partytracker.uk — a sourced record of what Britain's political parties say and do, party by party, with every entry linked to a primary source

Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,832 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

1. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Brian Leishman

   Israel and Palestine

   Like my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West (Naz Shah), I believe that historical context is essential when it comes to this debate, because Britain has been an important participant in creating the situation that Palestine and Israel are in. Our country’s role as the former colonial power in Palestine—issuing and implementing the Balfour declaration of 1917 and presiding over the dispossession and disenfranchisement of the Palestinian people—is an awful stain that has got deeper with the failure to stand up for the inalienable rights of Palestinians in the decades after the Balfour declaration. Britain was an architect in establishing Israel, but over time the relationship has changed. Britain and Israel have become a partnership largely defined by imperialism, colonialism and capitalism, and the oppression, apartheid and poverty that those traits have created. Co-operation between the British and Israeli Governments goes beyond the “normal” relations that most nations have. It was a year ago that the then Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, welcomed the Israeli President, Isaac Herzog, to No. 10 Downing Street. The House should remember that President Herzog is the man who said that an entire nation was responsible for the October attacks perpetrated by Hamas, and that the collective punishment of Palestinians was right. President Herzog came to protest against British positions, including the potential—at the time—recognition of a Palestinian state and Britain supporting humanitarian efforts. The result of the meeting was not a resounding condemnation of Herzog’s abhorrent views, but instead the Government stressing that Israel is a long-standing ally and the importance of our ongoing partnership with Israel. The appeasement of the president of a state that carries out a genocide is a much more recent stain on our nation. The time for the UK to show international and moral leadership, as we did last week, was long overdue. Like many others in this place, I welcomed the change in outlook from our new Prime Minister and our Government with the Foreign Secretary’s statement. It was a real change and a massive step towards Israel being held to account for its blatant, flagrant and repeated violations of international law, but it must be just the start. Our Government must act much more quickly, because Palestinians cannot wait six to nine months. They are still subject to human rights abuses because of Israeli state-sanctioned settler violence. The UK should not be financially facilitating that a day longer. I say to the Minister that the UK Government must target the infrastructure that funds, sustains and supports Israel’s unlawful occupation and impose measures on key entities, including Israeli Government Ministries that are implicated in establishing, maintaining and providing material support to illegal settlements and settlement infrastructure. The UK Government must end any political, diplomatic, financial and military support that contributes to Israel’s serious and systematic violations of international law. The Government should suspend the UK-Israel trade and partnership agreement and impose targeted sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes, against Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel Katz, Orit Strook and all Israeli officials directly implicated in ethnic cleansing and the forcible transfer of Palestinians in the west bank. There is no doubt in my mind that we have witnessed a genocide take place, so the UK must now act swiftly in response by ending all political, diplomatic, financial and military support that contributes to Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza. The UK must sanction the Israeli officials most implicated in the commission of genocide and commit to executing ICC arrest warrants. Finally, the UK must support South Africa’s genocide case against Israel in the ICJ, just as the UK has done in support of The Gambia v. Myanmar case. To finish, I wish to reiterate that our Government have done the right thing in shifting our position, but we must go further and quicker if we are to repay the historical debt that we owe the Palestinian people.

   Hansard source
2. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Bell Ribeiro-Addy

   Water Sector: Public Ownership

   It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for introducing the debate. My constituents are fed up of mismanagement, debt, and simultaneous price hikes and shareholder bonuses. They are also fed up of hosepipe bans, while water runs down our streets. Since April 2025, our bills have risen by 31%, and this year by an additional 3.4%. What do we get for that? Sewage dumps, burst pipes and drinking water that I advise all Members—if they do not know this—not to drink without boiling or filtering first. Thames Water is one of the worst polluters in England and, last year, got one star from the Environment Agency—I think that is only because it has not figured out how to colour in half a star or a quarter of it. Unfortunately, Thames Water is not just crap; it is also full of crap—9,189 sewage spills last year alone, and nearly 592 million litres of water lost to leaks every single day. The company then has the cheek to call a hosepipe ban. The Thames cannot be seen from my constituency, but anyone who wants a riverside experience can just walk down Brixton Hill, where water is usually gushing from some leak, causing havoc and gridlocked traffic on the main road or some of the residential roads—a reality TV version of “The Hunger Games”, with residents scrambling for bottles of water that have been left there during an outage. Keeping the company under private ownership just delays the inevitable Government bailout—essentially, us paying twice. I believe that the great privatisation experiment has failed in nearly every public service industry in which it has been tried. Some may call me ideological for this, but I point them to Thames Water as a case in point. We do not need a crystal ball, or even a referendum, to tell us that there would be overwhelming support for public ownership, so I ask the Minister: why has it not happened yet? Why has Thames Water not been put in special measures? Why will it not simply be brought under public ownership?

   Hansard source
3. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Barry Gardiner

   Water Sector: Public Ownership

   I hope I do not shock my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies), who made an excellent speech in opening this debate, when I say that I do not want a referendum to bring the water industry back into public ownership. I just want Ministers to get on and do it. The Secretary of State has the power under the Water Industry Act 1991 to petition the High Court for any water company to lose its licence for either poor performance or insolvency. Poor performance? Discharging untreated sewage into our waterways across England and Wales 568,674 times in just one year—I call that poor performance. That is the reason that Ofwat and the Environment Agency have been imposing fines of more than £100 million a time on water companies. No river in England meets good chemical status, and only 14%—one in seven—achieve good ecological status overall. Section 94 of the Water Industry Act sets out that companies have a principal duty to provide sewerage systems. They also have a principal duty to comply with their statutory duties under regulation 4 of and schedule 2 to the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994. The Secretary of State can apply to put a company into a special administration regime if it has contravened, or is likely to contravene, any principal duty. They have; she should. On insolvency, let us turn to Thames Water’s disservice of my constituency of Brent West. Under section 24 of the Act, the company can be taken into an SAR if it “is or is likely to be unable to pay its debts”. Thames Water’s gearing is 88%. Major pension funds have written off their £956 million stake in the company, and it has failed its licence obligation to maintain investment-grade status.

   Hansard source
4. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Barry Gardiner

   Water Sector: Public Ownership

   No, I will not. The company’s credit rating is now junk status. The only way it claims it can pay its bills is if the regulator allows it not to do its job of meeting its environmental performance obligations. For goodness’ sake, we do not need a referendum. We need a Secretary of State who is prepared to use the legislation that was provided for the purpose of defending the public.

   Hansard source
5. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Barry Gardiner

   Water Sector: Public Ownership

   I fully agree with all that the hon. Lady is saying. Does she find it strange that, although we talk about taking tough action against these companies —we talk about Thames Water’s £80 million rebate and the more than £100 million fine—it is not the investor who ends up paying that, but we the billpayers? Even then, it is not the companies’ investors who suffer; it is us.

   Hansard source
6. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Barry Gardiner

   Water Sector: Public Ownership

   First, I reassure my hon. Friend that she is not an irritating Minister at all; I think she is generally held to be a very good Minister. Can I tempt her to enlarge slightly on what she said? When we talk about an SAR, people say, “Let’s start with Thames Water—it is the obvious one to start with.” Might the reason for the Minister’s hesitation to elaborate be that the Government are now looking much more holistically at what could be done with the whole water sector?

   Hansard source
7. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Bambos Charalambous

   Water Sector: Public Ownership

   It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. The current model for our water service is not working for customers and has not been working for quite some time. My constituents have watched their bills rise again and again while Thames Water falls further into debt and water bosses are rewarded with huge bonuses, despite failing to invest in critical infrastructure and allowing more sewage pollution into our rivers, lakes and streams. These failures in investment, infrastructure and environmental performance have undermined public confidence, and customers have been unable to take their business elsewhere, because the water companies operate through regional monopolies. I commend the Government for trying to tackle some of those issues, but tougher regulation is not enough to deal with a model that is fundamentally broken. Thames Water is in approximately £19 billion of debt, but the rescue deal on the table is a market-led recapitalisation by its creditors that will keep the failing private ownership model intact in exchange for environmental leniency. Water is an essential service and a natural monopoly, so it is reasonable to ask whether the interests of taxpayers are best served when the ownership of our water is determined by private investors. Bringing Thames Water into public ownership, either permanently or initially through a special administration regime, would allow the Government to write down debt on fairer terms than any creditor-led deal and to direct further revenue toward infrastructure and customers, rather than debt servicing and returns to shareholders. We must restore public confidence and end the era of profiting from pollution and prioritising shareholder returns over taxpayers. Our water services are too essential to be treated simply as another commercial asset. The water privatisation of the 1980s is a failed ideological experiment that has seen profits plundered into the pockets of hedge funds and offshore investors, while the sector has been starved of investment. Not a single reservoir has been built since 1992, and there has been under-investment in our antiquated pipes and overflowing sewerage system.

   Hansard source
8. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Bambos Charalambous

   Water Sector: Public Ownership

   I support my hon. Friend 100%. We urgently need the infrastructure, because we have seen the impact of drought and the need for hosepipe bans as a result of not having the infrastructure in place. As I was saying, not a single reservoir has been built since 1992, and the underinvestment in our antiquated pipes and overflowing sewerage system is plain to see. This is not good enough. That is why public ownership is the only way forward, and why I urge the Government to put Thames Water back into public ownership as soon as possible.

   Hansard source
9. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Apsana Begum

   Battle of Cable Street: 90th anniversary

   It is an honour to lead this Adjournment debate. Let me say at the start that another colleague wants to speak, and I will take two very short interventions from Members I have had conversations with before the debate. Next month, on 4 October, thousands of people from east London will be marking the 90th anniversary of what is commonly known as the battle of Cable Street, when the Jewish community and allies stood together to march off Oswald Mosley and his blackshirts. The victory is held up today as a high water mark for so many causes, including anti-fascism, grassroots Jewish activism and cross-community solidarity. It echoes from 1936 to the present in so many ways. Antisemitism and hate crimes are again on the rise in Britain. Just last week, a man was charged after making a Nazi salute outside a synagogue. Of course, we must never forget the victims of the recent antisemitic attacks in north London—including the stabbings in Golders Green earlier this year—and the abhorrent Heaton Park terrorist attack a year ago, which took the lives of Melvin Cravitz and Adrian Daulby. We are also seeing the return of far-right and racist agitators who seek, much like Mosely, to exploit the struggles of working-class people in this country and sow hatred, intolerance and division. In the UK, migrants and asylum seekers are a sharp target. The anti-migrant pogroms in Belfast were just one among many chilling incidents of racist violence in recent months.

   Hansard source
10. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Apsana Begum

    Battle of Cable Street: 90th anniversary

    The hon. Gentleman is absolutely correct that communities must work with one another to deal with the challenges of our time—particularly the rise of racism and fascism, which we see across the world. Far-right parties are winning elections across western Europe, so we must look seriously and carefully at our own history and how we overcame those challenges in the past. Fascism was not defeated in Britain in a single day, but no day contributed as much as 4 October 1936. I am pleased that the Minister, a fellow London MP, is here, along with my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Rushanara Ali), in whose constituency Cable Street is now situated after the boundary changes in 2024. We are here to debate the 90th anniversary and understand how the battle came to be. By 1934, the British Union of Fascists was concentrating its efforts on building a menacing street movement in inner-city areas. In east London, the BUF had four large branches. Thousands of supporters were based in a diverse and economically struggling area, where the largest minorities were of Irish Catholic and east European Jewish heritage. About 100,000 Jews lived in east London, where shop signs were written in Yiddish and more than 100 synagogues and shtiebels were established. Fascists attempted to set Irish Catholic and Jewish communities against each other, accusing Jews of taking English jobs, smashing their market stalls and attacking and beating Jews returning from synagogue or from shopping. On 26 September 1936, Mosley announced his intention to march provocatively right through those Jewish neighbourhoods and hold rallies with his supporters, but within two days 100,000 signatures were collected by the Jewish People’s Council—a local grassroots campaign formed only that year—to petition the then Home Secretary for a ban on the march to “retain peaceable and amicable relations between all sections of East London’s population.” Local mayors and local MPs including one of my predecessors, the great Labour MP George Lansbury, handed in the petition, yet shockingly the then Home Secretary refused and instead decided to send 7,000 police officers to protect Mosley and the blackshirts. Just hours after the refusal was issued, the Jewish People’s Council began to distribute leaflets calling on citizens of London to make sure the fascist march would not take place. Far from being a spontaneous uprising, it took an extraordinary amount of effort to organise east London’s resistance. The Jewish People’s Council worked frantically to mobilise Jewish and non-Jewish communities locally, while Communist party, Independent Labour party and trade union branches all mobilised the area’s textile workers, dockers and railway workers.

    Hansard source
11. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Apsana Begum

    Battle of Cable Street: 90th anniversary

    The right hon. Member is correct. The debate is about recognising those really courageous, brave efforts. He speaks of his family’s contribution, as his parents were at the battle of Cable Street; over the years, I have spoken to him about his parents’ stories. By the time that the human blockade was formed, tens of thousands of protesters had gathered at Gardiner’s corner at Aldgate, hugely outnumbering the 4,000 fascists and their 7,000-strong police protection. It is important to remember that younger anti-fascists—children as young as 12—acted as runners delivering messages and directing for reinforcements. Far too often overlooked is the role of women, who leafleted and organised workers in the run-up to the march and in their thousands defended barricades on the day. To clear a path for the fascists, the police brutalised protesters with truncheons and attempted to charge their horses through their path. Hundreds of Jews and anti-fascists engaging in self-defence were seriously injured or arrested, and later accused by the police of having instigated the violence. Police were unable to force their entry via Aldgate or Whitechapel after huge confrontations there and eventually closed in on Cable Street. They broke through the first barrier at Cable Street, but fierce resistance pushed them back. By late afternoon, Mosley was instructed to retreat westwards. The police withdrew, and that evening celebrations erupted across the east end of London. As the daughter of migrants who moved to east London, I feel it is all too important to consider how community solidarity and resistance continued in the aftermath. The BUF did not disappear overnight, but anti-fascists were able to build on the battle to form a confident and united mass movement in the east end of London. Leafleting and public campaigning took place to keep out Mosley’s fascists in local elections held five months later, while initiatives such as the Stepney Tenants Defence League were pivotal in uniting the Irish and Jewish communities that Mosley had attempted to divide. Jews stood with Irish Catholics, and vice versa, against evictions and exploitation by landlords. They made it clear that their struggle was a class struggle, and this cut away at the remaining support for the BUF’s antisemitic politics in east London. For me and for anti-racists across east London and far beyond, this is an enduring inspiration. Many of those present spoke movingly about the cross-community solidarity that they saw at Cable Street that day. They included people such as Charlie Goodman. Charlie was arrested at Cable Street and after three months in prison went on to fight for the republicans in Spain. He spoke of the “Orthodox Jews with long silk coats and soft felt hats and the sidepieces standing shoulder to shoulder with Irish Catholics, dockers and Somali seamen…they all felt there was a need to be out there to stand on that particular day.” In other words, they knew that an injury to one was an injury to all. This, too, is how subsequent generations of east-enders have united in the face of hostile racist threats. Indeed, in the decades after Cable Street, east London’s Bangladeshi community, especially its youth movements and socialist and trade unionist allies, mobilised in response to the racially motivated murder of a 25-year-old textile worker, Altab Ali, in 1978. A huge demonstration marched Altab Ali’s coffin to Downing Street to demand their rights, while Bangladeshis and anti-racists together organised night patrols to protect communities from neo-Nazi threats. In the 1990s, communities on the Isle of Dogs in my constituency came together to confront the British National party. Trade unionists, the Bangladeshi community and allies once again organised huge demonstrations and mobilised across communities to challenge the BNP’s support base. Ahead of the 75th anniversary of the battle of Cable Street, the English Defence League was marched off Whitechapel, and even more recently the United Kingdom Independence party failed in its attempt to drive a crusade towards mosques last October and in its provocations again in January this year. Generation after generation of east-enders have had to confront attempts to divide our neighbours, to target, attack and intimidate them and to spread fear in our communities. As the historian, educator and author David Rosenberg has often reminded us, the anti-fascists at the battle of Cable Street did not have a blueprint, but they left us one with their sheer courage. As difficult as this may be for some, we must also pay attention to the catastrophically poor decisions from the police and political establishment at the time. The shameful decisions of the then Home Secretary amounted to tacit consent for the fascist assault in east London. His mounted police cracked skulls and arrested scores of protesters, some of whom received custodial sentences with hard labour for defending themselves and their communities. Six fascists were arrested, compared with 79 anti-fascists. Others, including the then Labour leadership, urged members to stay away from Cable Street that day. However, rank and file members, trade unionists and grassroots socialists all saw the necessity of defeating the blackshirts and continued to organise and mobilise. The victory at Cable Street has been memorialised in the iconic Cable Street mural, a major piece of public art unveiled in 1983 on the wall of the former St George’s town hall. It depicts a chaotic scene of mass resistance and street battles, and is itself a grassroots piece of cultural resistance with its own fascinating history. I would like to know whether the Government will be working to protect that cultural heritage, particularly as it has, sadly, been vandalised numerous times. I know that, unlike in 1936, the Government have invested resources into building community cohesion and inter-faith activities in my borough of Tower Hamlets, and I am pleased that my local council, along with local voluntary organisations, have been awarded Common Ground resilience funds to build social connections across communities, complementing numerous initiatives from the Mayor of London. Next month, on 4 October, east London will be standing together. Trade unionists, Jews, Muslims, Bangladeshis, Somalis, socialists and many thousands more will be at Cable Street once again to mark the history, legacy and values of all those brave people who stood together 90 years ago to say, “No pasarán! They shall not pass!” Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to them and to the organising committee, including the Jewish Socialists’ Group, who have done so much to immortalise the legacy of Cable Street, and tell us how the Government will honour the legacy of Cable Street and the anti-fascists of the day as we confront the rising antisemitism, racism and division of today? As my friend Rabbi Herschel Gluck OBE said: “Cable Street isn’t just a place on the map. It’s a concept. It’s an idea. The message of Cable Street is that we must never let evil pass.”

    Hansard source
12. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Antonia Bance

    Speciality Steel UK

    I welcome the direction that the Secretary of State has set out today. Wednesbury Bright Bar is part of Speciality Steel UK. It is a specialist steel-finishing plant that produces precision-engineered bright steel bar in the heart of the UK metal-finishing industry area. It is used for automotive and advanced manufacturing across the Black Country and beyond. This is not primary steel production, and it will need a clear strategy separate from that for the primary steel production, which is the business in Rotherham, in Stocksbridge and elsewhere in the country. What specific consideration will the Secretary of State give to securing the long-term future of Wednesbury Bright Bar as part of work towards the public acquisition of Speciality Steel UK, and how will this support the skills, jobs and manufacturing supply chains across the west midlands and beyond?

    Hansard source
13. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Dixon

    Water Sector: Public Ownership

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for opening this petition debate so well and for representing the petitioners and campaigners here today. My constituency of Shipley is fortunate to be home to two beautiful rivers: the Aire and the Wharfe, where people walk, exercise, enjoy nature and spend time with family and friends. The rivers should contribute enormously to residents’ quality of life, but from Bingley to Burley in Wharfedale, residents are afraid to let their children paddle or swim in the rivers because of the health risks created by the illegal dumping of human waste. Just last summer, one of my constituents in Bingley, a boy of seven, was left fighting for his life with E. coli poisoning. He suffered multiple organ failure, and he needed emergency operations and kidney dialysis to beat the infection. It is absolutely disgraceful that, so much time after the first tragic death that was vividly depicted in a Channel 4 documentary, private companies are still allowed to abuse our rivers and put profit before people and nature. Why are we in this terrible situation? As others have said, in 1989, the Tory Government did what no other country has done—there is no international precedent for this—and put the stewardship of our most precious natural resource into the hands of private companies. We were told that private ownership would bring investment, efficiency and innovation. Instead, we have seen rising debt, rising bills and more pollution in our rivers. It is claimed that there is no evidence that public ownership leads to better outcomes, yet in Paris, where there has been remunicipalisation, there has been improved service quality and water quality, and a reduction in price. In fact, water bills in Paris are about a third lower than they are for my constituents under Yorkshire Water. We must act now to prevent further harm being done to children like the boy in my constituency by the likes of Yorkshire Water and Thames Water. I join others in urging the Government to put Thames Water into special administration and to be bold in bringing forward a water reform Bill that goes beyond the Cunliffe commission and sets out a legal framework that will enable us to build back a publicly owned water sector.

    Hansard source
14. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andy McDonald

    Israel and Palestine

    I will confine my remarks to the subject of Israel and Palestine, and I declare my interest as co-chair of the all-party group on Britain-Palestine. I very much welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement of 8 September, and particularly the Government having now made it clear that their official position is that Israel’s occupation of Palestine is unlawful—it is illegal. That is an important change, and it at long last brings the United Kingdom into line with the International Court of Justice 2024 advisory opinion, but, as the Minister said, the court’s conclusion was rooted in Israel’s entrenchment of its control, its clear intention to extend permanent sovereignty, and its expansionist settlement agenda. It is also welcome that the Foreign Secretary acknowledged the increasing evidence identified by bodies, including the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry, that war crimes appear to have been committed in Gaza, and we support the appropriate legal processes to establish responsibility for those crimes. On genocide, I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s commitment to full, robust and fair judicial processes, with final determinations made by competent courts, but the UK does not need to wait for a final determination before acting. The UN commission of inquiry stated in September 2025 that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and that state parties to the genocide convention had been on notice of a serious risk of genocide since at least January 2024. That serious risk itself triggers a duty to prevent genocide. The UK must therefore recognise that risk and act now: ending political, financial and military support that contributes to it; sanctioning those most implicated; committing to execute International Criminal Court arrest warrants; and supporting South Africa’s case at the ICJ. I welcome the Government’s commitment to refuse arms licences where exports materially contribute to the unlawful occupation, but the Foreign Secretary did not clearly confirm when I asked during last week’s statement whether existing licences will be cancelled where they meet that test. Will the Minister confirm that the new double lock will apply to existing licences, and set out the criteria by which the Government will determine whether an export contributes to the occupation? Colleagues will wish to know whether British arms exports currently available for the IDF in the west bank will no longer be licensed. I welcome the proposed sanctions on goods and services linked to illegal settlements I very much welcome that in the context of the previous ridiculous position of properties being marketed in this city for sale in the west bank. When that was raised, the wholly inappropriate response was to send in the Advertising Standards Authority, so I welcome the movement on that by Front Benchers. Will the Government confirm that these measures will cover all settlements, including existing settlements, that the ban on goods will apply to exports as well as imports, and that there will be no “re-export to settlements” clauses in contracts, as modelled on the guidance issued in respect of Russia? Finally, I sincerely hope that this reset will be furthered and sustained, as only by doing so can the commitment to a two-state solution be truly achieved.

    Hansard source
15. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andy McDonald

    Israel and Palestine

    The Minister is setting out the criteria around the crime of genocide, but would she accept that the duty actually bites when the risk of genocide is known, not at the determination of legal processes? That is when the United Kingdom has a duty to act. I welcome the steps that have been taken thus far.

    Hansard source
16. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alistair Strathern

    Topical Questions

    T9. Shockingly, 16 to 19-year-olds face higher rates of domestic abuse than any other age group. With the worst corners of the internet peddling increasingly extreme attitudes to them around sex and relationships, surely we owe them better. That is why my private Member’s Bill builds on the inspiring campaigner Faustine Petron’s work to make it mandatory to ensure that young people up to the age of 18 have healthy spaces to explore these issues in school and at college. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss how we can make that vision a reality?

    Hansard source
17. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Sobel

    Water Sector: Public Ownership

    My hon. Friend is making an excellent argument. In 2025, our regional water company, Yorkshire Water, discharged untreated sewage into our regional waters for 285,000 hours. Does he agree that that shows the failure of the private sector?

    Hansard source
18. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Sobel

    Israel and Palestine

    I know of constituents who have moved from Israel to Leeds because of the actions of the Israeli Government, and who applaud what we have done in banning Israeli settlement goods and services. Many of us stand squarely behind international law and human rights, and commend the Minister and the Foreign Secretary for their actions.

    Hansard source
19. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Mayer

    Select Committee Chairs: Period of Leave

    I was somewhat confused about the concept that after the period of seven months had elapsed the decision was then given to the Chair of the Liaison Committee, when the Speaker would have already deemed that that individual was entitled to leave from the House generally. I wonder whether the Leader of the House could provide clarification on why that decision was taken.

    Hansard source
20. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Ballinger

    Israel and Palestine

    Can I raise the “NAZA” film that was recently shown at the Venice film festival? It talks about the targeting systems that the IDF used in Gaza, and where it had specifically waited for Hamas fighters to return home so it could target them in a place they knew, but with huge civilian casualties. One whistleblower suggested that 500 civilians were killed in a strike on a single Hamas target. To give a UK example, something similar happened against three former British servicemen at the World Central Kitchen. Could the Minister reflect on that documentary and how we will get accountability for those former British servicemen who were killed with this awful targeting system?

    Hansard source
21. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Afzal Khan

    Water Sector: Public Ownership

    My constituents in Manchester Rusholme have seen a £57 increase this year, yet it is safe to say that there has been very little to show for it. Just last week, United Utilities had to pay a further £900,000 in fines for dumping raw sewage. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government must treat water reform as a strategic priority to tackle the cost of living crisis as well as the crisis in our waterways?

    Hansard source
22. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Abtisam Mohamed

    Water Sector: Public Ownership

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. Water is a basic natural resource, essential for public health and hygiene, but it is trapped in one of the largest ever private monopolies: we cannot choose water from a less polluted waterway or stop paying bills that rise faster than inflation, and we cannot even change suppliers. As others have said, under Thatcher, our water and sewerage system was sold off with a clean slate: £5 billion in debt was wiped and companies were given a cash boost to the tune of £1.5 billion. Yorkshire Water has paid shareholders £7.6 billion in dividends since 1989, and it has £6.2 billion in debt. That is unacceptable. Resident bill payers have paid the price. Every promise of a better system has completely collapsed under the weight of this monopoly. On Addy Street in Upperthorpe in my constituency, residents are no strangers to jets of water coming out of the ground. The most recent instance was not the first, second or even third time that they had seen a burst main, but the fourth. These are no longer unique occurrences; they are endemic to a system that is at breaking point. We have to be transparent: mounting corporate greed across England will not be wished away by making it easier to sack failing chief executives or imposing greater fines on companies. The personnel are not the problem. The problem is the system of deriving massive profit from life’s essential needs. Although I welcome the Government’s planned reforms, I urge them to go further than public control and regulation, and work to bring the system back in house. Four hundred and thirty-four of my constituents have signed the petition that we are discussing today, and 440 more in Walkley have signed local activist Hannah Cawley’s petition calling for water to be brought into public ownership. They are calling for an end to stakeholder payouts, and for cleaner rivers, lower bills and real accountability. That is the least that they deserve. Sheffield, like the rest of the country, has paid enough for this failure. It is time to bring water back into public ownership, and it is time to put the people who depend on it first.

    Hansard source
23. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Lara Bird

    Israel and Palestine

    I want to start by congratulating the latest iteration of the Labour Government for finally growing a backbone and doing what anybody with a moral conscience would and should have done years ago. While I genuinely welcome the statement and the sanctions that were announced last week—I really do—it is crucial that we remember that this is not the end goal, and that we do not lose sight of just how long Israel has been conducting violence and terror against the Palestinian people, and how long the UK Government have known in detail and failed to do anything about it. It was 25 years ago that Israel constructed a wall in the occupied west bank, barricading Palestinians in, separating families, denying them access to their land and enforcing a regime of illegal annexation and apartheid —treating an entire population like they were animals. The UK Government knew that and did nothing. It was 22 years ago that the ICJ confirmed that the construction of that wall was an unlawful use of force and violated international law. At the time, the UK Government accepted that and still did nothing. It was 20 years ago that the UK Government accepted that Israel was systematically abusing human rights in Palestine. There was a Labour Government at the time, and yet no action was taken because there was no political will to do so. For decades, successive UK Governments have known in detail the level of harm that Palestinians have suffered at the hands of the Israeli Government—arbitrary detention, torture, burning farms and farmland, killing children, destroying entire villages. Members of Parliament from across this House have gone to the west bank and seen it with their own eyes, and yet no action has been taken. There have been debates and statements of condemnation, and yet thousands of Palestinians have been killed, thousands of homes have been destroyed and thousands of children will grow up without their parents because the UK Government had no political incentive to act. I thank the hon. Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson) for raising the murder of Awdah Hathaleen, who was murdered a year ago by an Israeli settler in the village of Umm al-Kheir. Awdah was a friend of mine. I knew him well, and I grieve his murder every single day. Awdah was known to this House, because in 2024 he visited Westminster and spoke to parliamentarians. He visited Government officials in the FCDO and detailed the horror of living under illegal occupation in the west bank. He asked the UK Government to act and, at the time, they did not. Just think: how many Palestinian lives could have been spared if the UK Government 25 years ago had acted on the information and the facts that were in front of them. How many Israeli lives could have been spared? I might be new to this House, but I have watched every single debate in this place on Palestine and Israel, not just for the last three years since the genocide but for years before that. I will not make any friends when I say this, but I am so disappointed at how few Members across the House have raised their head above the parapet to condemn the UK Government’s continued support of Israel, and at how so many Members are doing so now just because it is politically convenient for them to do so. I genuinely welcome the statement given by the Government last week and genuinely hope that this causes a change, and that it saves Palestinian lives. But I cannot forgive, and so many others will never forget just how long it has taken the UK Government to finally do the right thing.

    Hansard source
24. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Suella Braverman

    Topical Questions

    We all know that child safeguarding is non-negotiable, so does the Secretary of State share my concern that the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children’s most recent schools briefing appears to put the safety of girls at risk, given that it has removed the express requirement that adult supervisors of pupils getting dressed should be of the same gender or sex? Does the Secretary of State agree that the NSPCC should clarify its guidance to comply with the law so that men and boys have no place in girls’ changing rooms?

    Hansard source
25. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Richard Tice

    Speciality Steel UK

    I congratulate the Government on making the decision to take Speciality Steel UK into public ownership, but the truth is that it should have been taken earlier. The preferred bidder was never going to perform. It has never made any steel, it did not have any money, it was seeking aggressive financing and it was using an investment adviser who fundamentally failed. I am troubled that the Government are now using the same investment adviser to advise them on British Steel. I urge the Government and the Secretary of State, who are doing the right thing with steel, to come up with a combined vision for Speciality Steel UK and British Steel. Merge them, invest in them, get the working capital going and get the production going. That will make it viable, that will get the cash flow positive again and that is in the strategic national interest.

    Hansard source
26. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Richard Tice

    Point of Order: Rectification Procedure

    On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to apologise to the House for my failure to declare an interest when participating in a Westminster Hall debate on 22 June 2026, on the topic of pro-Israel influence on UK politics and democracy. When speaking in the debate, I failed to declare the relevant interest, which was that I had been on a visit to Israel between 26 and 30 September 2025, funded by Reform Friends of Israel. Although the trip is properly recorded in my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, I should have declared it during the speech. That was a breach of the rules and I apologise to this good House.

    Hansard source
27. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

    SEND: Cross-Government Work

    Research from the Department for Education confirms that children who move schools frequently often suffer poor outcomes, particularly children with special educational needs. That is why a number of armed forces families—people on average incomes—choose independent education to minimise the disruption that results from their postings. May I ask the Secretary of State, with her new Education team, whether she will publish—perhaps jointly with the Ministry of Defence—research showing whether the introduction of VAT on school fees has led to an increase in the number of in-year moves, especially among service families?

    Hansard source
28. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

    Sovereign Grant Bill

    There is what might be an important innovation in the text of this year’s sovereign grant annual report and accounts, which the Bill refers to and which the Minister is describing. Usually, the description of the sovereign’s role includes the term “defender of the faith”, but that term does not appear in this year’s report and accounts. Instead, the monarch is referred to as the “Supreme Governor of the Church of England”. That is good. The report also says that he “protects the space for Faith within the multi-faith nation.” That is an admirable ambition, but I invite the Minister to confirm that no alteration to the monarch’s role is implied in that change. If there were to be such an alteration, would it be debated properly in Parliament, rather than introduced quietly through these sorts of official reports?

    Hansard source
29. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Andrew Rosindell

    Topical Questions

    Will the Secretary of State for Education join me in commending my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Fareham and Waterlooville (Suella Braverman) on her proposal that every school in the land should fly the Union flag every day of the year, and that every school should sing the national anthem at assembly at least once a week? Is that not a policy that the Government could implement now, instead of waiting for a Reform UK Government to implement it?

    Hansard source
30. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Plaid Cymru·Llinos Medi

    Speciality Steel UK

    I wish to pass on my party’s condolences to the Prime Minister and his family. While recognising the £500 million transition fund to Port Talbot, there are real concerns that Welsh steel will not receive a fair share of the £2.5 billion steel fund. Today the Secretary of State has announced that the public acquisition of Speciality Steel will be funded from that steel fund. Can the Secretary of State reassure the Welsh steel sector that Wales will get its fair share of the steel fund following today’s announcement?

    Hansard source
31. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Wera Hobhouse

    International Skills Partnerships

    11. What support her Department provides to help colleges and training providers develop international skills partnerships.

    Hansard source
32. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Wera Hobhouse

    International Skills Partnerships

    Bath college is a shining example of how collaboration across Europe is creating opportunities for students through the WorldSkills UK programme, which the Minister has just mentioned. Will he work with the British Council to build on its international skills partnership programme so that providers such as Bath college can access funding and support? I was also wondering whether international skills could be part of the agenda of the EU summit that will happen very soon?

    Hansard source
33. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    SEND Specialists: Schools

    Barely a day goes by without hearing from a new family whose child is struggling or—worse—does not have a school at all. Given the long delays in autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder diagnoses and the length of time it takes to get packages in place, what consideration has been given to screening for neurodivergence at a very early stage so that we can plan properly for those schools?

    Hansard source
34. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Israel and Palestine

    During his statement to the House last week, the Foreign Secretary said that “we will never have stability in the middle east without a two-state solution.”—[Official Report, 8 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 884.] That line touched me, as when I was invited to go on a visit to Israel and Palestine more than a decade ago, the very same words were used to explain why that visit was so important, and why understanding the relationship between the two places and the fears and threats they both faced was so important. On my visit, way back then, I saw the withholding of water from Rawabi; settlers encroaching on the hillsides of the west bank; the way that families whose children had played together were gradually pulled in different directions as the time for national service approached; and the difference between the day-to-day lives of the people of Ramallah and the people of Tel Aviv, and the tension between the two populations. Like every schoolchild in that country, I visited Yad Vashem and learned about the horrors that came before the Holocaust—the dehumanising of Jewish people in Europe, and how antisemitism can manifest itself in the most unusual ways. What I saw will never leave me, but it did leave me convinced that a two-state solution is the only way. Fast forward to 2023 and the horror of the atrocities inflicted on the people of Israel by Hamas. Every person who took part in the murder, torture and kidnapping of people on kibbutzim or at the music festival, or simply going about their lives, must be held to account. But although the pain of the Israeli people and the Jewish diaspora cannot be overestimated, it does not justify what followed in the following two years: the killing of 70,000 people, including 20,000 children, and the destruction of everything that is Gaza. What has happened since the official ceasefire, with the continued attacks, the violence and intimidation in the west bank and the attempt to take more land, cannot be ignored. We must not turn a blind eye as Prime Minister Netanyahu attempts to destroy Gaza. That is why I was pleased that the UK recognised the state of Palestine, and why I am relieved that the Foreign Secretary has taken further measures to show that the UK is prepared to stand up for what most of my residents believe. However, I know that this causes nervousness in some parts of our community, and I recognise that people are worried that this suggests the UK is no longer a friend of Israel. To that, I say that when a friend is attacking their neighbour, stealing their land and hurting their children, a friend holds them to account. But we must make sure that our Jewish communities in this country and the Jewish people in Israel who do not support this are not blamed for what the Government in Israel are doing. I know that some residents want us to go even further, and I hear their calls. For now, I believe the Government are close to getting the balance right, but we are in a fluid situation, and I hope for reassurance that if the Government in Israel continue with their actions and do not hear our calls for change, or those of countries such as Canada and France, we will keep everything on the table. Importantly, I also hope that as we head towards winter, the children in Gaza will be protected from famine and from the cold. We must not go quiet on the humanitarian front. There is, however, one area that I struggle to reconcile, which I raise on behalf of my constituents who have been caught up with it—I am surprised I am the only person to have mentioned it in this debate—and that is proscription. I am not sure what my parliamentary privilege allows me to say, so I am going to choose my words extremely carefully, but I cannot be the only hon. Member who struggles to see masked people intimidating our towns and abusing our rescue crews being treated as activists, when elderly or silently seated people holding placards that name a group find themselves not only arrested, but treated as terrorists. I should stress that I absolutely condemn the breaking and entering of property, criminal damage and all other offences, but they are already crimes. I also know that protesters who insist on naming a proscribed group probably know the consequences, and that among those decent people hide cowards, racists and people who are just there for the thrill. As we move forward in our position, though, I wonder whether we should ask if this is still proportionate, particularly as some companies are starting to take action against people who are wearing badges for Palestine. They do not worry about the badge for Ukraine that I am wearing. I do not make apologies for those who break the law, but I do ask the Government to reflect—and I am using my words carefully here. Given that they have now recognised the state of Palestine and have taken action in support of Palestine, maybe it is time to review the proscription of the group wearing those exact same words, but in a different order.

    Hansard source
35. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Bearwood and Merley Green Belt

    The balance between nature and green space and the need for housing is a delicate one, and it is always really sad when people who wish to maintain open spaces between villages are described as nimbys when they are simply trying to maintain good mental health for their communities. The green belt was created to ensure protected open land of high quality between communities, and it serves a purpose, so it is deeply concerning to see new legislation erode that purpose and local decision making on sites coming forward when there is no relevant local plan. This has led to residents in Mid Dorset and North Poole to ask me to present their petition, signed by over 900 local people, to request that the House of Commons urge the Government to uphold the purpose of green belt and demonstrate this by calling in and rejecting the planning application for 1,200 homes on green belt between Merley and Bearwood. Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the constituency of Mid Dorset and North Poole, Declares that the Green Belt land between Bearwood and Merley is a precious, high-quality green space providing a natural buffer between the two communities; further declares this land that supports local wildlife and gives residents access to valuable open space; further declares that the Government’s plan to build 1,200 homes on this land as part of the proposed Canford Garden Village development would undermine the purposes of Green Belt set out by the National Planning Policy Framework, namely to prevent neighbouring towns from merging into one another and to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; further declares that the people of Mid Dorset and North Poole are concerned about the erosion of local decision making in the planning process, and want their voices to be heard in the context of this planned housing development. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to uphold the key purposes of Green Belt set out in the National Planning Policy Framework by calling in and rejecting the planning application for 1,200 homes to be built on the Green Belt land between Bearwood and Merley. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003238]

    Hansard source
36. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tim Farron

    Curriculum and Assessment Review

    I commend my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for her Bill. I draw the Secretary of State’s attention to the recent change of the law by the Scottish Parliament that entitles every young person at school to five days outdoors with four nights in residential accommodation, which brings massive benefits to their resilience, love of learning and capacity to work together in teams. Given that 81% of children from the poorest backgrounds never get access to outdoor education, is it not time that we considered doing something similar?

    Hansard source
37. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tim Farron

    Curriculum and Assessment Review

    indicated assent.

    Hansard source
38. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tessa Munt

    Student Loans

    1. What steps she is taking to improve the student loan system.

    Hansard source
39. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tessa Munt

    Student Loans

    I associate myself with the comments of the Secretary of State. I am sure that all of us on the Liberal Democrat Benches feel deeply sad for the Prime Minister. Tuition fees continue to rise, while the plan 2 repayment threshold stays frozen until 2030. If it is frozen until 2031, it will align with the minimum wage, leaving students facing higher premiums for up to 40 years. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds are hit by sky-high rents and living costs and face a brutal job market. Young constituents tell me that they cannot trust the fees system when a change of Government can mean a change to the terms of their loans. Will the Secretary of State commit to uprating the thresholds, restoring maintenance grants and creating an independent watchdog so that Governments cannot keep moving the goalposts?

    Hansard source
40. 14 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Sarah Dyke

    Water Sector: Public Ownership

    Cocklemoor in Langport is a popular spot for water sports on the River Parrett and it sits right at the heart of the community. I am campaigning for it to be designated as a bathing water site, but in 2025 alone, it was polluted more than 200 times as a direct result of Wessex Water prioritising profits over investment in stopping discharges. Does the hon. Member agree that tackling sewage dumping at official bathing water sites should be prioritised over paying big bonuses to water company bosses?

    Hansard source