public control over investment strategy, learning from the Greater Manchester model of a consolidated good growth fund drawn from their own funds, prudent loan borrowing and fragmented budgets held by Government bodies. We will back local industrial strategies—a policy of the Theresa May Government I am happy to revive—by identifying priority sectors and developing the triple-helix approach to economic development by entwining business, academia and Government behind the plan. This is the way we will build a pro-business culture and an innovation-led economy in all parts of the UK, finally capturing the long-term benefits of the invention that is in the DNA of our nation, backing our start-ups and scale-ups to stay in the UK where they were founded.

When I stood outside Downing Street six weeks ago, I said that Britain needs a circuit breaker after a decade of turbulence, negativity, point scoring and divisive politics. This is what I have outlined today: a clear, coherent and credible approach to growth that can unlock a feeling of positivity and possibility in every postcode in Britain. Our job here is to make it real by taking a place-first rather than a party-first approach. It starts with reasserting basic standards for Britain—that this is a country where no one sleeps rough and no community is blighted by an illegal waste tip—and, from there, working together to build a new sense of optimism around the country. We can make this next decade better than the last. We can lift the prospects of all our people and places. We can put more power into every postcode. We can let Britain believe again. We can bring back hope. I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome the Prime Minister to his office and to the Dispatch Box—[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. People should not leave when a Member is on their feet; it is discourteous.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

I and my fellow Committee Chairs look forward to welcoming the Prime Minister to the Liaison Committee very soon so that we can drill into his agenda in more detail.

I was pleased by the announcements over the summer on housing, which in London is really holding people back. One of the many challenges is releasing public land that was previously used for education or health, for example, for building on. Will he undertake to put a rocket under the release of that land where appropriate to best deliver housing?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend. I look forward to my first appearance before the Liaison Committee. On the question of public land, she raises a really important issue. We have got to look at how we build as many council and social homes as we can to bring down the housing benefit and temporary accommodation bill, which is ruinous in London for London councils. We must find ways of doing that within the public purse. Public land is one way in which we can achieve that. I will be looking at a programme for the release of public land to build council and social homes, and I look forward to working with her on that.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

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

I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement and I welcome him to his place. I associate myself with the condolences that he has sent to the family and friends of the police officers killed on the A66 and with his comments on the disaster on the Nepal-China border.

I wished each of the Prime Minister’s predecessors well, but given how that went for them perhaps he would prefer that I did not bother this time. I sincerely hope that he can turn things around, and quickly, because we all know how fed up people are. We hear it all the time. Every year, it gets harder to make ends meet, waiting lists seem to go up, more and more things seem broken, and the populists and extremists are eager to keep things that way so they can profit from it.

Everything the Prime Minister has described in his statement would be possible only if we fundamentally change the way we do politics in our country. Growing the economy, cutting the cost of living, fixing our public services, restoring people’s trust: those are things that every new Prime Minister has talked about. Yet they failed because they stuck to a broken political system; a system that makes it impossible to really change things for the better. The reason so much is broken in our country and can never be fixed is partly that our political system concentrates too much power in the wrong hands —in Westminster, in Whitehall and in big multinational companies. I think the Prime Minister gets some of that, judging by what he has been saying.

There are so many more problems in our political system: too much power in the hands of social media barons who interfere in our politics and crypto billionaires who use donations to buy influence; and too little power in the hands of our people. Britain’s political system too often rewards corruption and leaves everyone else feeling powerless. Our great country is being held back, and it will only be free to thrive again if we put real power in people’s hands.

We have been campaigning on that for decades and the Prime Minister has written about it. His decision over the summer to finally start cross-party talks on social care—talks I have been desperate to start for years and which Conservative and Labour Prime Ministers promised but failed to deliver—is a welcome step in the right direction. There is, however, a lot more work to do, and more fundamental change is needed to make our politics work for the people we serve. Will the Prime Minister start that work today? Listening to the calls of over 170 Members on the Opposition Benches and on his own, will he launch a national commission to change politics so that we can fix our country?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my right hon. Friend and agree with her very strongly that we need to restore trust, particularly when it comes to foreign donations that seek to influence our politics. I am pleased she recognises the amendments that have been brought forward to the Representation of the People Act, which will be debated in this House later this week. I mentioned the defending democracy taskforce, which has been set up in the Cabinet Office. It needs to continue to look at these issues, and this will not be the last chance. We can come back to these issues in this Parliament, such is their importance.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

May I congratulate the Prime Minister on what he said about Ukraine and on how he conducted himself there? Our enemies should know that this House is completely and utterly united in standing behind the Ukrainian people. That was the most powerful part of his statement, precisely because we are working together, so may I encourage him in that direction? We all know that we are under mortal threat, that we must increase the defence budget and that the decisions to pare back the bloated welfare bill are extremely difficult, so why does he not take up the offer of the Leader of the Opposition to deal with this, to meet our international commitments, to reduce dependency, to ensure that we are living within our means, to work together and to do this now? “Action this day.”

Oral Answers to Questions

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Wednesday 15th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I think that is the first and, sadly, probably the last time I will be compared to Jude Bellingham. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that. On the question of red cards, I cannot tell him how much incoming I had a week ago Monday, after President Trump intervened on the USA red card, asking me to get the England red card adjusted. Just for the record, Mr Speaker, I did not attempt that.

For my successor, and for the England team, I will not give advice; I will simply give my wholehearted support. Just for the record, Mr Speaker, I do not care what the score is tonight, as long as we win.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Matt Turmaine.

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I take this opportunity to thank the Prime Minister for his many years—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I was calling Matt Turmaine—red card in action.

[Matt Turmaine (Watford) (Lab)]

Q2. It was an honour to march with people from across Watford on a peace walk in my constituency recently. Earlier this year, we saw an attack on our high street. A fire was lit at a Jewish-owned shop, and the shop was sprayed with antisemitic graffiti. Additionally, mosques in Watford have been subjected to Islamophobic attacks and intimidation. I welcome my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister’s additional support to deal with antisemitism and anti-religious hatred. Does he agree that this House must come together to stand united against those who would seek to divide us?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question and his hard work. He reminds us that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. Antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred are a poison. We ripped antisemitism out of the Labour party, and I have worked as Prime Minister to root it out of our country. Just this week, we invested a record £250 million to protect our Jewish communities, and we are using the new powers we have introduced to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, going after those who incite violence on our streets. Everyone deserves to live with security, dignity and freedom. That is a fight that I and every Labour Government and those across this House will never give up on.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

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

Can I start by thanking the Prime Minister for the way that he responded to the murder of Ann Widdecombe last week? This is the first opportunity I have had on the Floor of the House to commemorate her life. A lot has been said about how she died. I want to focus on celebrating the life she lived.

Ann was a woman of high principle and profound beliefs, with a wicked sense of humour—a wonderful combination of being a serious person who did not take herself too seriously. She changed her faith from Anglican to Catholic and from the Conservative party to the Brexit party, but she always remained part of the Conservative family. You might not always have agreed with her, but Ann Widdecombe was a woman who said what she meant and meant what she said. Hers was an honesty that made our politics better. Her wit and forthrightness sat alongside a deep humanity and decency.

Ann had wonderful turns of phrase. She said:

“We need less political correctness and more political courage.”

She said:

“If we deny our culture, become nothing and everything, that weakens us.”

She also said:

“It is a truth universally unacknowledged at Westminster that there is life after politics.”

With that in mind, I turn to this Prime Minister’s final questions. Mr Speaker, I wanted to make sure that I got the tone right today, so I looked back at the Prime Minister’s final questions to Boris Johnson. Luckily for the Prime Minister, I plan to be much gentler than he was that day.

Week after week, the Prime Minister and I have clashed at these Dispatch Boxes and rarely agreed on anything, but there is one thing that I admired. When President Zelensky was attacked in the White House, the Prime Minister showed leadership and invited him to Downing Street. That was the right thing to do. Ukraine is on the frontline in the battle for freedom, so does the Prime Minister agree that cross-party support for their cause must endure?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

We did pull the levers. We pulled the levers to stabilise the economy, and we have done that. We pulled the levers to strengthen our public services and NHS waiting lists are coming down at the fastest rate for 17 years. We have pulled a big lever on child poverty, and this Government are doing more on child poverty than any Government ever, including previous Labour Governments. We have put the biggest investment into defence and security, and our international standing has been restored.

We also pulled the lever on the individual cases that matter, including those of individuals such as Carla—she is in the Gallery—who is one of the parents who came to see me about online harm and what that can do to our young children. That is why we banned social media for under-16s. Daniel, who is also here with his son, has spoken to me many times about the struggles that he has had with the cost of living and the need for a safe and secure home for every family and every child to grow up in. They are the people who matter more to me than anything else, because it is their lives that I think about when we make decisions in this Government.

[Mr Speaker]

Final question.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister may not think so now, but it is a tribute to him that not a single sitting Labour MP could beat him. Not the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner) who could not count her taxes, not the right hon. Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh) who could not count how many phones she had lost—“lost, lost, lost”—and definitely not the right hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting) who could not count to 81.

This is my last exchange with the right hon. and learned Gentleman. I know how much his wife and children mean to him, and that they are in the Gallery. As everyone here knows, our families make a huge sacrifice for our choice to enter public life. I hope that he will allow me to draw our time together to a close by thanking them for the love and support they have given him throughout his time in office.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

Yes I do, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s campaigning on this issue. Yesterday I was with John and Penny Clough, who I first met nearly 16 years ago. They lost their daughter to domestic violence of the most extreme sort in appalling circumstances, and in many ways my journey campaigning on violence against women and girls started with them 16 years ago this year. I pay tribute to them and everybody else who campaigns on this. That is why we set the mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. Whatever role I do next, I will continue to campaign for that for as long as I have breath in my body.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Sir Ed Davey, the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

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

I associate myself with so many of the Prime Minister’s comments today, but particularly with his remarks about Ann Widdecombe. She devoted her life to public service and her murder was truly horrifying. I support his campaign for a memorial to her in this Chamber. I also thank the Leader of the Opposition for her tribute to Ann, and for reminding the whole House and the whole country that we need to remember her for the way she lived her life. I have to make a confession: I have always been slightly jealous of Ann for appearing on “Strictly Come Dancing”. [Hon. Members: “There’s still time!”]

Can I join the whole nation, and hopefully every nation, in wishing England well against Argentina tonight after their superb win against Norway? It is the last job of the Prime Minister to make sure that we win the world cup.

Can I also pick up on a remark from the Leader of the Opposition about the by-election we are about to see in Clacton? I have to tell her that I cannot back joke figures with ridiculous policies, which is why I am supporting Count Binface. [Laughter.]

As the Prime Minister finds himself with more time on his hands, can I recommend the new “Toy Story” film? For those who do not know the films, the main character used to be in law enforcement, but was mainly known for being a little wooden, and was replaced by a shiny new action figure from far away who thinks he can fly—and the name Andy is on everyone’s lips. Maybe the Prime Minister should give that a miss, but does he share my fear that when it comes to Britain’s national debt, the plan of the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) is “to infinity and beyond”?

--- Later in debate ---

[Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury) (Lab)]

Q12. Watching the Prime Minister secure his legacy this week, with the NATO summit and the Hillsborough law, I wondered if he wanted to make it a hat-trick, and support Shrewsbury college’s bid for a new construction skills centre? As the main post-16 provider in the county, our outstanding college trains over 10,000 young people and adults, providing both A-levels and vocational qualifications, but this year’s applications are up by 15% and our buildings are full to capacity. In a rural area like Shrewsbury, with limited alternatives, hundreds of people could end up becoming not in employment, education, or training. Will the Prime Minister support the college’s third attempt to secure capital funds and meet the growing need, so that we can open the construction skills centre in September?

[Mr Speaker]

We have all got the point!

[The Prime Minister]

I know that the college in my hon. Friend’s constituency has made a bid to the post-16 and construction skills capacity fund to expand its provision. I have set a target of two thirds of young people either to go to university or to a gold standard apprenticeship, because I think that we need to rebalance. We rightly applaud and put on a pedestal those who go to university, but we need to do the same for those who are apprentices as well and have a bit of rebalancing.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Please can we speed up questions? There are some people who I really want to get in and that will help everyone.

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

Q3. Two weeks ago, the news leaked that Powys teaching health board is considering taking the beds out of all but two community hospitals in Powys. Some 2,500 people have already signed my petition against those cuts. Does the Prime Minister agree that taking beds out of community hospitals is not a solution for the crisis in social care? Why did he not prioritise fixing social care when he had the opportunity?

--- Later in debate ---

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

The Prime Minister will not need reminding about Arsenal’s success in the premier league last season and my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) will not want reminding that Everton, unfortunately for him, came 13th, but what neither of them might know is that the UK finished 20th in the corruption perceptions index, well within the relegation zone. At the Prime Minister’s request, last week the Ethics and Integrity Commission produced a comprehensive set of recommendations to tighten up rules around lobbying. In light of recent stories around the leader of Reform UK, does the Prime Minister agree—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I call the Prime Minister.

[The Prime Minister]

I pay tribute to the commission and its work. The work of strengthening our democracy will, and must, continue.

[The Prime Minister]

It is very important that we have all the resources we need to provide the energy we need, and to bring the price of energy down, and that is what we are doing.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Carolyn Harris to ask the final question.

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

I can do this. Can I thank my right hon. and learned, and very dear, Friend for everything he has given to our party and our country? There were few who believed we could make the changes needed to bring in a Labour Government after the general election of 2019, when he became leader. Today, though, because of his service and his leadership, children are growing up in a fairer Britain. We stand tall on the world stage, and every day, we have seen his decency and his courage shine through. My family and I thank him and his wonderful family for their cherished friendship, and I am certain that everyone will join me in wishing him and his family the very, very best for their next chapter.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question, her support and her friendship for me, Vic and the kids. Whatever the challenge, she has always been there for us, particularly Vic and the kids, and I really thank her for that.

This will be my last answer from this Dispatch Box. Every Prime Minister knows when they take up the torch that the day will come when they have to pass it on. That day has come for me. This is the end of my political journey. In six years, we went from historic defeat in 2019 to historic victory in 2024, and after two years in government, I leave the country in better shape than I found it in. I am proud of everything that we have achieved.

Can I just take time to say to you, Mr Speaker, and to all those who work for the House and in our constituency offices, thank you for all your hard work? To our civil service, thank you, also, for all your hard work. To my political team—many of them here today—who came on this journey with me, thank you so much for everything you have done, and for being prepared to walk through fire for me. To my colleagues on the Labour Benches, I am proud of all we have achieved together, and proud of each and every one of you. To my successor and each of you, I will give my full support. To all colleagues across the House, I wish you good health and happiness. To all those in the Gallery whose lives have been changed or improved by this Labour Government, and all those across the country who struggle to be seen or heard, you are the reason I came into politics. To my wife and children, I love you. Goodbye. [Applause.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Can I just say, as the curtain has fallen and this House quite rightly cheers out the Prime Minister—[Applause.] I am sorry that we are still clapping. We do not do clapping in the House; we cheer, or hold our Order Papers up. That is the farewell that we should always give to a Prime Minister.

Historical Forced Adoption

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Thursday 2nd July 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)]

This morning in Downing Street, I met some of the mothers and adult adoptees harmed by historical adoption practices in England. They are here with us in the Gallery today, and I had the chance to talk with them privately. They are the most remarkable women, and I know the whole House will want to join me in paying tribute to the extraordinary courage with which they have shared their harrowing testimonies and fought for the truth time and again. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]

I have to confess that, as I said to those mothers this morning, I found it hard to read the testimonies and to hear their stories—I found it particularly hard as a dad—but how much harder it must have been for them to go through that, to set out their testimonies and to tell their stories over and over again. As they said to me this morning, this is something which is so intensely private having to be public. The courage and resilience they have shown, and others alongside them, is absolutely incredible, and I want to mark that.

What happened to them, and to tens of thousands of mothers, children and families, should never have happened. It is a stain on our history. Mothers—many young, vulnerable and without support—were coerced, bullied or misled into feeling they had no choice but to have their children taken from them. What a thing to do.

These were not isolated or accidental acts. They were practices embedded within systems across local authorities, across voluntary and faith-based institutions, and in health and social care services, including parts of what is now the NHS. They were all institutions that operated with power over people’s lives, yet they did so without compassion, without consent and without dignity or proper safeguards.

These practices were particularly prevalent between 1949 and 1976, but also extended beyond those years. In some cases, women, including those placed in mother and baby homes and other institutional settings, were cut off from their families, relationships, education and employment, and subjected to harsh and isolating conditions. Some experienced treatment that amounted to exploitation and abuse.

Many were made to feel ashamed—that came through very, very powerfully in the discussions I had this morning —silenced, and unworthy of care or dignity. Children grew up believing that they were unwanted. Young mothers were told that they were immoral and that their babies were better off without them. As they told me this morning, that lasts a lifetime and has a huge impact.

Ann Lloyd Keen, who is in the Gallery and is of course formerly of this House, described to the Education Committee how she was stitched without anaesthetic, and was told:

“You will remember the pain, because you’ve been a bad girl.”

Many of those harmed in this way feel a gut-wrenching sense of shame. Ann and others have said that that has stayed with them. She says that she still feels it today. I know that this apology will not be able to lift it completely—it will help a little, I hope, but it will not lift it completely.

I say this to Ann, to everyone with us in the Gallery, and to all those impacted and affected, wherever they are in the country—there are many thousands of them, including some who still, to this day, have not been able to speak about what happened to them. I hope this statement and apology perhaps gives some of them the confidence to speak about what happened to them, because it will help in a small way. The shame is not yours. The shame was never yours. The shame is ours. I say that on behalf of the whole country and I say it to every single person impacted. We are deeply and profoundly sorry.

To the mothers who were told they were unfit, who were prevented from caring for the children they desperately wanted to help and to keep and who have carried this loss for decades. To those who were not given the information they needed to provide informed consent, who faced pressure or coercion and who experienced practices that were unethical.

To the sons and daughters, the children who are now adults, who through pressure and coercion within these systems were taken from their families and denied their identity, their history and sometimes their safety. To those who grew up believing they were unwanted, some of whom were even told directly that they were second class.

To those who have carried a burden of loss, confusion and stigma, or who experienced neglect and abuse without the protection or oversight that should have been their right. To those who have experienced lifelong uncertainty, loss or questions about identity and belonging, or whose mental and physical health, relationships and sense of self across their lives has been affected.

To the fathers who were denied a voice, excluded from decisions, or separated from their children. To the siblings, grandparents, partners, extended families, and future generations who have lived with the consequences of these practices. To those who experienced harm from these practices, even while being brought up in loving homes, by their adoptive parents.

To those who were adopted across borders or cultures, who lost connections to their heritage, and racial and personal identity. And to those from ethnic minority backgrounds who experienced racism or were treated differently within those systems, and who as a group were less likely to be adopted or to grow up in stable family homes.

I am struck by the words of Debbie Iromlou, who I met this morning. She says she was

“raised with racist views towards her own biological family.”  

Mr Speaker, how do you even begin to comprehend that? To each and every one of those affected, we say a deep and heartfelt sorry.  

Let me be clear and unequivocal: those harms were compounded by the actions and failures of the state. Governments funded, enabled and relied on systems that were not consistently or effectively overseen. The state did not prevent harm from continuing. The state bears responsibility for the systems it funded and legitimised, which enabled those practices to occur. The state did not do enough to protect mothers, children and families from harm. And for that systemic failing, I am truly sorry.  

Many of those affected have suffered a further injustice. They have had to fight for the basic human right to know their own story. As Sally Ells puts it:  

“We are treated as if the information about our own lives, does not belong to us”.

Debbie Iromlou was told her birth mother’s life would be in danger if she tried to search for her. Barriers were put in place at every twist and turn. Records have in some cases been lost, altered, or not made fully accessible to those seeking answers, and the whole process is painfully slow—traumatic and dehumanising all over again.   

We say sorry and we mean it, but sorry is not enough. This must also be the start of real change: working with those affected and their families to improve access to records, and to provide the care and support that people need. So today I can tell the House that we will fund the development of a national online resource, creating a single access point to locate records wherever they might be held across the country. We will consult on requiring existing records to be retained for 100 years, so they remain available across the lifetime of those affected. 

Today, the Education Secretary is writing to local authorities, regional adoption agencies and voluntary adoption agencies, setting out the expectation that requests for records should be responded to swiftly and with compassion and consistency. We will expand access to funded intermediary services, with a particular focus on pre-1976 cases, where access to support is currently most limited. We will establish national virtual peer-led support groups for mothers and adopted adults, to improve access to ongoing, trauma-informed support across the country.

We will work with NHS England to ensure those affected are taken seriously when they seek help. That includes new support for clinicians to better understand the impact of forced adoption and respond appropriately in their care. NHS England will also explore how those who wish to do so can have their experience of forced adoption appropriately recorded in their health record. 

Finally, to further recognise those affected and ensure we learn the lessons of the past, we will commission a testimonials project to capture the stories of those with experience of historical forced adoption practices. Through all of this and more, we will continue to meet regularly with those with lived experience. We will be guided by them to get this support right and learn from our past to ensure that nothing like this can ever happen again in this country.

Finally, this national apology reflects and builds on the approaches taken by Scotland and Wales, whose devolved Governments have also issued apologies for these practices, which we fully endorse. I welcome the process under way in Northern Ireland to establish a statutory public inquiry into mother and baby institutions, Magdalene laundries and workhouses. I also thank the Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Education Committee for all they have done to shine a light on this injustice.

Most of all, I want to thank those who have campaigned for so long to have the truth recognised, including those who are no longer with us to hear the apology they fought for. It should never have happened, and they should not have had to fight so hard for this day to come. Today, finally, I say on behalf of the state and the nation as a whole: we see you, we hear you, and we are truly sorry.

I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Kanishka Narayan]

Do we want tougher accountability? Absolutely. That is why the codes published mean stronger review mechanisms, a direct line to law enforcement and a clear crisis playbook required of risky platforms. Do we want it to be faster? Absolutely. That is exactly why we have asked Ofcom to expedite those codes in particular. On whether we take a risk-based or uniform approach, it is right that we focus our resources, in law enforcement and regulatory action, on those that are the greatest risk. We will continue to review that.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee.

[Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)]

It is almost exactly a year since my Select Committee published its report on “Social media, misinformation and harmful algorithms” in the wake of the Southport riots. It was truly distressing and disturbing to see misinformation playing such a role in the Belfast riots, and my thoughts are with all those affected. Will the Minister confirm what conversations he has had with Ofcom about misinformation being included in its crisis response protocol, as recommended by my Committee?

--- Later in debate ---

[Liz Kendall]

I saw the documentary and absolutely agree how concerning it is. I bet that many men, even some in this Chamber, will have been fed this vile stuff just because they are a man. We are looking at a whole range of measures. We are also looking at the issues of advertising and money, which are relevant to the hon. Gentleman’s question as they are driving a lot of this. The Minister for Digital Government and Data, my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray), who is a joint Minister in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, is chairing a taskforce looking specifically at that matter, but I always like to see further recommendations, so the hon. Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) should send them in.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Liz Kendall]

Of course I have talked to my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield, because I am focusing on doing my job, which is to do the right thing for children and families in this country. I hope the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer) gets a good rest over the summer holidays too, and maybe works up some slightly more challenging questions.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)]

This might be the last time we face this ministerial team, but I hope that they will stay, because I know they have done a lot of hard work on online safety. With that in mind, I have recently spoken to students in Harpenden and Berkhamsted, who passionately shared their fears and hopes around AI chatbots. With the Labour leadership transition putting any major announcements on hold, what guarantees can the Secretary of State give that, alongside the support of the right hon. Member for Makerfield—the Prime Minister in waiting—there will be an announcement in July about AI online safety, and vital protections will not be sidelined?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Kanishka Narayan)]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that critical question for Britain’s creative sector. Just yesterday, on British IP Day, I met with the Alliance for Intellectual Property, including artists, authors, publishers, journalists and media organisations, to talk about how our work on digital replicas and transparency will be critical to supporting the creative sector. I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend and the APPG.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Julia Lopez (Hornchurch and Upminster) (Con)]

Professor Brian Cox is among the eminent scientists warning about the impact of Government cuts to research on advanced physics and astronomy—a move that he calls “inexplicable”. Meanwhile, the Government are spending millions on projects examining climate coloniality, decolonising justice and transforming LGBTIQ+ asylum policies. Are those the Secretary of State’s research priorities too? If not, has she made that crystal clear to UK Research and Innovation?

--- Later in debate ---

[Liz Kendall]

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point—we know children will try to get around the ban, and will succeed. Our measures are as much about resetting the cultural and social norms for future generations, but we will have more highly effective age verification measures to make this work. We are looking at the issue of VPNs in particular, and I will come back to the House with more on that issue very soon.

[Mr Speaker]

Before we come to Prime Minister’s questions, I extend a warm welcome to the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Trinidad and Tobago and his delegation, who are in the Gallery today.

The Prime Minister was asked—

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Pinkerton]

I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s condolences and his birthday good wishes to the NHS.

Everyone in my constituency of Surrey Heath wants a new Frimley Park hospital, but the chosen site—the last remaining fragment of the ancient Frimley common—is wholly inappropriate. It is inaccessible, behind multiple schools, and environmentally devastating. Worse, over recent weeks, I have received deeply troubling evidence that the preferred relocation site was known and being openly discussed by local political figures in 2023, before the official site selection process had even begun. The entirely reasonable conclusion is that this project has been compromised from the outset and the site predetermined. I think the Prime Minister would agree that this is no way to begin a multibillion-pound public procurement process, so will he please step in, commission an urgent independent review—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I think the Prime Minister has got the question.

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman’s NHS trust has identified its preferred site for the new Frimley Park hospital, and detailed technical work can now start. Let us be frank about this hospital. The Tories promised 40 new hospitals with no funding and no delivery plan, and we have had to fix that. Thanks to Labour investment, the hon. Gentleman’s hospital is at the front of the queue. It will be one of the first in the country to be rebuilt, but his approach has been, on the one hand, to demand a new hospital, and then to oppose actually building it. He has urged his constituents to oppose it because, to quote him,

“if this hospital goes ahead, there will be no golf course.”

Labour is building new hospitals, and the hon. Gentleman is standing up for golf courses. I cannot think of anything more Lib Dem.

[The Prime Minister]

I am proud that this Government are delivering the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation. That is backed by £39 billion, and it means we are unleashing the biggest surge in council house building in more than 30 years. That includes a thousand new social and affordable homes in Luton and Bedfordshire. Our Social Housing Bill will reform right to buy to deliver even more social houses. That is a Labour Government delivering the homes that we need.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

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

Can I associate myself and those on the Opposition Benches with the Prime Minister’s comments about Venezuela, and also about the Lib Dems? [Laughter.] But seriously, the Chief of the Defence Staff made it known that the armed forces needed a minimum of £28 billion more to defend the country. Can the Prime Minister tell us why he thinks half that amount is enough?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this case; he has been a committed campaigner on this issue. I have seen the details of that particular case, and he is right not to repeat them in this Chamber—they are horrifying. The lack of dignity and compassion is unacceptable, and I simply cannot imagine the pain that Cody, Liam and Zoe experienced and are still experiencing. The status quo here is not working for families, and people deserve to know that their loved ones are treated with dignity and compassion. We are going to consider this issue closely, and I thank him for raising it. I do want stronger standards and oversight. I think that is absolutely needed, particularly in the light of appalling cases like this.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

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

Can I not associate myself with the Prime Minister’s comments about my party, but can I associate myself with all his remarks about the earthquake and humanitarian catastrophe in Venezuela? May I commend the Scottish team and the Scottish fans for the joy they brought to the world cup? They did the whole of Scotland proud. May I wish England well against DR Congo later today? But with Reece James and Jarell Quansah in doubt, I know the Prime Minister is not the only one struggling for a solid defence plan. [Laughter.]

The wars in Ukraine and Iran show us how seriously we must take the threat of missiles and drones hitting our country. Our national security requires the best possible missile defence system, including Royal Navy destroyers, but the funding in the Prime Minister’s plan for this falls dangerously short. Yet he has rejected our proposals for defence bonds, which were used in the past to rearm our country. So why has the Prime Minister chosen to leave our country so vulnerable to missile attack?

--- Later in debate ---

[Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)]

Q4.   I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s comments on the legacy of Jo Cox.I know that all of us in this place have been following the contest for No. 10 quite closely in recent weeks, but amid the north versus south debate, I think it is about time we had someone from the midlands who was ready to step into this important position for our country. [Laughter.] So I am delighted to say we have two fantastic Black Country lads—Jude Bellingham from Stourbridge and Morgan Rogers from Halesowen, who have both been doing us proud in the contested England No. 10 role—for our game against Congo this evening. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that we should congratulate England on their progress out of the group stage so far, and does he also agree with me that we need to do more to support—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I call the Prime Minister.

[The Prime Minister]

I thought the next few weeks were about to get quite interesting, Mr Speaker. We all wish England the best of luck this evening. Every time those players step on to the pitch, they represent the talent, ambition and diversity of this country. We are proud to be supporting the next generation, investing £400 million in grassroots facilities and over £1 billion in school sports. And if Thomas Tuchel needs any advice on penalties, he should ask David Seaman, who slotted one past him just a few weeks ago.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Thursday 25th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

I am very proud of the Government’s work over the past two years. I do not think there is any doubt at all that the UK-EU relationship is in a significantly better place today than when we came into office. I look forward to making the case for a deal that will be good for jobs and for securing our borders.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

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

The Minister has submitted in answers to written questions that there will be no substantive vote in this House on UK association to Erasmus+, even though the Government plan to tie us into a multi-year programme without saying what it will cost after the first year. The Defence Secretary resigned because the Chancellor will not provide the funding we need for our defence, but apparently money is no object when it comes to this programme. Will the Minister finally tell us the Government’s own central estimate for the programme, or must the public rely on press reports of an £8 billion bill?

--- Later in debate ---

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

Because it has a 10-month review clause to ensure that it is delivering value for money. Under Erasmus+, there are still opportunities to go around the world. I say quite candidly to the hon. Gentleman that he should look very carefully at all the different opportunities under Erasmus+. It is not just about traditional studies. People studying vocational qualifications go overseas as well, such as those studying sport coaching. There is a range of opportunities that are not available under Turing. If the Conservatives are seriously now setting their face against these opportunities for young people, best of luck to them.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

This week marked 10 years since the EU referendum vote, and the world has changed since then, with an unreliable Trump in the White House and Putin bombing schools in Ukraine. Labour’s red lines are holding Britain back. They are hurting the British people and playing into the hands of those who seek to divide us. It was made clear to me in Brussels last month that the ball is in the UK’s court and that there is real openness to Liberal Democrat plans for a sensible, pragmatic and deliverable plan for closer working. Will the Paymaster General commit to urging the new Prime Minister to drop Labour’s red lines and back Lib Dem plans for a new UK-EU growth and defence partnership to make the UK safer, stronger and richer?

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Shastri-Hurst]

Space has a crucial role to play in our national resilience. Responsibility for it cuts across Government Departments. With that in mind, and given the Cabinet Office’s role in cross-Government co-ordination, can the Minister confirm when the National Space Council will next convene?

[Mr Speaker]

Oh my word!

[Dame Angela Eagle]

I will get back to the hon. Gentleman. I have to confess that I have not had my briefing on space yet.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)]

12. What recent progress he has made on implementing the Humble Address agreed by this House on 4 February 2026.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Minister Jones.

[Hon. Members]

Hear, hear!

--- Later in debate ---

[Darren Jones]

With permission, Mr Speaker, may I refer to my 11 previous statements that answered that question?

[Mr Speaker]

I call Alex Burghart, shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

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

T4. I thank the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister for asking the Ethics and Integrity Commission to review lobbying, disclosure and access to Government. Does he agree that given that The Guardian has reported that the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) lobbied for changes in cryptocurrency policy that would massively benefit Reform’s biggest donor and, in fact, his £5 million personal benefactor, any look at strengthening the rules should include a look at lobbying cases involving the Bank of England?

[Mr Speaker]

Mr Powell, have you informed the hon. Member that you intended to name him?

[Joe Powell]

indicated assent.

[Darren Jones]

I wonder where the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) is? [Interruption.] Not in Clacton, I am told, Mr Speaker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell) for his question, and his continued support for the Government’s efforts to improve ethics and integrity in public life. The House knows that trust in politics is important, and that we have more work to do. That is why we have important rules about conflicts of interest, and why we must declare those conflicts of interest on the record, and then not lobby on behalf of donors or others who have sought to put money into our campaigns or other personal interests. The leader of Reform UK has said,

“it’s literally none of your business”

in answer to questions about the £5 million crypto-donation. I am afraid that it is in the interests of the public, and he needs to answer questions about it. If he is acting on behalf of donors and asking questions in return for money, there should be consequences.

[Mr Speaker]

We are still on topical questions, folks.

[Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)]

This may be the last time I come up against the right hon. Gentleman during parliamentary questions. When we first faced each other nine months ago, I said that he was one of the most able performers in Government, and I still believe that to be the case. I think there will come a time when his party regrets the fact that he did not stand in this leadership contest. I think he would have lost—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We are on topical questions! I cannot say that to one Member and not another. I love a love-in, but not now.

[Alex Burghart]

I was just trying to be nice, Mr Speaker. We will do it privately.

Given that we may have a new Prime Minister on 16 July, does the right hon. Gentleman think that that new Prime Minister should take questions in the House before he goes off for the summer break?

[Mr Speaker]

Boris didn’t!

[Darren Jones]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind comments. He says that this might be our last time together at the Dispatch Box; I do not know where he is planning on going, but I hope to be back here in due course. He asks a very pertinent question. I know that any Prime Minister takes their responsibilities to the House seriously, and I am sure that the next Prime Minister will be at the Dispatch Box at the earliest opportunity.

--- Later in debate ---

[Satvir Kaur]

of course I would be happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss that matter. We will be launching the national school of government, which will ensure that we have a civil service fit for purpose, not only for the current challenges but for the challenges of the future.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

We will soon have our seventh Prime Minister in 10 years. My commiserations go to the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister, who I see has bowed out of the race gracefully—I am sure he has many irons in the fire.

The right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) is known to be committed to proportional representation. What plans does the Cabinet Office have to enable any new Prime Minister to move quickly on making our voting system fit for purpose—if he does not change his mind? Has that come up in access talks?

--- Later in debate ---

[Darren Jones]

My hon. Friend is right. The Barnett formula plays an important role in ensuring fairness in public spending across all the nations of the United Kingdom. She is right to point out that we have given a record-breaking level of money to the Scottish Government, but it is the responsibility of the Scottish Government to spend that money effectively. People in her constituency and across Scotland have seen that the SNP has failed to spend that money wisely, and we should continue to hold it to account.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst.

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

Double dip!

--- Later in debate ---

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

I know from my experience setting up Bournemouth town centre citizens’ panel just how effective those forums are for deep dives into complex issues and for building consensus, so can the Minister tell me what recent progress has been made on the work of the people’s panel for digital ID?

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Minister.

[The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Mr James Frith)]

Thank you—a batsman needs runs, Mr Speaker.

Digital ID will ensure digital access to our public services. In recent weeks, citizens have been debating evidence from independent technical experts, privacy advocates and civil society groups. They have been discussing how we can join up our public services, saving time and money and reducing faff and friction. It will be a free-to-use and a freedom-to-choose proposition from this Government, and the Government are now considering the recommendations I received in person on Sunday in Birmingham from the 120 citizens involved. By taking this independent, people-led approach, we will ensure that digital ID has genuine public consent.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Gareth Bacon—not here.

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

As we approach the upcoming EU-UK summit, can I urge the Minister to make sure that restoring international trains at Ashford International is firmly on the agenda for discussions with our European neighbours? It would bring over half a million extra visitors to Sussex and Kent every year and £2.5 billion of economic growth. Everything we need is sitting there in pristine condition, ready to go—it is a no-brainer. Will the Minister support it?

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Angela Eagle]

We always assess security risks on a case-by-case basis, and we do not discuss what they are in public.

[Mr Speaker]

Absolutely.

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

As a previous chair of a local government pension scheme, I was really pleased to hear that the Government are going to bring catering, security, cleaning staff, porters and repair people back into Government Departments. Does the Minister agree that that is the right thing to do and is beneficial for those workers, particularly given the situation with their pensions and the other things that they should have had access to in the first place?

Oral Answers to Questions

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Catherine Atkinson]

Our police receive calls relating to domestic violence every 30 seconds. Victims of domestic violence need to be treated well, and to see much more action taken, whether we are talking about our police, our courts, or the services that victims need. This Government are taking that action, not only by putting domestic abuse specialists in 999 call centres, but through domestic abuse protection orders, but we know that there is so much more that is needed by victims of domestic abuse.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister for Women.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

As a 16-year-old, Kate worked a summer at Harrods. In 2024, she told her story of being raped at work. Intimate medical examinations were carried out on women by senior Harrods staff and security. Hundreds of women’s attacks were silenced. How will the Justice for Fayed and Harrods Survivors be heard? I met some of those brave women this week. How will they get the whole truth, justice, and systemic change, if the Met police inquiry remains stalled, and if enablers—some of them women—are left at large? Incredibly, over 500 victims still need answers.

[Catherine Atkinson]

I have met victims and campaigners from the al-Fayed campaign, as has the Prime Minister. We must ensure that no matter who you are or where you are, there is always justice. I look forward to continuing to work with campaigners to ensure that they get justice.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)]

The Government’s recently announced social media ban for under-16s will play an important role in tackling violence against women and girls and the online spread of misogyny, but social media bans by themselves are not enough. While we welcome steps to address online harm, the Government’s proscriptive approach simply will not be enough. New platforms and apps will continue to spring up, and the Government are in danger of being a dangerously outpaced competitor in an online game of whack-a-mole.

Alongside legislation, we urgently need to give our parents, teachers and schools the tools that they need to ensure that when children come across harmful or inappropriate content, they are equipped to recognise and challenge it, and are ultimately kept safe from it. Will the Minister work with her colleagues in the Department for Education to ensure that teachers have the resources and support in the curriculum to cover that?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for Equalities (Olivia Bailey)]

I thank my hon. Friend for that important question. The code is clear that nobody should be left without the services they need. The EHRC is clear that it will monitor the impact of the code.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Claire Coutinho (East Surrey) (Con)]

The Government’s Islamophobia definition is already being weaponised to shut down free speech, just as I warned it would. South Wales police tried to use it to effectively criminalise people for criticising Islam, which Ministers promised us time and again would not happen. Does the Minister understand how divisive that is? If so, will she finally withdraw that dangerous definition?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

My thoughts—and, I am sure, the thoughts of the whole House—are with Max and his family in what must be the most awful of circumstances. Through our cancer trials accelerator programme, we will make it easier to launch innovative new clinical trials and find new treatment. For people like Max, that will make young people’s cancer a research priority, make clinical trials more accessible and pay for his travel costs for care. I hope that comes as some comfort, but as a parent, I cannot imagine what his family are going through, given the circumstances that he faces. I know that a Minister would be happy to meet Max and his family.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

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

I associate the Opposition with the Prime Minister’s remarks on the horrific train crash, the attacks in Edinburgh and, of course, Armed Forces Week.

I want to start by congratulating the Prime Minister: he is the other party leader who won a by-election last week, although I think I am much happier with my new MP than he is with his. Two weeks ago, the Prime Minister told the House that the Government were funding defence and that everything was under control. The very next day, the Defence Secretary resigned, saying the Prime Minister was “unable” and the Treasury “unwilling” to fund the defence of our country. What changed?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Badenoch]

The fact is that if the Education Secretary knew so much about poor children, she would not have given them fewer teachers. Teacher numbers have gone down—[Interruption.] It is amazing; I have never seen this much excitement on the Labour Benches. They are cheering so loudly, while there are 400 knives stuck in the Prime Minister’s back. Shame on them. They don’t like it up them, but they know that what I am saying is true.

There were times when the Prime Minister tried to do the right thing. He tried—he did try to cut welfare, and who stopped him? Those MPs behind him. In the words of the Welfare Secretary, his MPs only want to know who they can tax to fund more benefits. They are not Labour MPs, they are welfare MPs. Does the Prime Minister feel betrayed by the people he got into Parliament?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We should think about the language we are using. When we leave this Chamber, do not be surprised if constituents feel that they can use the same language against each other. Let us show a little bit more decorum and respect to each other.

[The Prime Minister]

Thank you Mr Speaker. I was trying to do all this with as much good grace as I could, but I shall certainly miss these exchanges. I am very proud of every one of our MPs who, with a landslide Labour victory, come from all different backgrounds and different places across the country. We inflicted the biggest loss on the Tories in the history of their party. We have picked up our party and we turned it around. We had to address what went wrong, we turned it around, and we won a landslide victory. The right hon. Lady will not address or even talk about their failure after 14 long years.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

Antisemitism is a poison and that is why I drove it out of the Labour party. In government, we are acting to drive it out of society: new powers to ban repeated protests, new plans to root antisemitism out of our schools, universities and the health service, and new proscription-like powers to clamp down on malign state activity that incites hatred and violence, and we will take further steps. I am proud to lead this tolerant, decent country, and I will always fight for the security, safety and freedom of British Jews.

[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 remarks about the horrifying train crash in Bedford and the appalling attacks near a mosque in Edinburgh. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.

May I mention today’s review of Nottingham’s maternity services, which is truly shocking? I hope that the Government will rise to the moment and implement Donna Ockenden’s recommendations in full, without delay.

I recognise how difficult it was for the Prime Minister to make the statement that he made on Monday. As we debate issues robustly in this House, it is an important reminder that we are all human—that is something that everyone should remember. [Interruption.]

We all know how hard it is when relationships break down with close friends and allies, and when even our next door neighbour barely speaks to us some of the time, so have the Prime Minister’s experiences opened his eyes to the need to rebuild Britain’s relationship with our European friends and allies? Will he advise the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) to put his EU red lines in the past and to adopt our plan for a new growth and defence partnership?

Belfast: Violent Disorder

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

The hon. Lady describes with great clarity the impact of the scenes that we have seen in Northern Ireland over the past number of hours. Let me be absolutely clear: the scenes of disorder that we witnessed in parts of Northern Ireland last night are not only damaging communities, but literally putting lives at risk. Like her, I utterly condemn the attacks on property and vehicles, and the other related violence that we have seen. There is no justification at all for that type of thuggery, and no place for it in Northern Ireland or anywhere else.

The hon. Lady will agree that it is now vital that the Police Service of Northern Ireland is given the time, space and full support that it needs to continue with its investigation. The rule of law must, and will, prevail; justice must, and will, be served.

Violence is never a justified response, and this disorder only causes pain and suffering for those living in the area, as the hon. Lady eloquently described. Those involved need to take a step back and consider the consequences of their actions. I strongly urge anyone who has information, no matter how small it might seem, to come forward and contact the PSNI urgently in order to assist it with its inquiries.

The hon. Lady specifically asked what support is being offered. She will understand that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is in Belfast today, and I know that he will be working with colleagues there to ensure that they have the support and resources they need to deal with this very troubling situation.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Home Secretary.

[Chris Philp (Croydon South) (Con)]

Monday night’s attack was disgusting and barbaric. The victim suffered serious injuries to his neck and lost an eye. I am sure that the thoughts of the whole House are with him. I thank the police and emergency services for responding and pay tribute to the members of the public who so bravely intervened. I commend the police for confirming the suspect’s identity swiftly, because full transparency is vital in these cases. Will the Minister confirm that the PSNI will have all the resources needed to deal with these issues?

We have all seen the footage of the appalling attack, featuring a Sudanese illegal immigrant, but let me be clear: violence of any kind in protest is never justified. Innocent people should never be targeted and nobody should ever set fire to houses or cars. Speaking as a father, no one should ever feel unsafe in their homes. I hope that the police will bring the perpetrators swiftly to justice.

I do understand, though, why people are angry. The suspect came into the UK illegally—he should never have been here in the first place. Mainstream politicians must now understand how angry the public are about mass illegal immigration. If mainstream politics does not stop this, the public will turn elsewhere.

Since the election, 73,000 people have entered the country illegally via small boat, mostly young men, and many have committed serious crimes. I recently met the mother of Rhiannon Whyte, a young woman brutally murdered by a Sudanese small-boat migrant. There have been multiple rapes and sexual assaults, with victims as young as just 13. Over time, I have come to realise that there is ultimately only one way to end illegal immigration: by leaving the European convention on human rights so that we can deport all illegal migrants upon arrival. Illegal migration will then stop, and these appalling crimes with it.

[Dan Jarvis]

I am grateful to the shadow Home Secretary for the points that he has raised and, in particular, for the clarity with which he made the point about violence never being justified. He is absolutely right, and I hope that we can speak with a strong sense of unity about that. He specifically asked about ensuring that the PSNI has the resources it needs to do the difficult work being asked of it at this moment. I know that he understands that policing is devolved, but as I have said, the Secretary of State is in Northern Ireland this morning to work out what more we can do to provide support and to ensure that the PSNI has the resources it needs.

The shadow Home Secretary spoke about the anger that people feel, and that is absolutely understood. I am sure that all right hon. and hon. Members will have seen the footage that is circulating online. While clearly I have to be incredibly careful not to get in the way of a live investigation, it is understandable why people will feel extremely angry at what they have seen, but it is important that that anger does not tip over into criminality and the kind of thuggish behaviour that we have seen.

The shadow Home Secretary rightly raised concerns about the importance of making sure that this Government, as with any Government, have the right framework in place to deport those foreign national offenders who come here and engage in criminality. I think he is aware of the figures: there have been 67,000 deportations and removals under this Government, which marks a significant increase. I hope that he and the House recognise the seriousness and the urgency with which we take these matters. They need to be dealt with calmly and effectively, but this Government will do everything in our power—and if further powers are required, we will ensure that we have them—to deport and remove those people who present a threat to the public.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee.

[Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower) (Lab)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast South and Mid Down (Claire Hanna) on securing the urgent question. I pay tribute to the Chief Constable, the PSNI and the emergency services for their work and their bravery, which continues to be unstinted. Does the Minister agree that the events we witnessed last night demonstrate the importance of political leaders speaking with one voice in condemning violence, rejecting extremism and supporting those working to build a shared and prosperous future for all communities and the people in Northern Ireland?

[Dan Jarvis]

My hon. Friend, who has a long-standing interest in Northern Ireland, is absolutely right to highlight the bravery of the police. I have spent a lot of time in Northern Ireland over the years and have something of a sense of the importance of the work that they do and the risk that they carry. Looking at the scenes that unfolded last night, it is impossible not to conclude that the police did an incredibly good job under very difficult circumstances. I pay tribute to them, their service and their families, who would have been at home, sick to death with worry at the kind of risk and threat that their loved ones were having to deal with.

My hon. Friend is right to raise the importance of responsibility. As political leaders, and as Members of this House and further afield, we should all understand that words have consequences. While I understand the temptation for some to score cheap political points, at moments like this the public expect all of us to rise above that and think about how we can stand together to address the problems that we undoubtedly face.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

My thoughts and those of the whole House are with Stephen Ogilvie, who suffered truly horrific injuries on Monday night, and with the residents of Belfast who were forced to flee by rioters who do not speak for any legitimate community grievance. The knife attack was repugnant, but so too were the scenes that followed. This is the second consecutive summer of racially motivated disorder in Northern Ireland that the PSNI has faced while understaffed and underfunded. The Minister rightly says that the PSNI should be given time and space, but will he confirm what additional financial support the Government will provide for the PSNI, because it needs it?

Although the alleged attacker had leave to remain, concerns about irregular migration across the Northern Ireland border are being exploited by right-wing extremists to foment hatred and division. Given the importance of accurate information, will the Minister confirm whether the Government will begin collecting data on such crossings, as officials were unable to provide it when I recently raised the issue as a member of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee?

--- Later in debate ---

[Dan Jarvis]

My hon. Friend makes an important wider point. Many hon. Members who do not represent constituencies in Northern Ireland will have a long-standing affection for and knowledge of the place. I first went there in 1998 and have been a regular visitor ever since. It is an extraordinary part of the United Kingdom. It is a place that has been on something of a journey over the years. When I was in Northern Ireland recently, I was incredibly impressed with that journey and the progress that has been made in recent times. We have a shared endeavour across Government and across this House to ensure that that journey continues in a positive direction. Key to that is the point that he made about young people in Northern Ireland. We have a shared responsibility to them to ensure that they can enjoy the brightest possible future, and that will a priority for the Secretary of State and colleagues across Government.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee.

Oral Answers to Questions

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend. Settlements are a flagrant breach of international law, and no UK charity should be supporting them. The Middle East Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), met the Charity Commission today to discuss those concerns. We announced yesterday further sanctions against those who support settler violence, and we will continue to look at strengthening those sanctions. British businesses should have no economic involvement in illegal settlements. Let me just say that the situation across Palestine remains desperate, and the UK will continue to lead efforts to prevent human suffering and get aid in, and to preserve the viability of a two-state solution.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

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

I, too, wish England and Scotland the very best in the world cup. I wish you a very happy birthday, Mr Speaker—many happy returns. May I take the opportunity to associate myself with the remarks that the Prime Minister made about the helicopter crash? Our condolences go to their families, and to the family of Michael Storey.

I thank the Prime Minister for his short statement on Belfast. The scenes in Belfast are deeply, deeply disturbing. A man is in hospital after a brutal attack and now families are frightened after a night of violence. There is a live criminal case, so we must be careful about what we say, but we can be clear about this: people have a right to be angry—I am angry—and people have the right to expect their politicians to secure our borders, but no one has a right to burn families out of their homes or to burn public property and attack the police. We all have a duty to stand up for public safety in every way.

Last night, America carried out strikes on Iran in response to the downing of a US helicopter. This comes just days after renewed attacks on Ukraine. The world is getting more dangerous and the British public want to know that this Government are doing everything they can to protect our national security. Can the Prime Minister tell the House, will the full defence investment plan finally be published this week?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

When the Conservatives were in office, they did not reform welfare spending or invest in our armed services. The right hon. Lady sets out that choice, but, on their watch, defence spending went down and welfare spending went up—£88 billion overall, with £33 billion alone under the shadow Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Central Devon (Sir Mel Stride). The Conservatives neither reformed welfare nor spent on our armed forces.

Every week, the right hon. Lady reminds us why the British public sent them packing. She ignores the fact that we are turning the country around: growth is up, but she does not want to talk about that; interest rates are down, but she does not want to talk about that either; immigration is down, after she cheerleaded for it to go up, and NHS waiting lists have come down at the fastest rate in 17 years. I am going to keep fighting for the people who elected a Labour Government and sent us here two years ago—people who want to live in a safer world, parents who want a better future for their children and young people growing up in poverty who deserve a better future. [Interruption.] We are investing in this great nation and standing up against those who divide us for a stronger, fairer Britain.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. There will be a taxi, and it might be for somebody who did not request it.

[Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)]

Q2. I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s comments on the horrific events in Belfast. The co-founder of US tech giant Palantir once claimed that the NHS “makes people sick”. Now, Palantir is running the NHS’s new data platform. The Financial Times has reported that Palantir staff have had “unlimited access” to identifiable NHS patient data. There are also deep concerns about Palantir’s human rights record in relation to Trump and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Israel’s military action in Gaza. NHS patient data should not be left in the hands of a US tech giant. The Government have an opportunity to end this contract through a break clause next year. Will they take that opportunity and kick Palantir out of our NHS next year?

[The Prime Minister]

As the Health Secretary has said, the existing contract will be reviewed as it always is ahead of the break clause. Data security is always a priority; there will be strong cyber-security protections for the single patient record and we will protect that data, as we do with all health data. We are focused on modernising the NHS so that patients do not have to repeat themselves and can get the care they need more quickly. Our investment has cut NHS waiting lists, delivered millions of extra appointments and improved A&E and ambulance response times, and I am proud of what we are doing.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

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

I join the Prime Minister in sending our condolences to the families of those killed in last week’s helicopter crash. I associate myself with his remarks about the horrific knife attack in Belfast; our thoughts are with the victim and his family. I join the Prime Minister in condemning the disorder last night.

In Carer’s Week, I celebrate the millions of family carers who make huge sacrifices to look after their loved ones. I also look forward to an England versus Scotland world cup final, and wish you, Mr Speaker, a happy birthday.

As the chaos over the defence investment plan goes on, I am sure that Members across the House were shocked to read yesterday’s reports that the Government are considering slashing the hospital programme to fund the shortfall. Surely in 21st-century Britain people can expect both a decent local hospital and armed forces that keep them safe, so will the Prime Minister rule out any cuts to the NHS budget to fund defence?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is right to raise the concerns that we have. We have increased defence spending, and the defence investment plan is going to be set out very soon and before the NATO summit, which is in just a few weeks’ time.

[Mr Speaker]

For the final question, I call Alicia Kearns.

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

Lindsay Foreman and her husband Craig have not eaten in 32 and 23 days respectively. They are being held hostage by the terrorist Government of Iran, but this Government’s weak words have abandoned them, so will the Prime Minister stop raising their case and start fighting for them? He can do that by declaring today in this House that they are being arbitrarily detained—something he has refused to do—and by referring their case to the International Court of Justice, so we get them home.