All 1 Debates between Matt Bishop and Paul Foster

Lord Mandelson

Debate between Matt Bishop and Paul Foster
Wednesday 4th February 2026

(5 days, 2 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Matt Bishop Portrait Matt Bishop
- Hansard - -

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I think we are talking about trust across the House, so that includes every Member of this House, and across both Houses.

The Government’s violence against women and girls strategy is one of the proudest achievements of this Parliament. It is the product of years of tireless campaigning by survivors, advocates and frontline organisations who have fought to have their voices heard, but that work and that trust is fragile, and it risks being profoundly undermined when we appear unwilling to apply the same standards of transparency and accountability to those closest to power as we demand elsewhere. How can we stand in this Chamber and say to victims that we believe them and that we will stand with them, while refusing to release full documents relating to serious concerns about one of our own? How can we ask victims to trust the system if the system appears unwilling to scrutinise itself?

The files released last weekend further highlighted what many already fear: there exists a despicable elite network operating with proximity to power, entangled in international criminality, and shielded for far too long by status and influence.

Paul Foster Portrait Mr Foster
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My understanding is that new information is coming out daily and that other current Members of this House may or may not be directly linked to the Epstein-Mandelson scandal. Does my hon. Friend agree that they should be fully investigated as well?

Matt Bishop Portrait Matt Bishop
- Hansard - -

Anybody linked should be investigated—simple.

If we are not fully transparent about how we vetted the ex-US ambassador in the face of such scandal, how on earth can we expect victims to come forward in future? How can we expect them to trust institutions that seem designed to protect the powerful rather than the vulnerable? I think of the survivors I have met in my constituency and since being elected. I think of the advocacy groups who have worked alongside all of us across the House: organisations such as the Hollie Gazzard Trust, Sarah Taylor from PEEPSA—Prevent, Educate and Eradicate Post Separation Abuse—and campaigners who have poured their lived experience into shaping the VAWG strategy. How can I go back to them and look them in the eye having voted for an amendment that has the potential to conceal the behaviour of powerful people and their potentially criminal relationships?