UNESCO: 80th Anniversary

Seema Malhotra Excerpts

Tuesday 18th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd, and to have the opportunity to respond to this interesting debate.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire (Jonathan Davies) for securing the debate and opening it with such a rich introduction to the topic. I pay tribute to his work as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on UNESCO world heritage sites. In his opening remarks he made a powerful case, as did the other speakers, for education and culture as a force for peace and progress.

I welcome the £1 billion that has been spent by the National Lottery Heritage Fund. My hon. Friend explained some examples of that and the impact that funding has had. I also acknowledge the work of my the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Chris Elmore), who would ordinarily have taken this debate but is unable to be here today.

Eighty years ago, the world gathered in London to found UNESCO, committing to peace through education, science, culture and communication. I was really privileged to visit one of the sites mentioned several times in this debate, Giant’s Causeway, earlier this summer. It is an incredible site that highlights the importance of recognising the connection with place in our history and heritage and our role in protecting that.

The mission set out at the founding of UNESCO 80 years ago remains as vital as ever. The UK maintains a permanent delegation to UNESCO and funds the UK National Commission for UNESCO, ensuring the UK is an active and influential member state. Membership allows the UK to project its strengths in education, science and cultural heritage globally and reinforced its reputation as a thought leader and trusted partner, which is important for this work across the world in multilateral forums.

I pay tribute to one of Britain’s outstanding parliamentarians and a founding force of UNESCO, Ellen Wilkinson, who has been mentioned. She was a Fabian, a co-operator and Education Secretary, who championed the idea that education and culture could be powerful agents of peace and reconciliation in the period just after the war. Contributions today paint a picture of the choices that the Labour Government made in the immediate aftermath of the war, which set the foundations for long-term institutions that still form part of the way in which we build connection and peace across the world.

I congratulate Professor El-Enany on becoming UNESCO’s director general this week and wish him well in the role. Today, the spirit of peace and co-operation that was the hallmark of the founding of UNESCO is carried forward by communities across all our four nations, our Crown dependencies, our overseas territories and many examples illustrated in the debate today. I am proud of the 35 UNESCO world heritage sites that preserve our shared history. That includes the seven biosphere reserves, 10 global geoparks, and the United Kingdom’s 13 creative cities, with 10 cities of lifelong learning and schools that embed UNESCO’s values of peace, respect and understanding.

[Anna Dixon]

Will the Minister give way?

[Seema Malhotra]

I am conscious of time, so I will not give way. My constituency includes schools that embed UNESCO’s values. These UNESCO designations, as we have heard, cover 170 of our constituencies and are a testament to the UK’s rich heritage and global outlook.

I could not be more delighted that Aberystwyth has joined the UNESCO creative cities network as a city of literature, becoming the first ever Welsh creative city. This celebrates its centuries-old literary tradition and vibrant bilingual cultural scene, so we congratulate the people of Aberystwyth. I also congratulate the Isle of Arran on its recent designation as a UNESCO global geopark. Often referred to as Scotland in miniature, this recognition celebrates Arran’s outstanding geological heritage. Alongside these UNESCO designations, our scientists, experts, institutions and universities are working with UNESCO to build the UK’s trust, attractiveness and reputation on the world stage.

A national strategy for UNESCO was discussed today. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire on his work on the APPG and his continuing work as he listens further to Members about the need for sites in their areas. Heritage is a devolved policy area, and a number of strategy documents cover world heritage. At the UK level, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport takes a strategic approach to a range of world heritage policies, including the development of sites and engagement with UNESCO. The UK sites range considerably in size and type, and the challenges they face are often unique. The DCMS works closely with the world heritage site co-ordinators and agencies across the UK to monitor the condition of sites and update UNESCO as and when required, to ensure that a site’s outstanding value and world heritage status are maintained.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner) suggested that Stoke-on-Trent might become a creative city. I encourage her to speak to the UK national commission, which manages the process. Applications open every two years with the next one at the end of 2026.

On soft power, I agree that UNESCO membership allows the UK to project its strengths in education, science and culture across the world. That is an extremely important part of reinforcing our reputation as a trusted thought leader. I am pleased we participate in programmes and committees, including the intergovernmental oceanographic commission and the international hydro- logical programme, as well as networks such as UNESCO Chairs and UNITWIN.

Climate threats were mentioned a couple of times. DCMS and the UK national commission for UNESCO recently finished a pilot project to look at data and decision making in relation to climate change at UNESCO heritage sites. The learnings, the tools and the templates will be made available free of charge later this year.

Finally, I will make a small point about education. It is important to share local history. This is already a compulsory part of the national curriculum. In reforming the curriculum, we are clear that all pupils should have a robust understanding of our nation’s history. We will continue to include it and strengthen it in the national curriculum and the subject content of qualifications.

As UNESCO marks 80 years since its founding in London, its mission to build peace through education, science, culture and communication is as vital as ever. The UK remains committed to that mission and will work with partners to ensure that UNESCO reforms and delivers for today’s world.

Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill

Seema Malhotra Excerpts

Committee of the whole House
Monday 17th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Madam Chair, and to open this debate in Committee of the whole House on the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill.

Before turning to the detail of the clauses and of the amendments that stand in my name, I want to underline why it is so important that this House sends a clear signal today by progressing this legislation. This Bill will, along with subsequent secondary legislation, enable the United Kingdom to implement obligations in the United Nations biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction agreement into UK law, and enable us to move towards ratification of this historic agreement.

The House may also have seen that the BBNJ agreement was recognised by the Prince of Wales’s Earthshot Prize Council last week, which is a testament to the broad support for it. The BBNJ agreement is the culmination of nearly two decades of international negotiations. The agreement covers roughly two thirds of the world’s ocean, which is home to ecosystems that regulate our climate, support fisheries, drive weather patterns and sustain the livelihoods of millions around the world.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is such an important subject, and I appreciate the opportunity to ask a question on behalf of those I represent who are involved in fishing. The Bill and the international treaty it implements will affect the fishing industry primarily through the creation of marine protected areas and through the imposition of stricter environmental impact assessments. Does the Minister agree that this means engagement with our fishing sector is essential, and can she confirm that the viability of fishing and food security will be a priority for this Government?

[Seema Malhotra]

The hon. Member will know from previous conversations that we continue to engage with the fishing industry on all areas of policy. Fishing falls outside the scope of the Bill, but it is important that the Government maintain that dialogue.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

I welcome and support the Bill, which is an important step forward. It is a shame that it was not passed before the election so that it could have been dealt with in the wash-up of the previous Parliament. Will the Minister assure us that the Government will provide the necessary resources, and that the UN agencies are sufficiently funded, to ensure that this law becomes an effective protection for the natural world and the oceans that we all rely on?

[Seema Malhotra]

As the right hon. Member will have seen—I know that he has studied the Bill closely—we are looking to implement our obligations in line with many existing obligations. It has been important for us to hear from scientists and other involved parties that there should be no extra burdens and that we should consider how to move forward together. When we ratify the agreement, we will be party to the Conference of the Parties and able to participate in how future decisions are made. That will be important to understanding how the UK can incorporate decisions efficiently, effectively and with the fewest possible resources.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

I welcome the Bill’s enhancement of biodiversity and the protection of our oceans and natural world. How will the Bill help to unlock innovation in marine science?

[Seema Malhotra]

I will come to that later in my remarks. My hon. Friend makes a good point. Ratifying the agreement will also make it easier to share the benefits of research more widely and efficiently. That will allow those who might not be able to carry out such research themselves to use it and consider where innovations might be made. That is an important benefit of the Bill.

The Bill is the culmination of nearly two decades of international negotiations. The agreement represents a once-in-a-generation step forward in ocean governance, to ensure that areas beyond national jurisdiction are managed sustainably, transparently and equitably. Through the Bill, the United Kingdom will be able to play its full part in that effort. It will allow our scientists, companies and research institutions to participate confidently in the new frameworks on marine genetic resources, to contribute to the development of area-based management tools, and to meet international standards on environmental impact assessments in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Royal Assent early next year—subject to time in the House—will place the UK in a strong position to ratify the agreement and to take its seat at the first Conference of the Parties, which is expected to be in the second half of 2026. It is vital that the UK is at that table.

[Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)]

I am grateful to the Minister for giving way as she speaks about the importance of the UK taking global leadership. I welcome the Bill, but will the Minister complement it and show global leadership by announcing a new international taskforce dedicated specifically to protecting at least 30% of the Atlantic ocean by 2030?

[Seema Malhotra]

The hon. Lady will know that that is outside the scope of the Bill, but the measures will protect the world’s oceans—as I have said, the agreement covers roughly two thirds of them. Indeed, in all areas of our international work, we do all we can for the environment around the world.

--- Later in debate ---

[Seema Malhotra]

I will make a bit of progress—I thank my hon. Friend for his patience.

The Bill is divided into five parts. Parts 2, 3 and 4 align directly with three operational pillars of the BBNJ agreement: marine genetic resources, area-based management tools, and environmental impact assessments. I will address the Government amendments and clauses stand part now, but I will address the Opposition amendments in my closing remarks, so that I have had an opportunity to hear the shadow Minister’s contribution.

Part 1 sets out the definitions that underpin the rest of the Bill. Given that those definitions will be discussed at some length today, I say for the benefit of the Committee that “areas beyond national jurisdiction” comprise the high seas—waters beyond exclusive economic zones—and the area, meaning the seabed and subsoil beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, and “marine genetic resources” are defined as any marine material containing functional units of heredity of actual or potential value. Those definitions mirror the agreement and ensure consistency between domestic law and our international obligations. Clause 20 provides definitions for terms that are used in the Bill but not defined elsewhere in it.

In part 2, clauses 2 to 10 implement the provisions of the agreement relating to marine genetic resources. The provisions promote transparency in the collection and utilisation of marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction and associated digital sequence information, and provide the building blocks for benefit sharing.

Clauses 2 and 3 create reporting obligations for individuals collecting marine genetic resources using UK craft and for those utilising those resources and associated digital sequence information. Information must be provided to the Secretary of State before and after collection, and information about the results of utilisation should be provided in accordance with the schedule. Clause 4 provides that the Secretary of State may transmit to the BBNJ clearing house mechanism the information provided on collection and utilisation, unless it is protected from disclosure under domestic law. Those clauses are designed to implement the UK’s obligation on information sharing, with the clearing house mechanism facilitating transparency and helping us to deliver on our obligations while protecting information that is not to be shared.

Clauses 5 to 7 impose duties on those managing repositories that hold marine genetic resources from areas beyond national jurisdiction, or databases of digital sequence information on those resources. They must ensure that samples or data can be identified as originating from areas beyond national jurisdiction, provide access, and submit biennial reports. Clause 8 sets out exceptions from the requirements of part 2 in respect of fishing and fishing-related activities, military activities, and military vessels and aircraft, as well as anything done in Antarctica, the marine genetic resources of Antarctica, and the digital sequence information of such resources. The Committee will be aware that this is because the Southern ocean is governed by the Antarctic treaty system, which was part of the debate we had on Second Reading.

Clause 9 provides the Secretary of State with regulation-making powers, including those necessary to implement the UK’s future obligations under part 2 of the agreement. Given that the conference of the parties may adopt further measures once the agreement enters into force, those powers are essential to ensure that the UK can respond in a timely and appropriate manner. The clause also allows for provision for any enforcement of those requirements imposed by or under part 2 of the Bill. We will ensure that there is ample time for scrutiny of additional measures that may be brought in under secondary legislation.

Finally, clause 10 requires guidance to be published in relation to the above-mentioned provisions on marine genetic resources. Those will be prepared by the national focal point in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and will provide practical illustrations to help institutions and researchers understand the requirements placed on them. The guidance developed will also be laid before Parliament. Taken together, these measures create a clear, proportionate and internationally aligned system that allows UK researchers to continue their world-leading work with confidence, meeting the requirements of the Bill and, in turn, allowing the UK to meet its obligations under the BBNJ agreement.

[Jeremy Corbyn]

The Antarctic treaty, which was long and hard fought for in this House and other places, has been important and, generally speaking, very successful. But there are issues about the increasing access to the Antarctic, the pollution that this causes and the need to clean up after the substantial number of visitors that go there at present. Is the Minister confident that the resources will be available to ensure that the Antarctic treaty is fully adhered to?

[Seema Malhotra]

The right hon. Member will be aware that the UK also made a declaration upon the signature of the BBNJ agreement stating that the Antarctic treaty system comprehensively addresses the legal, political and environmental considerations that are unique to that region, and provides a comprehensive framework for the international management of the Antarctic. It is important to recognise that it is also about the international management of the Antarctic, to which we are committed as part of the international community. I thank the right hon. Member for his comments.

In part 3 of the Bill, clauses 11 to 13 implement the provisions relating to area-based management tools, including areas beyond national jurisdiction designated as marine protected areas. Clause 11 contains provision for the Secretary of State to be able to make regulations to implement decisions adopted by the BBNJ conference of the parties under part 3 of the agreement. Many activities under UK jurisdiction or control in areas beyond national jurisdiction, such as fishing, are already regulated domestically, and where existing powers suffice, the clause 11 power will not be needed. However, where new measures are adopted by the conference of the parties, where they require additional controls or restrictions, the clause ensures that the UK has the necessary legislative mechanisms to comply. Clause 12 sets out the parliamentary procedure for regulations made under clause 11.

Clause 13 provides a power for the Secretary of State to issue directions to UK craft, without the need for secondary legislation in order to implement emergency procedures adopted by the conference of the parties. As emergency procedures may require immediate action to prevent serious harm to marine biodiversity, regulations alone may not provide sufficient responsiveness. The clause enables swift operational steps, such as directing vessels to avoid a particular area. Clause 13 is modelled on existing direction-making powers available to the Secretary of State’s representative under schedule 3A to the Merchant Shipping Act 1995. Given the nature of any scenarios that could arise, it is power-limited in scope and emergency in nature.

Part 3 of the Bill ensures that the UK can meet its obligations and exercise leadership in protecting ecologically important areas beyond national jurisdiction.

[Matt Rodda]

The Minister is making an excellent speech, and I pay tribute to her work and that of the Government in showing UK leadership in this important environmental area. Could she also briefly touch on the importance of working in a multilateral way with partners from around the world, and—perhaps she will move on to this point later in her speech—could she outline how the UK will work with other countries to protect these areas and carry out other important work?

[Seema Malhotra]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that this is an area where obviously no nation can work on its own. It has to be done through being influential on the world stage, working through and with the UN, and with our international partners and other nations. Indeed, through the course of all of our conversations, be that in the FCDO, DEFRA or other Departments, we maintain dialogue on this and other important matters in relation to our environment and climate impact around the world. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that issue, because it is another example of where being outward facing as a nation, as this Government have chosen to do, is incredibly important for not just what we achieve at home but our responsibilities on the world stage.

I will make some progress on part 4 of the Bill. Clauses 4 to 19 implement the environmental impact assessment provisions of the agreement, where relevant to marine licencing, and ensure that UK marine-licensable activities and areas beyond national jurisdiction are subject to the appropriate level of scrutiny. Clause 14 amends the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 to ensure it can be used effectively to regulate planned UK activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Government amendment 1—a minor amendment—has been tabled to omit the heading “on the continental shelf”, which will adjust the 2009 Act so it more accurately reflects the content of this section, including the section that is amended by clause 14 in part 4 of the Bill.

Clause 15 updates the Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007 to bring them into alignment with the BBNL agreement. Government amendment 2 would add “or person” to subsection (5)(b) as a minor clarificatory amendment to the regulations. Clause 16 allows regulations to be made to implement the standards and guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties under article 38 of the BBNJ agreement. Clauses 17 and 18 ensure that equivalent provisions exist for Scotland, amending the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, and enabling Scottish Ministers to make regulations where it is a devolved competence, and to implement environmental impact assessment obligations for Scottish regulated marine activities.

Clause 19 amends the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, to ensure that any future environmental outcomes reports can apply to licensable activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The BBNJ environmental impact assessment provisions closely replicate our existing domestic arrangements for marine licensing, which operators are familiar with. These are minor technical changes to align our existing regime with BBNJ processes. Together the provisions deliver a coherent and modernised framework for assessing and mitigating the environmental impact of activities linked to the United Kingdom on the high seas.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sarah Champion (Rotherham) (Lab)]

I welcome this Bill. As chair of the Channel Islands all-party group, I was interested that the Minister tabled an amendment that covered just the Isle of Man. Before the Bill goes to the other place, could her officials please consult the Channel Islands one last time to make sure that they do not also need to be included in the Bill?

[Seema Malhotra]

I thank my hon. Friend for her comments, and yes we will continue those conversations with the Channel Islands.

To conclude, provisions in the Bill would be extended only to British overseas territories and the Isle of Man with their agreement. Clause 25 sets out when most of the Bill’s provisions come into force, and gives the Secretary of State power to make regulations to appoint entry into force and dates for other provisions. In summary, the Bill provides the legal foundation for the United Kingdom’s participation in the new global regime for protecting biodiversity on the high seas. It will enable us to fulfil our international commitments, provide certainty to our scientific and research communities, and demonstrate once again the UK’s leadership in marine conservation. I commend the Bill to the Committee, and look forward to engaging with hon. Members during the debate.

--- Later in debate ---

[Seema Malhotra]

In the interests of time, I will do my best to come back to Members on the amendments they have spoken to. The contributions from the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) and my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) showed the importance of a healthy marine ecosystem that underpins global fisheries and climate regulation. The BBNJ agreement is an essential step towards protecting marine biodiversity and the creation of marine protected areas in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

I will speak briefly about the amendments tabled by the shadow Minister and our reasons for not supporting them. I recognise his point about reducing burdens, which is on all our minds, and I thank him for tabling his amendments. However, the Government consider that amendment 4 is not necessary, as the ability to provide a single report already exists. If the person who controls the repository on which a report is required is the same person who controls the database on which a report is required, there is nothing in the Bill that prevents them from providing a single report covering both elements. I hope that is of some reassurance to the hon. Gentleman.

On new clause 1, I think it would be helpful to say that as we do not currently know when or if the powers in the Bill will be used, we believe that our approach of a post-implementation review after five years provides the necessary flexibility to review the implementation of the Bill at a more appropriate point. We therefore do not think that new clause 1, tabled by the shadow Minister, is needed.

On amendment 5, the purpose of the enabling provision for the charging of fees under clause 11(3)(c) is to allow for the recovery of costs associated with the carrying out of functions. This is standard practice to ensure effective use of public money, as set out in the Treasury’s “Managing Public Money” guidance. Regulations made under clause 11 that amend an Act of Parliament, create a civil sanction or vary the maximum amount of a monetary penalty, and so on, are regulations that also contain provision for the charging of fees, which are already made by the affirmative procedure. The shadow Minister may not have been aware of that detail, but I hope it will reassure him.

On new clause 2, we believe that the consequences of the various reporting requirements it would introduce would be disproportionate to the value it would provide. There is also a risk that it would duplicate existing processes, misalign with the international reporting cycle and increase the burden on entities providing information in the reports.

Finally, it may help to reassure the shadow Minister if I say that engagement with scientific stakeholders suggests that the notification and other requirements are unlikely to impose a significant burden. Indeed, the BBNJ agreement will benefit the scientific community by encouraging information sharing and supporting scientific and technological development. I hope that reassures him that we have considered his amendments and that we have reason for not supporting them.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 2 to 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 7

Supplementary provision

Amendment proposed: 4, page 5, line 4, at end insert—

“A single report may be submitted for the purposes of sections 5(2)(c) and 6(3)(c), provided that any such single report meets the requirements in sections 5(3) and 6(4).”—(Andrew Rosindell.)

This amendment would permit a single report to be provided to the Secretary of State for the purposes of fulfilling reporting requirements under clauses 5 and 6.

Question put, That the amendment be made.

--- Later in debate ---

[Seema Malhotra]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

If there is one message that Members should take from today’s debate, it is that this Bill is essential—essential to protecting the ocean, advancing marine science and ensuring that the UK continues to lead ocean protection efforts on the international stage. This is a landmark piece of legislation. It will, along with the subsequent secondary legislation, enable the United Kingdom to ratify the biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction agreement to protect marine biodiversity in the two thirds of our ocean that lie beyond any one nation’s control.

The Bill means that the UK can play its full part in shaping a fair, science-based international system for areas beyond national jurisdiction, one that balances conservation, sustainable use and global collaboration. It delivers on our international commitments and ensures that British scientists, institutions and innovators remain at the forefront of ocean research and biotechnology.

Let me take this opportunity to thank Members across the House for their thoughtful contributions and scrutiny of the Bill at every stage. The work of the all-party parliamentary group for the ocean and of environment Committees has been crucial to keeping the Bill high on the agenda. I am grateful to those who spoke on Second Reading, have taken part in the Committee of the whole House and have engaged constructively throughout. I would also like to thank my hon. Friend the Minister for Water and Flooding for her support throughout the passage of the Bill.

I also thank officials from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department for Transport, whose expertise, along with that of parliamentary draftspeople and other officials across Government, has underpinned the Bill. I thank, too, the devolved Governments for their engagement on the Bill and legislative consent processes. Finally, I acknowledge the scientific community, from the National Oceanography Centre to the National History Museum, and our universities, which have been pivotal in presenting the need for this legislation.

Let us be clear why this Bill matters. The ocean regulates our climate. It sustains global fisheries. It provides half the oxygen on Earth. Protecting it is not just an environmental choice; it is an economic, scientific and moral imperative. The previous Government began this process by signing the BBNJ agreement in 2023, but they delayed bringing forward legislation. This Government are now finishing the job, taking the necessary steps to implement their obligations in UK law and to ratify the treaty.

By passing this Bill, the House will send a clear message that the United Kingdom will continue to lead the world in the protection of our shared ocean, that we stand with our partners to deliver a healthy, sustainable ocean and that we will do so grounded in science and international co-operation. This is our responsibility today and for future generations. For those reasons, I commend the Bill to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Minister.

Modern Day Slavery: Pakistan

Seema Malhotra Excerpts

Thursday 13th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship today, Sir Roger, and to respond to this debate. I am grateful to my good friend, the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), for securing the debate, and for his work on the issue through the all-party group and by contributing to the cross-party report that was published last year. I am also grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Newport West and Islwyn (Ruth Jones) for her contribution, and to the Opposition spokespeople, the hon. Members for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding) and for Romford (Andrew Rosindell). I will endeavour to come back on all the points that have been made, and where I am unable to, I am sure we can follow up in conversations afterwards.

I am sure that the hon. Member for Strangford will want to join me as I express my deepest condolences to all affected by the tragic explosion in Islamabad earlier this week. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families, and with everyone on whom that terrible event has had an impact.

I am grateful to those who intervened in the debate, which has highlighted our shared determination to confront another grave injustice—modern slavery. I must also acknowledge the work of the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer). He is the Minister for the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and he would normally have responded to this debate, but he is unavoidably unable to be here. He and I speak regularly, and I am grateful for the opportunity to respond on his behalf.

Modern slavery refers to horrific situations in which individuals are exploited through coercion, threats, deception, forced labour and human trafficking. Despite the work that we have done and the abolition of slavery, which is such an important part of our history, so many forms of modern slavery still go on in the UK and across the world. We are determined, collectively, to do all we can to end it.

Bonded labour is a specific form of modern slavery, where a person is trapped working to repay a debt, often under conditions that make escape or repayment impossible. In the debate, we heard how Pakistan has an estimated 2.3 million people in modern slavery, including bonded labour, forced marriage and child labour. We heard about the billions of bricks made annually across the estimated 20,000 kilns, which employ more than 1 million workers. Many of those workers are trapped in debt bondage, because they take loans from kiln operators—sometimes for emergencies or basic needs, but the loans come with exorbitant interest that workers may not even be able to calculate, as well as unlawful deductions and a lack of transparent records. Children and entire families work to repay the debts, which are often passed down through generations. Some 83% of kilns surveyed had children working in them, many during school hours. Religious minorities, especially Christians and Hindus, are disproportionately affected. Up to 50% of kiln workers in Punjab and Sindh are from minority communities.

Let me reaffirm the UK’s clear and unwavering commitment: we are determined to end all forms of modern slavery, forced labour and human trafficking. We are working with partners to protect the most vulnerable, especially women and children, and to help survivors to rebuild their lives. That commitment shapes our engagement with Pakistan, and precisely because of that important relationship, we can engage frankly and constructively, including on human rights.

As we have heard, bonded labour remains a significant risk, particularly for already marginalised religious minority communities, which are disproportionately affected. We have welcomed moves by Pakistan to strengthen its response to forced labour and wider trafficking issues, including through its accession to the UN trafficking protocol in 2022 and the 2025 amendments to the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act and related laws.

As the all-party group identified, and as has been said today, legal enforcement remains a challenge. The UK’s approach has been to combine diplomacy with practical programmes that strengthen laws, data, institutions and community resilience, alongside discreet advocacy in sensitive cases. We know that progress is possible, because when evidence, political will and community action come together, exploitation can be prevented.

Let me say a few words about how the UK is helping, and then I will respond to some of the comments and questions. Through the UK’s £46.5 million Aawaz II programme, we support Pakistan at both policy and community levels. Nationally, the initiative helps to improve laws, policies and systems that protect marginalised groups; locally, it raises awareness, promotes behaviour change and supports people to engage constructively with the state to access rights and services. That has included practical work on bonded and child labour in sectors such as brick kilns. Because we cannot fix what we cannot see, the UK’s support has helped to deliver some of the first child labour surveys in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab, giving policymakers the evidence they need to act.

I should also mention our work in Balochistan through our Asia regional child labour programme—the FCDO’s largest modern slavery programme—between 2018 and 2023. We helped to set up a child protection system that is already linking vulnerable children to support services. That is part of a wider preventive approach that puts survivors at its heart, and it sits alongside the UK’s wider development partnership in Pakistan: investing in girls’ education, strengthening health systems and building community resilience.

[Jim Shannon]

I welcome all the things that the Minister refers to—they are good steps forward, and that is what I would expect—but we have all mentioned that the young children in the brick kilns are not even getting educated. Some 80% of them have no education whatsoever. How will the Government target that issue? The hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) referred, as possibilities, to more inspections in the brick kilns and more work with the NGOs. I welcome everything that the Minister has said, but those are the key issues.

[Seema Malhotra]

The hon. Member has raised those issues in the report, and I can come back on a few points.

Our UK aid is delivered in Pakistan via trusted partners with rigorous safeguards. Our programmes focus on systemic change, strengthening child protection systems, improving birth registration and supporting legal reform. Through Aawaz II and the Asia regional child labour programme, which I mentioned, we have helped to register more than 3.4 million children and established referral services that connect vulnerable children to protective services. I will talk a bit more about that work. We are also doing work through some of those programmes to tackle early and forced marriages, which are a problem in this space, and raising these concerns regularly with the Government of Pakistan, including at ministerial level.

The investments that we are making in our work with Pakistan also address the underlying vulnerabilities—poverty, exclusion, lack of documentation and lack of access to justice—that traffickers and exploiters so often prey on; they believe and say that people have no option. We will continue to use our diplomatic network to encourage effective enforcement against those who profit from exploitation and to champion the rights of workers and of children to be safe, to be in school, and to be free.

We know that modern slavery thrives where rights are weak and discrimination goes unchallenged. That is why, in parallel with our work to tackle modern slavery, we consistently raise human rights issues with the Government of Pakistan, publicly and privately. We call for respect, for due process, for the rule of law, and for the upholding of the rights enshrined in Pakistan’s constitution and international obligations. That is why the Minister for the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan has regularly raised these issues with his counterparts, including most recently in a meeting with Deputy Prime Minister Dar in August when he voiced concern about the persecution of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community. I know that is a very serious matter of concern to us all.

The British high commission in Islamabad regularly raises the subject of the rights and safety of religious minorities—such as Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and Ahmadis—with the Pakistani authorities at the highest levels. We also support interfaith dialogue; we support efforts to counter hate speech, especially online; and we support sensitive parliamentary engagement on laws that are misused to persecute minorities. We will continue to press for the protection of minorities, for full investigations where violence occurs and for accountability for those who are responsible.

Hon. Members have asked about our approach to modern slavery, and I will make this point about our work and our trade strategy. The Government have launched a review of their approach to responsible business conduct policy. That review will focus on the global supply chain of businesses operating in the UK, and it will be a neutral and objective appraisal of the UK’s current responsible business conduct approach and alternative options that aim to enhance that approach. The review will consider the effectiveness of the UK’s current responsible business conduct measures and alternative policy options to support responsible business practices, including mandatory human rights due diligence and import controls, among other measures. I am sure that hon. Members will want to consider their views in relation to that work.

When it comes to the UK funding more organisations that aim to tackle bonded labour, we recognise that UK resources are finite, as I am sure the shadow Minister does. However, we can prioritise programmes that deliver systemic change, and we can do that alongside our continuing advocacy. It is important that our UK aid is channelled through trusted partners. That requires due diligence and accountability, and we must ensure that it has impact and represents value for money. We welcome the all-party group’s recommendations and share its concerns. Although direct funding for inspectors is not currently in place, I hope that our programmes that focus on systemic reform, and that support legal enforcement, data collection and community empowerment, are having an impact. We keep that work under review.

In conclusion, the UK stands with those in Pakistan who are working to end modern slavery. We will continue to combine evidence-driven programmes with principled diplomacy to help to tackle bonded labour and strengthen the rights that keep people free. That is the measure of a just society, and it is a cause that the United Kingdom will continue to champion.

Sudan: Government Support

Seema Malhotra Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)]

I am very grateful to the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) for securing this debate at such a critical moment for Sudan, which I know will be a matter of concern not only to this House and to his constituents, but to all our constituents across the country. I also thank him for his contribution to this morning’s Westminster Hall debate on official development assistance —I know there are Members here who also spoke in that debate. I acknowledge his work on the International Development Committee and his work in aid prior to entering this House. I thank the other hon. Members who have contributed to this debate.

The hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes will have followed the urgent question on Sudan in the House last week, to which the Minister of State at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), replied. I am responding on his behalf tonight.

I recognise the seriousness of the situation that we are witnessing. The conflict has left more than 30 million people in need of urgent help in what is the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. Supporting Sudan remains a vital and top priority for this Government. We have heard a number of contributions about freedom of religion and belief, so perhaps I can briefly speak to that issue before I continue my remarks.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

The United Kingdom has always stood as a defender of human rights. I say this with deep conviction: how many burned churches and murdered worshippers in Nigeria and Sudan will it take before we call this what it is: namely, a campaign to exterminate Christians? British aid must never bankroll corruption or indifference. Will the Minister urgently press the Governments of Sudan and Nigeria to protect all citizens, but particularly Christians, and ensure that our aid goes towards addressing their needs?

[Seema Malhotra]

I thank the hon. Member for her contribution. Perhaps I can reassure her by saying that the UK remains extremely concerned about the persecution of individuals on the basis of their religion or belief, a point that has also been made by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) during the debate. We have strongly condemned the violence in El Fasher and north Darfur, as well as attacks on places of worship, including in other countries across the world. We also regularly use our role as leader of the core group on Sudan at the Human Rights Council to advocate for the protection of civilians in line with international law, including the right to freedom of religion and belief.

Turning to some of the other points that have been made, as has been referred to, we have recently seen advances by the Rapid Support Forces into El Fasher, accompanied by shocking reports of mass murder and rape. Last week, the Foreign Secretary condemned the horrific massacre at the Saudi maternity hospital, as well as the murder of five very courageous humanitarian workers, and called on the RSF to urgently facilitate rapid, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access across El Fasher. That point has been made extremely powerfully by my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds), who has raised this issue and the need to support action in Sudan several times in recent weeks. I thank her for her contributions.

As the United Nations Security Council penholder, we called an urgent council meeting on 30 October to respond to the worsening crisis, and penned a press statement condemning the RSF’s assault. Last week we mobilised £23 million in emergency aid for El Fasher, and on 1 November the Foreign Secretary announced a further £5 million to help get food, clean water and medical supplies to over 100,000 people in north Darfur. Our special representative to Sudan, Richard Crowder, remains in contact with the RSF and its political alliance, Tasis, pressing for restraint and reminding it of its obligations under international law. We are also talking to international partners, calling on those who have influence over the parties to use it to urge restraint and bring them to the table.

The hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes made a very important point when he said that this cannot go on—we need to find a way to establish a ceasefire and ensure that we have a political solution. As such, our approach to Sudan is based on three pillars: first, pushing for that permanent ceasefire and supporting a civilian-led transition; secondly, securing unimpeded humanitarian access in order to deliver lifesaving aid; and thirdly, protecting civilians and ensuring accountability.

In April, as has also been referred to, the UK convened the London Sudan conference, alongside co-hosts France, Germany, the EU and the African Union. That conference brought together a broad coalition of international partners to build consensus on protecting civilians, improving humanitarian access and ending the conflict.

We have sustained the momentum built by the conference, and at the UN General Assembly in September the Foreign Secretary hosted high-level events, alongside our conference co-hosts, refocusing global attention on the crisis and the urgent need for action. That call for a continuation of global attention has been echoed by a number of Members this evening. The UK special representative for Sudan has maintained regular engagement with Sudanese civil society—including the anti-war coalition Sumud—and has done so, for instance, through the Sudan stability and growth programme, which aims to support Sudan on the path to an inclusive, resilient and peaceful political settlement. UK support has helped to establish Sudan’s largest pro-democracy coalition, and has included work with 200 women to shape a national political dialogue.

[Rachael Maskell]

I am grateful to the Minister for what she has said, but can she tell me how the UK is approaching the UAE, especially in relation to the supply of arms and the use of mercenaries who are being deployed into Sudan?

[Seema Malhotra]

I should first make it clear—as the Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth, did recently—that we take very seriously allegations that UK-made military equipment may have been transferred to Sudan in breach of the UK arms embargo. The UK has one of the most robust and transparent export control regimes in the world. There is no evidence in recent reporting of UK weapons or ammunition being used in Sudan, and there are no current export licences for the equipment reported on. However, my hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) may wish to continue to raise her concerns with my hon. Friend the Minister of State.

The UK continues to emphasise that external support for warring parties only fuels the conflict, and we urge all actors to press for that vital political solution. We welcome the Quad’s efforts to secure an immediate three-month ceasefire, and to end this terrible suffering. Conversations continue with members of the Quad and others across the international community.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

rose—

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

rose—

[Seema Malhotra]

I am conscious of time and will continue my speech, although I may be able to give way in due course.

On humanitarian aid, the UK remains one of the largest donors to Sudan, and the Prime Minister has made it clear that funding to Sudan will be protected for the next three years. At the London Sudan conference in April, we also announced £120 million in new funding to reach more than 650,000 people with food, cash, water, sanitation and nutritional support this year. In May, Baroness Chapman announced a further £36 million for Sudanese refugees in Chad to help to ease the regional burden of displacement, and UK aid has already reached 2.5 million people since the conflict began. Last year alone, we treated more than 98,000 children for malnutrition, gave 744,000 people access to clean water, and supported 71,000 victims of international humanitarian law violations with cash assistance.

[Tessa Munt]

Will the Minister give way, on that point?

[Seema Malhotra]

I will, very briefly.

[Tessa Munt]

Returning to the conference, is the Minister absolutely certain that all the actors in the region were part of the conference? There has been reference to the United Arab Emirates, and there are other actors in that region who did not seem to be on the list of people she mentioned who might have been here in April.

--- Later in debate ---

[Seema Malhotra]

We continue to work with the members of the Quad, and with others across the international community. In our role as penholder we continue to engage with the international community, because we need to see a ceasefire and a political solution.

[Sarah Champion (Rotherham) (Lab)]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

--- Later in debate ---

[Seema Malhotra]

I will try to give way later. In relation to support from the UK—

Official Development Assistance Reductions

Seema Malhotra Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond, and to respond to an incredibly thoughtful and important debate. I am grateful to the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) for securing this debate, and I thank him for his work on the Foreign Affairs Committee and multiple APPGs.

The Minister for Multilateral, Human Rights, Latin America and the Caribbean, my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Chris Elmore), who covers development in the Commons, would have been here to participate in the debate, but is currently representing the UK at the world summit for social development in Doha. I am sure that the House will understand his unavoidable absence. I am grateful to respond on behalf of the Government. I will endeavour to cover a number of the points that were raised today, but I am sure that my hon. Friend will also be willing to pick up on some of those issues that hon. Members have put on the record. I also thank the Chair of the International Development Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion), for her work, her remarks today and the Committee’s recent report, which the Department will be responding to in due course.

A number of issues were raised today, and the same very important point was made by a number of hon. Members about the connection between our security and global security. We continue to be clear-eyed about risks to security, which are at the forefront of our minds. We believe that international development is an important lever in delivering mutually beneficial outcomes, including security for us and across the world. A number of other issues were also raised, including on soft power influence in the world, long-term planning, shaping the world of tomorrow and aid matching. Let me add context to those challenges and the question of whether this Government are looking inwards more than outwards. The whole direction of our Government over the last 18 months has been to step up on the global stage. We are a Government who inherited a very difficult set of finances, but more than that, we inherited a broken Government in so many respects, which had stopped looking outwards and had lost respect and trust across the world.

I am proud that we are a Government focused on our responsibilities and place in the world. I am proud of the work that we have done to bring stability to our economy, but we are also now focusing on the long term here and abroad. That is also illustrated through some of the main trade deals and resets that we have had with the US, the EU and India, but we have been upgrading our partnerships with so many countries. I recently participated in the Aqaba process in Italy, hosted by the Italian Prime Minister and the King of Jordan, with a focus on counter-terrorism, development and support in the Sahel region. It is important that we recognise the links between security and prosperity across the world.

Earlier this year, to enable a necessary increase in defence spending, the Government made the decision to reduce our official development assistance budget. We have consistently affirmed the UK’s commitment to international development and to restoring spending of 0.7% of GNI on ODA when the fiscal circumstances allow. It is also the case—this point has been made by a number of hon. and right hon. Members—that it is not all about how much we spend, but about how we spend. It is crucial also that we modernise our approach for today. A more volatile and uncertain world demands a new development model. With less money, we must make choices and focus on the greatest impact. Every pound must deliver for the UK taxpayer and the people we support.

I note the comments about corruption and misappropriation, and I will say that from the conversations I have had with Baroness Chapman, I know that ensuring that we are spending wisely and have value for money—this has been identified as a strength of the UK by the International Development Committee—are top of her list. It is important that we keep that focus.

It is worth spending a little time on our strategy and what is at the heart of our new approach and fundamental shift. First, we are moving from donor to investor, partnering with countries to unlock growth, jobs and trade through innovative finance and private sector investment. Secondly, we are moving from service delivery to system support, helping countries build their own education, health and economic systems, so that they can thrive without aid. Thirdly, we are moving from grants to expertise, leveraging UK strengths such as our world-class universities, the City of London, the Met Office, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and the education, health and tech sectors. Fourthly, we are moving from international intervention to local leadership, working increasingly in partnership with local actors, rather than through internationally driven interventions. That does speak to the point that a number of Members made about partnership rather than paternalism.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Seema Malhotra]

I am conscious of time, so I will make some progress.

[Sarah Champion]

You have lots of time.

[Seema Malhotra]

I have a number of points to make, but I will come back once I have made them. On changing from donor to investor, a number of comments were made about British International Investment and other development finance institutions. These are central to the UK’s shifts. BII deploys patient capital to stimulate private-sector growth in developing countries, balancing financial returns with development impact. Indeed, we have seen our partnerships grow, such as with the Gates Foundation. Our co-investments with the Gates Foundation in breeding wheat with higher zinc and climate resilience have benefited more than 97 million people in Pakistan, positively impacting their health and quality of life. In Ghana, the UK is using its development relationship to support Ghana’s goal to move beyond aid. A Ghanaian textile factory financed by British International Investment has grown into one of west Africa’s largest, providing 6,000 jobs, mainly for women, and exporting garments globally.

[Sarah Champion]

It is of course the Government’s right to make whatever policy decisions and budget cuts they feel appropriate, but how are they planning to do the four priorities with a 25% cut in staffing and a £6 billion cut in the available money?

[Seema Malhotra]

I will go through how we will take some of the priorities forward and some of the changes that we are seeing through our strategy. I hope that helps answer my hon. Friend’s question. I want to make a point about our investment in Gavi, of which we were a founding member under the last Labour Government. It has generated £250 billion in economic benefits through reduced death and disability. It is a partnership based on the UK’s world-leading expertise in not just funding but research.

From grants to expertise, that partnership comes up in conversations that I have with countries that I work with as Minister with responsibility for the Indo-Pacific. It is important in terms of how we are working to increase the expertise of partners, including the Bank of England, the City of London and the University of Cambridge. We are helping to train financial regulators across countries, and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs’ partnership with the Ghana Revenue Authority used the UK’s expertise to increase Ghana’s tax revenue collection by £100 million last year—revenues that will help fund Ghana’s transition from aid.

I am conscious of time, but I will make a few further remarks. Reducing the overall size of our ODA budget will necessarily have an impact on the scale and shape of the work that we do. But we are sharpening our focus on three priorities, which match partner needs and the long-term needs of people in the UK, and are also in areas where we can drive real change. These priorities have been highlighted in this debate—humanitarian, health, and climate and nature—and they are underpinned by economic development. They will help maximise our impact and focus our efforts where they matter most.

I reassure the House that the UK will continue to play a key humanitarian role, including responding to the most significant conflicts of our era, in Ukraine, Gaza and Sudan. We will not let Sudan be forgotten. We are the third-largest bilateral humanitarian donor to Sudan, and in April we announced £120 million to deliver lifesaving services to over 650,000 people affected by the conflict.

[David Taylor (Hemel Hempstead) (Lab)]

On that point, will the Minister give way?

--- Later in debate ---

[Seema Malhotra]

I am sorry, but due to time I will be wrapping up. At the weekend, the Foreign Secretary announced a further £5 million of support to the crisis in el-Fasher. While we have seen cuts, we have avoided disproportionate negative impacts on women and girls and people living with disabilities in this year’s ODA allocations, as confirmed by the equalities impact assessment that we published. We will continue to strengthen actions to help mitigate some of the negative impacts on equalities, including by putting women and girls at the heart of everything we do.

I will make a final point in relation to the ODA budget for supporting refugees in the UK. The Government are focused on reducing asylum costs and ending the use of migrant hotels by the end of the Parliament, and we have already made progress on that. The UK remains committed to international development. We are working with our partners to shape the next stage of global development, and at the same time, we are strengthening the UK’s safety, security and prosperity—and global safety, security and prosperity—which is essential for delivering all the missions of this Government.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (in the Chair)]

Edward Morello, you have less than a minute.

Oral Answers to Questions

Seema Malhotra Excerpts

Tuesday 28th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

8. What assessment she has made of recent trends in the level of human rights violations in Hong Kong.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)]

The continued erosion of democratic rights and freedoms in Hong Kong is deeply concerning. Last week, the Foreign Secretary submitted to this House the Government’s latest six-monthly report on Hong Kong, which details how national security legislation is diminishing Hong Kong’s political autonomy. The Government will continue to champion the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong.

[Alison Bennett]

A constituent of mine, who now lives in Haywards Heath, came to the UK from Hong Kong under the British national overseas visa route after the deterioration of human rights there left her and her daughter with no choice but to seek safety. She is now deeply anxious about reports that the qualifying period for settlement and citizenship may be extended. I think the whole House can agree that the human rights violations in Hong Kong are abhorrent, so what representations has the Minister made to her Chinese counterparts, and can she explain how she will protect BNO visa holders who have made their home in the UK?

[Seema Malhotra]

Indeed, we agree that any attempts by foreign Governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics or others abroad, especially in the UK, will not be tolerated. The Government are also strengthening efforts to tackle transnational repression, including through the introduction of dedicated police training and online guidance to support victims. Indeed, we are committed to the people of Hong Kong, as exemplified by the BNO visa route. It is our historical and moral commitment, and the hon. Lady will be aware, in relation to the changes in the immigration White Paper, that the Government will bring forth more details about the consultation and work in due course.

[Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)]

Two pro-democracy parties in Hong Kong have disbanded recently, activist Joshua Wong was rearrested and faces further charges under the national security law, and Jimmy Lai remains in prison. Does the Minister agree that the national security law continues to be used to erode the rights and freedoms of Hongkongers, and can she confirm that the UK continues to strongly oppose it?

[Seema Malhotra]

I can absolutely confirm that we continue to oppose the national security law. As outlined in the report that the Foreign Secretary presented to Parliament last week, the Hong Kong authorities continue to apply national security legislation to diminish the city’s political autonomy and political pluralism, including freedom of association, freedom of assembly and freedom of information. Indeed, Hong Kong now ranks 140th out of 180 in the 2025 world press freedom index—entering the red zone for the first time. This is indeed a very serious situation.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lauren Edwards (Rochester and Strood) (Lab)]

I recently met the family of Davinder Singh Thandi, who died in suspicious circumstances in India. This has obviously been a distressing time for my constituents, and unfortunately they have struggled to get timely advice and support from the Foreign Office. I thank the Minister for her recent letter, but will she meet me to discuss their case and how the Department can develop a victims code to better support families like Mr Thandi’s?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)]

I thank my hon. Friend for her letter, and I am very happy to meet her to discuss this matter.

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

Last week the Chancellor accepted that Brexit has caused huge damage to the economy. This week sources suggest that the Prime Minister is being advised to go further in his realignment with the European Union, as the Office for Budget Responsibility is reportedly forecasting a new black hole of around £20 billion—again showing the impact of Brexit on growth. Is the Foreign Secretary ready to admit that no matter how people try to spin it, Brexit has been an all-out disaster for Scotland and these islands?

Black History Month

Seema Malhotra Excerpts

Thursday 23rd October 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Black History Month.

I am honoured to open this debate on Black History Month, which, for the second year running, is being held in Government time. It is a chance to honour those who came before us, to celebrate their lives and their courage, and to recognise the huge contribution that our black communities make in Britain today.

In her powerful opening speech in last year’s debate, my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare) made the very clear argument that black history is British history. She said:

“the lives of black Britons are the building blocks of our nation, from the Roman occupation to the Windrush generation; because history is never static, but a story constantly being told and re-told over again; and because the voices of black Britons have so often been marginalised and dismissed, ignored and overlooked.”—[Official Report, 24 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 446.]

She was right: generation after generation, black Britons have been present on the frontline of efforts to break down barriers, even when set against persistent and sometimes hostile opposition.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the Minister and the Government for bringing us this debate. What the Minister said applies to my constituency of Strangford. People from Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda, Egypt, Pakistan and India contribute to the work-life and economy of Strangford, as well its culture, religion and history. I think we all recognise their contribution, and the Minister is making that point in an absolutely excellent way.

[Seema Malhotra]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. He describes powerfully the contribution to his community and our country of those from all backgrounds and nations.

[Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)]

This week, it was reported that the hon. Member for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam), who is herself a descendant of Dutch Jews, and whose family lost members during the Holocaust, spoke about the desirability of creating a “culturally coherent” society, and her plan to return many UK residents to their “home”. Such rhetoric fans the flames of racism and division. Does the Minister agree that this is their home?

[Seema Malhotra]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments. I think we are all shocked by such sentiments. I am the daughter of two people who came to the UK in the 1960s, and I think that the intervention from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) better reflects the contribution made by immigrants to this country. People must recognise that this is our home, this is our country, and we do belong here.

During the debate, we will hear about the excellent contributions that those from minority ethnic communities have made to civil society, sport, politics, the armed forces, arts, business and much more, because this country’s heritage of black excellence is long and proud. Black History Month is a reminder of the legacy of those whose talent and fortitude took them and this great country forward, often in deeply challenging circumstances. We should remember drivers of change, from Ignatius Sancho, Ottobah Cugoano and Olaudah Equiano in the 18th century, to Claudia Jones, Trevor Carter and Olive Morris in the 20th century; and we celebrate the black change-makers we see today, from Idris Elba and Naomi Campbell on the world’s great stages, to those in Parliament, such as my right hon. Friend the Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), who is in her place, and Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon. I am sure the whole House will want to join me in wishing her a very happy birthday tomorrow. All are icons, visionaries and change-makers of our time, and we demand that this be a country where everyone is able to get on in life, regardless of their race.

Although fighting injustice has brought progress, the fight has not been without pain and sacrifice. Let me say a few words about where we find ourselves today. We see the growth of right-wing populism in Europe and the United States, and it is for progressives to defend our values of decency, tolerance and respect. We recognise the way people feel today, and the impact of the rise in racism, and together we must send a message that we will fight it once again.

People of colour across the country have told me about fearing for themselves, their families and their future. All of us are coming together as a nation in a coalition that unites, rather than divides. Doing so in Parliament today is crucial. A senior businessman contributing millions to our economy recently told me that when he went for a pub lunch in Buckinghamshire, he was told to “go home”. He was home. We thought those days had gone, but we are reminded that the progress we have made in law, culture and values must be defended, and that today we must consciously make the choices that will build the Britain of tomorrow. That makes it even more important that we remember and continue to tell the stories of those who came before us, and learn from the past.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

In 1835, John Kent became the first black police officer not just in the Carlisle constabulary, but in any police force in Britain. I recently approached Historic England to ask that John Kent be commemorated with a blue plaque in Carlisle. Does the Minister agree that John Kent’s plaque should be just one of hundreds that Historic England should add to commemorate and celebrate the contribution of black Britons?

[Seema Malhotra]

That is a very powerful point. It is vital that we recognise the contribution made by those from minority ethnic communities to our history, public services, economy and society. We stand on their shoulders today.

I was pleased this week to visit Bristol and the historic M Shed Museum, which tells the story of the city. It brings that story to life through marvellous displays on the Bristol bus boycott, the Colston statue and the transatlantic trafficking of enslaved Africans. Those powerful exhibitions provide the historical context of Bristol’s role in movements for race equality and social justice. I met community leaders and got a real sense of the lived experiences and challenges, and heard views from those on the ground about how we drive real change. I was also grateful for the conversations with my hon. Friend Baron Rees of Easton in the other place.

Yesterday, at M Shed in Bristol, I had the privilege of meeting the Bristol bus boycott elders, including Guy Reid-Bailey, and hearing directly from them about the Bristol bus boycott, which helped bring about the Race Relations Act 1965, introduced by a Labour Government. Guy was 17 years old when he was refused a job as bus driver because of his colour. At the time, that was legal. He told his youth worker, Paul Stephenson. Of course, Paul was furious, and he spoke to the bus company—in vain; it refused to change its mind. With the help of Roy Hackett, Audley Evans, Owen Henry and Prince Brown, they called for a boycott, because if their labour was not good enough, nor was their money.

Two days later, on 29 April, the Bristol bus boycott began. Together, blacks and Asians marched peacefully, with purpose, shoulder to shoulder. Students from the University of Bristol and sympathetic Bristolians marched with them, in solidarity. They were joined by their local MP Tony Benn, and even Parliament’s very first black life peer, Sir Learie Constantine, loaned his support. Of course, he too had infamously suffered from the colour bar some years earlier.

After four months of marching with dignity for equality, on 28 August 1963, the bus company caved in and agreed to employ people of all colours. This victory for equality happened on the same day that Martin Luther King gave his iconic and immortal “I have a dream” speech during the march for freedom on Washington DC.

[Paulette Hamilton (Birmingham Erdington) (Lab)]

Madam Deputy Speaker, will the Minister give way?

[Seema Malhotra]

I will.

[Paulette Hamilton]

Will the Minister outline what steps she is taking to ensure that equality and opportunity are at the heart of this Government’s five missions?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Just to help Back Benchers, when you intervene on a Member, it is up to them whether they want to take the intervention; you do not need my authority.

[Seema Malhotra]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question and the work she does. She will be aware of the importance of tackling barriers to opportunity, and that everyone, regardless of their race, background, religion or colour, should be able to get on in life. That mission of tackling barriers to opportunity is one of the key priorities of this Government, and I will certainly be talking further about the work we have done in the last year, and will continue to do in this Parliament, to ensure that Britain is a place where anyone and everyone can achieve their ambitions.

I was speaking about the important date of 28 August 1963. Three weeks later, on 17 September, Raghbir Singh, a Sikh, became Bristol’s first bus driver of colour. On a personal note, it was also in 1963 that a young Sushil Kumar Malhotra made his way to the United Kingdom from India by ship to start work as an engineer in London. This was the environment in which my father took his first steps in the United Kingdom. His journey, like the journeys of many whom I met yesterday, was one of courage; he was navigating a United Kingdom that, at the time, had no race laws. He was setting up in life, dreaming of and hoping for a better future for his family.

In Bristol yesterday, local community artist and activist Julz Davis recounted the story of the impact of the Bristol bus boycott and subsequent campaigning against the colour bar by Paul Stephenson, who passed away last year. His campaigning caught the attention of future Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson, who contacted Paul and promised to bring in a race relations Act if elected. Harold Wilson kept his promise, and Labour introduced the Race Relations Act in 1965, the UK’s first ever anti-racist law. It was strengthened in 1968, 1976 and 2000 before being superseded by the Equality Act 2010. This year, we proudly mark the 60th anniversary of the Race Relations Act, and our theme for this Black History Month is, “Legacies of Action: understanding 60 years of change and challenge”. The racism that our forebearers experienced and that shaped their everyday lives must not be forgotten, even as we continue to make progress to redress the past.

As we continue to acknowledge and celebrate the lives and achievements of black Britons, I want to mention a few others. Last summer, I joined Lord Simon Woolley, principal of Homerton College and deputy vice chancellor of the University of Cambridge, for his charter night. As the first black man to lead an Oxbridge college, he and other inspiring leaders, such as Professor Ijeoma Uchegbu and Sonita Alleyne, two other black Cambridge college heads, are transforming one of the oldest academic institutions in the world, helping to ensure that our institutions are inclusive and truly representative.

While we celebrate Maro Itoje proudly captaining England and the British and Irish Lions this year, we remember the racist abuse that John Barnes received from his own fans at the height of his career in the 80s and 90s and, indeed, the more recent racist abuse of black England players, called out by England manager Gareth Southgate as “unforgivable”. In so many ways, we as a nation have come far, but the battle is not yet won.

We know that it remains the case for too many people in 2025 that their access to opportunity is determined not by work ethic or talent, but by assumptions based on race and ethnicity; that people who have lived here for generations, who work hard in our schools and hospitals, who defend our country, who raise families and who shape the very fabric of our communities up and down the country are told, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) highlighted, that they do not belong here. We can all be clear that there is still so much to do. Indeed, the fight for racial equality is not over.

Throughout its history, Labour has consistently built on the foundations of the Race Relations Act 1965 to outlaw discrimination based on race in employment and housing and to place legal duties on the police and public bodies. Each new law took crucial steps to build a fairer society and has laid the foundation for progress that continues today. That is why we are building on past successes to tackle racial discrimination today, and it is what drives our mission to break down the barriers to opportunity and put equality at the heart of our plan for change.

Today we can celebrate the most diverse Parliament in our history and a series of further firsts, such as my right hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy) becoming the first black Deputy Prime Minister and the first black Lord Chancellor. Over the last year, I am proud of the work that we have done in government, in the Windrush reset that we announced last October and in taking forward our work on equalities.

Let me say a few words about the appalling injustice of the Home Office Windrush scandal. I said last year that the fact that people who came to Britain to help at a time of great need should later be made to feel that they did not belong here was, and remains, an outrage. Ros Griffiths, chair of the Friends of Windrush Square, opened the “Windrush Untold Stories” exhibition at the Home Office this week. She said:

“When the Empire Windrush arrived at Tilbury Docks in 1948, it brought more than passengers, it brought promise. It brought teachers, nurses, engineers, artists and dreamers. It brought a generation that helped rebuild Britain after the war, laying the foundations for the society we live in today.

But Windrush Untold Stories reminds us that history is not only what is recorded, it is what is lived. For too many, that journey of hope became one of hurt. The Windrush scandal revealed the pain and injustice experienced by people who had given so much to this country.

This exhibition is about bearing witness, reclaiming dignity and ensuring that the lessons of the past are never forgotten. It is also about celebrating the resilience, creativity, and brilliance of the Windrush Generation and their descendants, people who despite adversity, continued to build, to create and to love.”

The exhibition has been displayed as part of this Government’s fundamental reset of the approach after the Home Office-Windrush scandal, in which we have re-established the Windrush unit in the Home Office and recruited a Windrush commissioner—the Reverend Clive Foster MBE—who will serve as an independent advocate for those affected by the scandal, assure delivery of the Windrush compensation scheme and make recommendations to embed lasting change in the Home Office and across Government. We have implemented the new single named caseworkers process for the Windrush compensation scheme to streamline the process and increase transparency. I am proud that we have also launched a £1.5 million grant-funding programme for organisations at grassroots level to provide advocacy and support for people who need help with the compensation scheme application process.

No serious ambition to face those challenges and tackle inequality is possible without also prioritising the perspectives of those affected, with communities telling us the nature and impact of discrimination. We must do what too many Governments before us have neglected to do: listen. That is why, in March, we announced a new race inequality engagement group, chaired by Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon, to help the Government’s plans to seize opportunities and remove barriers to racial equality.

The group’s core aim is to strengthen the Government’s links with ethnic minority communities, enabling effective two-way dialogue on the Government’s work to tackle race inequalities. The group met for the first time in June at 10 Downing Street, at a meeting joined by the Prime Minister. In September, I joined the group as it held its first thematic roundtable in Birmingham, one of our most diverse cities. There, the group closely examined the actions taken by the National Police Chiefs’ Council to build trust and confidence with black communities through the vital police race action plan, and reviewed the work with the British Business Bank and others on tackling barriers to finance for ethnic minority entrepreneurs.

Everyone has the right to feel safe and protected by those who have been granted the power to uphold the laws of this country. That is a minimum expectation. We have a long tradition of policing by consent: order is maintained primarily by a trusting relationship between the police and the community. That must apply to every community, without exclusion or exception.

I am also proud that we are building on the foundations of the past to deliver a legislative programme to address many of the inequalities that persist in our society. We are committed to introducing mandatory ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting for large employers. Our public consultation on ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting closed in June, and we are considering the responses in order to inform our next steps in developing the legislation. The measures will be taken forward in the upcoming equality (race and disability) Bill, which we have committed to publishing in draft within this parliamentary Session. We will work closely with businesses on developing and implementing that commitment to ensure that reporting is beneficial and helps to identify tangible actions.

[Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)]

I appreciate that the draft will be published in this Session, but when the Minister has more information on the timeline for its publication—before or, as is more likely, after Christmas, for example—will she update the House so that we can get ready to scrutinise it and assist with her work, which we very much support?

[Seema Malhotra]

Indeed, the hon. Lady and I have sat on many a Committee to scrutinise legislation, and I understand the desire for clarity. There are still stages to go through to ensure that we fully consider the responses to the consultation, and work with the Leader of the House on bringing forward that draft legislation, but I will endeavour to keep the House updated on progress.

We know that claimants face significant barriers when bringing pay discrimination claims on the grounds of ethnicity or disability. That is why we have committed to making the right to equal pay effective for ethnic minorities and disabled people.

I look forward to today’s debate. I thank all hon. Members who are here to take part in what I am sure will be a celebration of a defining characteristic of our country: its diversity. We recognise that that diversity is in the very fabric and essence of our institutions and our society. The languages we speak, the food we eat and the culture we enjoy are a result and reward of a country that is confident with difference, that faces outward to the world, that is proud of its identity, and recognises, as we all do, that what is so important is that we have more in common.

Indeed, the story of our nation is a story still being written—a story of contribution, of recognition, of hope, of ambition, of partnership, of continuing conversation, listening and learning, and of ensuring that all voices are in the room. I will share a quote that I read yesterday at the Rebel Curators project in Bristol:

“We share a common history, but yours is quite different you see, so when I talk about liberty, it is through my eyes that it must be. And if we have to rebuild then I think first you should ask me.”

In this Black History Month, we mark not only the stories of individual achievement, but the story of a nation—because black history is British history. Parliament must foster that collective national spirit. It must be a place that reflects the richness of modern Britain and drives the work of reconciliation through inclusion, representation and opportunity. Our strength is in our unity of purpose. When every community can see themselves in the national story and know that national purpose cares for them, and when every young person knows that there is space for their firsts too, then we will truly be the country that we claim to be.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

If the House will indulge me, when listening to the Minister I was thinking about my own parents’ stories, especially that of my mother, who would carry me into this country. Who would have thought that I would make history by sitting here in the Speaker’s Chair? But my mother’s story is far more relevant, and her name is Farzand Begum.

I call the shadow Minister, and my constituency neighbour, Mims Davies.

Equality Act 2010: Impact on British Society

Seema Malhotra Excerpts

Wednesday 10th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan, and to respond to the debate, and I thank the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) for securing it. It is important that we discuss these issues in this place and have a debate about what evidence we use in these debates, whether some evidence should be challenged and what opportunities there are to look at other pieces of evidence differently. It is important to continue to have an evidence-based discussion, be respectful when we challenge the premises on which we choose to build our opinions and come back to what we all want to see: equality of opportunity for all.

On the first point on which I gently—or perhaps not so gently—disagree with the hon. Gentleman, I fundamentally believe that equality enables freedom for people to be able to live their lives, to rent and to work, without fear of discrimination or prejudice holding them back.

An important point was raised in this debate: we all want and believe that everybody should be equal under the law. They should be and I hope that they are, but there is a fundamental question about what happens when somebody is discriminated against and how our legal framework can bring redress. We are talking not about whether we believe in equality, but whether we believe that the law should defend people’s equality, and whether that is a value we all subscribe to.

Let me say something about how this has become about identifying whether someone is British. Let me tell the hon. Member for Romford that I am proud to identify as British before anything else, as somebody who was born in Hammersmith. He may also want to challenge those who, on my appointment as a Foreign Office Minister this week—perhaps he did not get the same on his appointment as a shadow Foreign Office Minister—told me that I was another foreigner and should go home. This is my home. This is my country. This is my Parliament. It is important that everything we say in this House defends our democracy and people’s right to live their lives in this country equally.

It is important that we understand our responsibility as legislators to ensure that we have a legal framework that defends people’s rights, particularly against a rising climate of hate and racism. I am sure that all Members across the House, whatever their background, will want to ensure that all their constituents—many of whom will have lived here for decades, bringing up their families, being law-abiding citizens, paying their taxes, contributing to our public services, starting and growing their businesses—are protected under the law. It is extremely important that we do not go backwards on the rights and freedoms that we protect under our legislation.

I welcome this opportunity to champion the positive impact of Labour’s Equality Act 2010. This year is the 15th anniversary, which is an important chance to recognise the other side of the argument: the achievements of that historic, landmark legislation. The Act was passed by giants of our movement, and I pay tribute to the right hon. Baroness Harman for her work on it. With a vision of bringing legislation together to simplify it and avoid different parts competing against one another, Britain’s equalities provisions were consolidated into one Act of Parliament, cementing rights in Britain for generations to come, empowering people who experience discrimination with the knowledge that they have the law and systems on their side and, importantly, giving them redress when it is needed.

[Claire Coutinho]

I thank the Minister for her speech. Labour Members always try to equate protections against discrimination and harassment with the entirety of the Equality Act but, as many have said, protections against discrimination and harassment existed before the Act. They also exist in many other pieces of legislation, such as the Public Order Act 1986 and the Malicious Communications Act 1988. What answer does the Minister have to my questions about the public sector equality duty, which talks about advancing equality by taking specific action to address disproportionate participation? That is where we have seen some internships excluding young white people, for example.

[Seema Malhotra]

Let me make a couple of remarks in response to the right hon. Lady’s challenge. It is important that our legislation is used in a way that follows the letter and spirit of the law. I do not want to see debates like this become culture wars. We want to be led by the evidence.

The right hon. Lady raised the issue of white working-class males. We have seen in the data that there is an underperformance among that group, which is really important. It is unacceptable that any young person is either not given the opportunity to succeed or not supported. Over the next year, it is our priority to tackle head-on the gap facing white working-class pupils, which the right hon. Lady will know because she is an avid follower of what the Government are doing. It is important that we look at where there is underperformance statistically and whether there are systemic issues in relation to that. This autumn, our schools White Paper will set out an ambitious and practical plan for tackling generational challenges; that is important, and I am sure the right hon. Lady will want to contribute to the Government’s work in that respect.

I will come back to a couple of other points should time permit, including about positive action provisions, which relate to the right hon. Lady’s own Government’s guidance. The positive action provisions in the Act allow limited exceptions to the general position that one group should not be treated better or worse than another. Lawful positive action is always voluntary and must relate to one or more of three conditions: addressing a disadvantage associated with a protected characteristic; providing for a protected characteristic group’s specific needs; or tackling disproportionately low participation by a group. The previous guidance, published in 2023, makes it clear that that is very different from positive discrimination. The right hon. Lady knows that mandatory quotas to recruit or promote people from a particular group irrespective of merit would be unlawful.

I want to make some points about the progress we have seen under the Equality Act and equality legislation, from ending child labour through to votes for women and the Race Relations Act—Labour’s first equality legislation around 60 years ago. Social progress often means that what was once controversial becomes a new normal—a new baseline. Indeed, legislation can change culture, just as culture can change legislation. I am proud that we are in what I hope is a more equal society—one that is more tolerant and believes in respect for each other—compared with the environment that my parents found when they first came to Britain to work, to contribute and to be in business. My mum was a teacher. What they experienced was dramatically changed by the legislation that was brought in, and that gave me opportunities. I remember being spat at when I walked down the street in Feltham and other places, but we are now in an environment where everyone should be able to grow up proud of who they are and able to play their part equally in British society.

Our landmark legislation was a triumph for how the whole nation, including business and unions, came together. I am incredibly proud that we have seen progress, from the implementation of the minimum wage to scrapping section 28 and bringing in same-sex marriage. If we were to scrap all our equality legislation, we might want to answer the questions that would be raised by Members of Parliament who are in same-sex relationships and who have married their partners. I could draw on the example of my hon. Friend the Member for Central Ayrshire (Alan Gemmell) and others. If we rolled back all our equality legislation, what would we be saying to them about how they have been able to come together, marry their loved ones and live their life in Britain, just as we should allow anybody to marry the person they love?

A handful of people in this House would like to take us backwards, to a time before our values were underscored in law and before fairness was put at the heart of our legal framework, but I believe it is important to be proud of the rights we are afforded by the Equality Act. I am a little unsure of the time I have remaining.

[Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (in the Chair)]

You can enjoy a little more time.

[Seema Malhotra]

I have a few additional remarks. Our Equality Act had a number of objectives: first, to bring together myriad pieces of primary and secondary legislation that had built up, so that we could have one clear, coherent framework that the British people could feel confident in; secondly, to modernise some of the language and concepts used, to make them clearer and more accessible, such as the fact that discrimination linked to breastfeeding is sex discrimination; and thirdly, to strengthen the law by, for example, introducing protection from discrimination by association across various protected characteristics. ACAS guidance gives as an example of the latter a parent being unfairly dismissed from work because of time taken off at short notice to care for their disabled child.

It is important to recognise the progress we have made and where we want to go further. Building on the success of gender pay gap reporting, we committed in our manifesto to introduce mandatory ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting for large employers, and to make the right to equal pay effective for ethnic minority and disabled people. The hon. Member for Romford might be interested to know that we have been working on that with business, and that many large businesses already follow such practice. We had a consultation and call for evidence, which we are looking at before coming back to the House. Leaders of successful international businesses have told me that more transparency and awareness enables a shift to a more inclusive culture, raising awareness and improving transparency. It also improves staff morale and satisfaction, respect for others and their backgrounds, and understanding—all things that I believe the hon. Member would be keen to see for his constituents and for others across the country.

Let me address some of the other points made in the debate, starting with addressing head-on the point about the definition of Islamophobia and the ongoing working group. Members will have heard it said in Parliament before that, should the Government accept the recommendations of the working group, the definition used will be non-statutory. It will enable the Government and other relevant bodies to have a greater understanding of the unacceptable treatment and prejudice against Muslim communities.

We have seen a massive rise in hate crime against the Muslim and Jewish communities, which accounts for about 71% of hate crime in the past year. As the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho) knows, the working group’s proposed definition must be compatible with the unchanging right of British citizens to exercise freedom of belief and expression, which includes the right to criticise, express dislike of or insult religions and/or the beliefs and practices of adherence. We fundamentally believe in freedom of speech but we do not believe in hate. It is important to have a legal framework that supports people’s rights to have their own freedom of religion and belief, without fear of what could happen to them.

We see our work on equality and tackling barriers to opportunity as being at the heart of how we support positive and inclusive growth for our economy and communities. The strong equalities framework drafted by the previous Labour Administration, further enhanced by the commitments of this Government, is ultimately about fairness for all, and will see us boost productivity and household income, getting more money in people’s pockets and raising living standards for all as we deliver the next phase in our programme of government renewal.

Let me come back on the comment about rainbows on roads and pavements. I remember that during the pandemic rainbows were everywhere, for what they symbolise in so many ways, including a commitment to equality. Perhaps the issue of road repairs is less about rainbows drawn on pavements and roads and much more about the cuts made under the previous Government. My local authority saw a 60% cut in income in the first 10 years of the Conservative Government. That had a massive impact on how we were able to renew and maintain infrastructure in our community. The hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) should know that dealing with roads and potholes is a priority not just for central Government but for my local government in Hounslow.

In conclusion, I want to be clear that the Government are very proud of the Equality Act 2010 and remain committed to improving equality and fairness for all through our Employment Rights Bill and other legislation. I look forward to seeing that come forward in our legislative programme.