Defending Democracy Taskforce

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Thursday 12th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his constructive tone. I am also very concerned to hear about the threats that he has faced. As he knows, if he thinks any further support is required, I would be very keen to work closely with him. I also join him in remembering his lost colleague.

The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the important work that his constituents in Cheltenham do; as he knows, I am a huge supporter of them, and a fairly regular visitor to Cheltenham. He is also right to raise concerns about foreign interference. He will know—I am pretty certain that his party has made a submission to the Rycroft review—that the Government commissioned Philip Rycroft to do an independent piece of work looking at the nature of interference in our democracy. Mr Rycroft is finishing his work and will report to Ministers in the near future, and will do so in a way that will allow the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to incorporate any recommendations that it thinks is appropriate in forthcoming legislation.

The hon. Gentleman cited a number of particularly egregious examples of interference in our democracy, and made a number of entirely reasonable and helpful suggestions. I hope he knows that my door and, I am sure, that of the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon), is always open to him, should he wish to discuss these matters further.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

I should mention that I am a member of the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission; its members work very collegiately, cross-party, in support of its important work. I thank the Minister for his statement today.

Like the women who encouraged me, I aim to support any young women in my constituency—particularly those from black, Asian and minority backgrounds—who put themselves forward to represent their communities in local government, but unfortunately, the increased harassment, abuse and intimidation of councillors and candidates, particularly in recent years, has been a huge deterrent. Does the Minister agree that it is vital that we increase support and protection for all those putting themselves forward, but particularly women, so that we can encourage women from all backgrounds to step forward and represent their communities?

[Dan Jarvis]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the important work she does on the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission, and for the points she has raised. She is absolutely right about the threat that women elected representatives and candidates face around the country. I hope she sees the determination of the Government to work with her and colleagues across this House to put in place the protections and support that are required. That is why I referenced the creation of the new threat assessment, which will provide greater granularity on operational intelligence that we think will deliver real benefits at a local level.

My hon. Friend is also absolutely right to highlight concern about the threats, intimidation and harassment directed at those participating in public life, both online and in person—there have been some particularly egregious examples of that in recent times. We have to do everything we can to support those women who want to step forward. I am particularly concerned about the chilling effect that some of these threats and this intimidation have on extremely talented women who might want to step forward in public life, but will look at the circumstances that they might have to deal with and think, “Why would I want to expose myself to that?” We should all collectively be very concerned about that, and should redouble our efforts against this problem. That is precisely why I made the point—hopefully clearly—that wherever we encounter this kind of activity, we must report it.

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Wednesday 25th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

It is good to see the right hon. Member in good form, particularly—if I may say so—after his health scare, which he and I have discussed a number of times.

The right hon. Gentleman discusses a former leader of his party. He was the former Health Minister who presided over record waiting lists; he was the former Prisons Minister who left the prisons overcrowded; and he was the former economy Minister under Liz Truss. We are picking up the mess and turning it around.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

Q2. I very much welcome the fact that our Labour Government have recognised the state of Palestine. I also welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement last week as chair of the UN Security Council, setting out the UK’s commitment to increasing humanitarian access to Gaza and advancing a two-state solution. Does the Prime Minister agree that protecting civilians, upholding international law and supporting Palestinian-led governance are essential for a lasting peace?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important issue, because the ceasefire in Gaza remains fragile, and protecting Israeli and Palestinian civilians is critical to the next phase of the peace plan. I am proud of our commitment to a two-state solution, and we will be hosting the peacebuilding conference in March to build lasting peace and security for both Palestine and Israel. Hamas must decommission their weapons and destroy their terrorist infrastructure and can have no future role in running Gaza. While aid flows have increased, the level of need is still dire. The Israeli Government must stop blocking supplies and preventing the work of international non-governmental organisations. That is unconscionable, and it is costing Palestinian lives.

Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Thursday 12th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris Ward]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to say that victims should remain at the heart of this. In answer to his question on the legislation to strip Lord Mandelson of his peerage and on broader reform of the House of Lords process for removal, that will come forward as soon as possible. It will be in Government time, as I committed to last week, and we will bring that forward after the recess. It is obviously a Cabinet Office matter, so the Cabinet Office is accountable, but obviously the Prime Minister is accountable for this as well. As I say, we will comply fully with the motion, and we will publish material as soon as we can.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

Just over a week or so ago, I expressed my horror at what had passed and was shocked that we could not remove a peerage from someone who had brought the other place into disrepute, so I am very pleased to see how swiftly the Government moved on bringing in legislation to do so. Does the Minister agree that full compliance with regard to providing transparency of records as soon as possible is vital to ensure that we rebuild trust in politics and politicians?

[Chris Ward]

Yes, I absolutely do. As I say, we will comply fully and as quickly as possible. I completely accept my hon. Friend’s point about the removal process for the other place, and it is inexplicable that that is still the case. The sooner we can update that, the better.

US Department of Justice Release of Files

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

I agree wholeheartedly with the hon. Lady, and the Government have called for anybody with information to do just that.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

Many of my constituents, like all of us, will be horrified by the revelations regarding Peter Mandelson and the Epstein files, but they will also be shocked to know that the Government do not have the power to remove peerages. Does the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister agree that it is absolutely right to do whatever is necessary to modernise procedures to allow for the removal of peers and their peerages when they have bought the other place into disrepute?

[Darren Jones]

My hon. Friend is exactly right, and that is why the Government have written to the appropriate authorities in the other place today to request that that work is now started.

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Wednesday 10th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Olivia Bailey]

I recognise the significant anxiety felt by many trans people at the moment, and I want to be clear, as the Supreme Court was, that protections for trans people are enshrined in law. Trans people deserve to live their lives with dignity and respect, and without shame. We are committed to delivering the trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices, per the King’s Speech, as soon as possible, alongside strengthening LGBT hate crime laws and improving trans healthcare.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

2. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to promote equality as part of the Government mission entitled “Break Down Barriers to Opportunity”.

[The Minister for Women and Equalities (Bridget Phillipson)]

Background should never be a barrier to getting on. That is why we are expanding Best Start family hubs, rolling out free breakfast clubs, expanding childcare and delivering on our moral mission to tackle child poverty by scrapping the two-child limit, creating a fairer Britain where every child has the opportunity to succeed.

[Rachel Hopkins]

Last week, I met the 93% Club to hear more about its vital work to address the impact of social class on young people’s career and life chances. I welcome our Labour Government’s steps to widen opportunities for those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, such as the match funding for criminal barrister pupillages. What other action is this Labour Government taking to level the playing field, so that young people in Luton South and South Bedfordshire, and across the country, can access opportunities, regardless of their background?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has long campaigned on these issues. The central driving mission of this Labour Government is to ensure that background is no barrier to success. That is why we are expanding free school meals, lifting the two-child benefit limit, introducing a new youth guarantee and bringing in maintenance grants for disadvantaged students. Of course, we are also rolling out free breakfast clubs, and it was brilliant to visit Denbigh primary school with her to see one open.

Middle East

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Tuesday 14th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

We have made a significant contribution. As we go forward, we are looking at public and private commitments to the reconstruction project that needs to take place—not just the aid, but the rebuilding. That is a huge challenge that faces us all, and we will rise to that challenge with others.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement, and I hugely welcome the ceasefire and the initial Gaza peace plan, including the release of hostages and prisoners, the stopping of the bombardment of Gaza and the aid starting to trickle in. However, peace is fragile, so can the Prime Minister reassure the House of this Government’s long-term commitment to working with international partners to support the rebuilding of Gaza—physically and politically—to ensure a lasting peace and a pathway to Palestinian statehood?

[The Prime Minister]

I can give my hon. Friend that important assurance, and I thank her for her question.

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Thursday 25th July 2024 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Can we pick up the pace of questions and answers? We are on topicals now. Rachel Hopkins will set a good example.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

T2. Small businesses are the lifeblood of our high streets and communities, and they create local wealth and opportunities across Luton South and South Bedfordshire. They play a vital role in providing social value by distributing growth locally, meeting environmental targets and developing social wellbeing. Does the Minister agree that it is essential to put social value at the heart of the Government’s growth agenda?

[The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Georgia Gould)]

Growth is a central mission of the Government. We want to use all the levers available to us, including procurement, to support good growth, jobs and local communities.

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Wednesday 15th May 2024 Commons Chamber

[Kemi Badenoch]

It is interesting that a number of people have that perception that they should stay in their lane. This Government do not support any sort of activity that is segregationist. We believe that we must treat people equally under the law. All of our access programmes are available irrespective of ethnicity. People should be encouraged to serve the entire community, not just people who look and sound like them. Some of the schemes that I mentioned in my earlier answer are available. The hon. Lady should know that the Start Up Loans Company reported that in her constituency 42 start-up loans were issued to ethnic minority-led start-ups, for about £315,000, so there are opportunities out there. I am happy to write to her with more information if she needs it.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South) (Lab)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Minister for Women and Equalities (Kemi Badenoch)]

Institutions should be able to operate free from ideological pressures. I am delighted that the Equality and Human Rights Commission has retained its accreditation as an A-status national human rights institution, denoting full compliance with the Paris principles, despite Stonewall’s attempt to have it stripped of its status at the UN. As I have said before, Stonewall does not dictate the law in this country, or indeed in the UN. The Equality and Human Rights Commission, having retained its A-status, retains its independent participation rights at the UN Human Rights Council and remains able to report directly to the United Nations on human rights issues.

[Rachel Hopkins]

Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that 25.3% of women are economically inactive, compared with 18.4% of men. Many women say that access to flexible working could see them return to the paid workplace. What steps is the Minister taking alongside her Cabinet colleagues to ensure that all workers have access to flexibility in their working hours?

[Kemi Badenoch]

There is a lot that my Department in particular is doing. We have put out multiple bits of legislation that will help to entrench workplace equality, whether that is around flexible working rights or sexual harassment in the workplace. We are doing more even on the trade side, where we continue to ensure that we have provisions that advance gender equality in our free trade agreements because we want to break down barriers and create opportunities for female entrepreneurs.

Ministerial Severance: Reform

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Tuesday 6th February 2024 Commons Chamber

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

I beg to move,

That this House calls on the Government to immediately introduce legislation to amend the Ministerial and other Pensions and Salaries Act 1991 to ensure that—

(i) departing Ministers who have not attained the age of 65 receive an amount equal to one-quarter of their earnings over the previous 12 months as a Minister, minus any period covered by a previous severance entitlement, where that is lower than an amount equal to one-quarter of the annual salary paid to that Minister before their departure;

(ii) any person who returns to ministerial office after three weeks but within the period equivalent to the number of days of salary that they were paid in severance must return the corresponding amount of their severance payment;

(iii) no person departing ministerial office while under investigation for allegations of gross misconduct or breaching the ministerial code will be entitled to a severance payment unless and until they are cleared of those allegations by the relevant authority; and makes provision as set out in this Order, to take effect unless such a Bill has been introduced by no later than Monday 26 February 2024:

(1) On Tuesday 27 February 2024:

(a) Standing Order No. 14(1) (which provides that government business shall have precedence at every sitting save as provided in that order) shall not apply;

(b) any proceedings governed by this order may be proceeded with until any hour, though opposed, and shall not be interrupted;

(c) the Speaker may not propose the Question on the previous question, and may not put any Question under Standing Order No. 36 (Closure of debate) or Standing Order No. 163 (Motion to sit in private);

(d) at 3.00 pm, the Speaker shall interrupt any business prior to the business governed by this order and, notwithstanding the practice of this House as regards to proceeding on a Bill without notice, call the Rt hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury or another Member on her behalf to move the order of the day that the Ministerial Severance (Reform) Bill be now read a second time;

(e) in respect of that Bill, notices of Amendments, new Clauses and new Schedules to be moved in Committee may be accepted by the Clerks at the Table before the Bill has been read a second time.

(f) any proceedings interrupted or superseded by this order may be resumed or (as the case may be) entered upon and proceeded with after the moment of interruption.

(2) The provisions of paragraphs (3) to (18) of this order shall apply to and in connection with the proceedings on the Ministerial Severance (Reform) Bill in the present Session of Parliament.

Timetable for the Bill on Tuesday 27 February 2024

(3)(a) Proceedings on Second Reading and in Committee of the whole House, any proceedings on Consideration and proceedings up to and including Third Reading shall be taken at the sitting on Tuesday 27 February 2024 in accordance with this Order.

(b) Proceedings on Second Reading shall be brought to a conclusion (so far as not previously concluded) at 5.00pm.

(c) Proceedings on any money resolution which may be moved by a Minister of the Crown in relation to the Bill shall be taken without debate immediately after Second Reading.

(d) Proceedings in Committee of the whole House, any proceedings on Consideration and proceedings up to and including Third Reading shall be brought to a conclusion (so far as not previously concluded) at 7.00pm.

Timing of proceedings and Questions to be put on Tuesday 27 February 2024

(4) When the Bill has been read a second time:

(a) it shall, notwithstanding Standing Order No. 63 (Committal of bills not subject to a programme order), stand committed to a Committee of the whole House without any Question being put;

(b) the Speaker shall leave the Chair whether or not notice of an Instruction has been given.

(5)(a) On the conclusion of proceedings in Committee of the whole House, the Chairman shall report the Bill to the House without putting any Question.

(b) If the Bill is reported with amendments, the House shall proceed to consider the Bill as amended without any Question being put.

(6) For the purpose of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with paragraph (3), the Chairman or Speaker shall forthwith put the following Questions in the same order as they would fall to be put if this Order did not apply—

(a) any Question already proposed from the Chair;

(b) any Question necessary to bring to a decision a Question so proposed;

(c) the Question on any amendment, new clause or new schedule selected by the Chairman or Speaker for separate decision;

(d) the Question on any amendment moved or Motion made by a designated Member;

(e) any other Question necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded; and shall not put any other Questions, other than the Question on any motion described in paragraph (15) of this Order.

(7) On a Motion made for a new Clause or a new Schedule, the Chairman or Speaker shall put only the Question that the Clause or Schedule be added to the Bill.

Consideration of Lords Amendments and Messages on a subsequent day

(8) If any Message on the Bill (other than a Message that the House of Lords agrees with the Bill without amendment or agrees with any Message from this House) is expected from the House of Lords on any future sitting day, the House shall not adjourn until that Message has been received and any proceedings under paragraph (9) have been concluded.

(9) On any day on which such a Message is received, if a designated Member indicates to the Speaker an intention to proceed to consider that Message—

(a) notwithstanding Standing Order No. 14(1) (which provides that government business shall have precedence at every sitting save as provided in that order), any Lords Amendments to the Bill or any further Message from the Lords on the Bill may be considered forthwith without any Question being put; and any proceedings interrupted for that purpose shall be suspended accordingly;

(b) proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments or on any further Message from the Lords shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement; and any proceedings suspended under subparagraph (a) shall thereupon be resumed;

(c) the Speaker may not propose the Question on the previous question, and may not put any Question under Standing Order No. 36 (Closure of debate) or Standing Order No. 163 (Motion to sit in private) in the course of those proceedings.

(10) Paragraphs (2) to (7) of Standing Order No. 83F (Programme orders: conclusion of proceedings on consideration of Lords amendments) apply for the purposes of bringing any proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments to a conclusion as if:

(a) any reference to a Minister of the Crown were a reference to a designated Member;

(b) after paragraph (4)(a) there is inserted—

“(aa) the question on any amendment or motion selected by the Speaker for separate decision;”.

(11) Paragraphs (2) to (5) of Standing Order No. 83G (Programme orders: conclusion of proceedings on further Messages from the Lords) apply for the purposes of bringing any proceedings on consideration of a Lords Message to a conclusion as if any reference to a Minister of the Crown were a reference to a designated Member.

Reasons Committee

(12) Paragraphs (2) to (6) of Standing Order No. 83H (Programme orders: reasons committee) apply in relation to any committee to be appointed to draw up reasons after proceedings have been brought to a conclusion in accordance with this Order as if any reference to a Minister of the Crown were a reference to a designated Member.

Miscellaneous

(13) Standing Order No. 82 (Business Committee) shall not apply in relation to any proceedings on the Bill to which this Order applies.

(14)(a) No Motion shall be made, except by a designated Member, to alter the order in which any proceedings on the Bill are taken, to recommit the Bill or to vary or supplement the provisions of this Order.

(b) No notice shall be required of such a Motion.

(c) Such a Motion may be considered forthwith without any Question being put; and any proceedings interrupted for that purpose shall be suspended accordingly.

(d) The Question on such a Motion shall be put forthwith; and any proceedings suspended under sub-paragraph (c) shall thereupon be resumed.

(e) Standing Order No. 15(1) (Exempted business) shall apply to proceedings on such a Motion.

(15)(a) No dilatory Motion shall be made in relation to proceedings on the Bill to which this Order applies except by a designated Member.

(b) The Question on any such Motion shall be put forthwith.

(16) Proceedings to which this Order applies shall not be interrupted under any Standing Order relating to the sittings of the House.

(17) No private business may be considered at any sitting to which the provisions of this order apply.

(18)(a) The start of any debate under Standing Order No. 24 (Emergency debates) to be held on a day on which proceedings to which this Order applies are to take place shall be postponed until the conclusion of any proceedings to which this Order applies.

(b) Standing Order 15(1) (Exempted business) shall apply in respect of any such debate.

(19) In this Order, “a designated Member” means—

(a) the Rt hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury; and

(b) any other Member acting on behalf of the Rt hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury.

Today we seek the permission of the House to make time for legislation in the weeks ahead to reform the system for ministerial severance payments. Those payments were first introduced exactly 40 years ago for Ministers in the House of Lords, with rules that were almost identical to the ones that now apply to this House as well. Departing Ministers were to receive a quarter of their annual salary, equivalent to three months of pay, provided that they were under the age of 65, that they had been in post for at least two years, and that they did not return to the job within three weeks.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South) (Lab)]

I have informed the right hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Sir Brandon Lewis) that I will be referring to him personally in this debate. He is the only Minister of the 97 in question who has claimed two severance payments in 2022-23, totalling almost £33,000. The second payment was worth three months’ pay after just seven weeks in the job as Justice Secretary. Does my right hon. Friend agree that at the height of a cost of living crisis it was nothing short of a disgrace that the right hon. Gentleman felt entitled to claim so much money from the taxpayer when delivering so little in return?

[Emily Thornberry]

My hon. Friend is spot on. For those on the Government Benches muttering about claiming, it does not really matter whether the money was claimed, or if it was given to someone and not given back—the point is that the money was still pocketed by the right hon. Member for Great Yarmouth, and no one was expecting the rules to be used in that way. That is the point of this debate.

The payments were extended to other Ministers in 1991 based on a recommendation by the then Top Salaries Review Board, which commanded broad cross-party support. The only change from the previous rules was to remove the two-year qualifying limit, but it is worth noting that in every debate that preceded the 1991 legislation, MPs remained clear that these payments were intended for the benefit of long-serving Ministers, who were having to make what Geoffrey Howe called

“an abrupt and significant financial adjustment…on relinquishing ministerial office”.—[Official Report, 17 January 1990; Vol. 165, c. 311.]

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Wednesday 13th December 2023 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Equalities (Stuart Andrew)]

I agree with my hon. Friend that the circumstances of a person’s birth or where they live should not be a barrier to social mobility. That is why we have established things such as the Social Mobility Pledge consortium with businesses, and 120 have signed up. There are 12 community renewal fund projects serving her constituency and the wider area, and £1.2 million from the shared prosperity fund to achieve those aims.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South) (Lab)]

T3. The Etherton review was published five months ago, and we are due to have a statement later today. May I seek assurances from the Minister that the Department will work with the Ministry of Defence to ensure that its recommendations are published at pace?

[Stuart Andrew]

I completely agree with the hon. Lady. It was a very important review, and I am glad that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made an apology at the Dispatch Box. There will be a statement later, and I suggest that she asks the Defence Minister a question at that point.