What Britain's parties say and do in public, recorded from the source.
Every entry links to Hansard, Parliament, the Electoral Commission or the party's own channel. Every party is tracked by the same rules. Methodology
Labour Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Conservative and Unionist Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Liberal Democrats
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Reform UK
Latest entry 6 Nov 2026
Scottish National Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Green Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Plaid Cymru
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,832 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
I thank the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) for securing this important question. Brave British servicepeople died defending the Falkland Islanders’ right to freedom and self-determination more than 40 years ago. We must never forget. Will the Minister confirm that this Labour Government will do the right thing and never compromise when it comes to defending British sovereign territory in the Falklands?
I thank the hon. Member for giving way and the tone in which she is conducting this debate. Would she feel more comfortable, however, if a transgender man with balding hair and a full beard, who was behaving like a man and full of testosterone, was attending a female toilet facility at night at a motorway service station? I would not feel safe, but it seems she would feel safer in that situation than she would with a trans woman getting changed in front of nurses or attending a toilet.
Will the Minister give way?
Will my hon. Friend give way?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey and Friern Barnet (Catherine West) for securing this really important debate. We have heard such powerful contributions about the scale of the issue and powerful proposals for how we can challenge it. I represent some of the most diverse communities in the United Kingdom, including historic Jewish communities. I represent one of the oldest continuously serving synagogues in Europe, Bevis Marks, as well as the Liberal Jewish synagogue, New London synagogue in St John’s Wood, and St John’s Wood synagogue. They all welcome diverse Jewish communities every week. We cannot underestimate the scale of the challenge we face. Every Jewish Londoner should be able to go to school, attend synagogue, travel to work and take part in public life without fear, yet they cannot; antisemitism remains far too common. The Community Security Trust reports that antisemitic incidents remain at very high levels, and increased during the first half of 2026. We need to be honest with ourselves and recognise that many of us have never experienced such a high level of antisemitism in our lifetime. These are not just statistics; they affect real people, communities, and our friends, neighbours and families. Last week, at a meeting with my local rabbis and synagogue chairs, whom I meet regularly, I heard at first hand just how my constituents are feeling. Just this weekend, there was an incident in my constituency in which there was profound surveillance of a synagogue, and the response times were completely unacceptable. I will come shortly to our response to this problem. I want to put on the record my support and thanks for the words of my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Dr Prinsley). We have heard some reflections on the disgusting conflation of geopolitical events with individuals and communities in this country. Such conflation is profoundly antisemitic, and as my hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Mr Rand) said, we absolutely need to be looking at the causes of that and put in place education measures.
I will make some progress. I welcome the Government’s support for security at Jewish schools, synagogues and community centres, as well as the announcement in July of £250 million for Jewish community safety. However, as we have heard so powerfully today, security funding alone is not enough, and none of us wants to be in a place where we are building higher walls. We need to take stronger action against hate crime. We have briefly heard about what is happening in London at weekends, when neighbourhood police are drawn into the centre of London to police demonstrations. We need to be honest about the hate crime that takes place at such demonstrations, and we must take the toughest possible action against it. We need stronger action and a closer focus on neighbourhood policing, so that every synagogue understands and knows its neighbourhood police officers and has a relationship with them that gives its members confidence in their local community. We need stronger action on antisemitism online; I pay tribute to the work of the Antisemitism Policy Trust on that specific issue, which I believe needs a greater focus. We need continued Holocaust education and clear leadership in calling out antisemitism, wherever it occurs. The safety of Jewish Londoners is not just an issue for those Jewish communities. It is an issue for all of us. When those in a community feel unsafe because of who they are, it affects us all and damages all our communities. We must stand firm against antisemitism and ensure that every Jewish Londoner can live openly, proudly and safely.
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham and Rainham (Naushabah Khan) on securing such an important debate. As we think about the displacement and destitution, the hunger, the rape and the violence in everyday stories of this forgotten war in Sudan, which is destroying a nation, ripping it apart and fuelling the greatest humanitarian disaster on our planet, we know we have to step up our focus and our action in this place. Although I welcome all the contributions of hon. Members to this debate, the amount of attention that the House gives to this disaster is still insufficient. When we think about the fact that 33.7 million of the Sudanese population are in need of humanitarian assistance, 13 million have been displaced, 19.5 million are at levels of food insecurity and need urgent attention, and there are 8 million children who are not in the safety of school every day, getting their education, which will fuel challenges for the future too, it is so urgent that we find a path to move beyond these atrocities. Yet it feels like actors cannot see beyond the desire to gain ground, destroy lives and property, and kill any hope. The Sudan war is a proxy for external actors, and that is what demands our urgent attention. We must use all the leverage we have to stop fuelling the conflict, not least by addressing the behaviours of countries such as the UAE and, at times, Egypt too. The conflict is moving beyond traditional warfare; we are now seeing extensive drone use, mercenaries being brought from Colombia, and the exchange of money too. We also know that Russia has its own interests in weapons and gold. We must look at the minimal interest in Sudan and the developments in Port Sudan at this time. In fighting this proxy war, we need to ensure there is proper global accountability, which seems so lacking from our systems. In our tinderbox of geopolitical fragility, where domestic politics sucks our attention, we need to find the capacity in Government to provide the leadership that is necessary and the resolutions that are so urgent. We must match those with commitments to provide aid at scale and to use the political capital that we can bring. In recent years, we have witnessed new approaches. In the assault on El Fasher in particular, we saw the systematic raping of women, the burning of people and places, and the escalation in the next chapter of the civil war that has raged since April 2023. Last year in London, and this year in Berlin, the UK and other actors brought people together to break the deadlock, yet the fruit of those efforts has been so small. We need to look more widely at our infrastructure for addressing conflict. I welcome steps taken by the former Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley (Yvette Cooper), to address the issue of women in conflict, and particularly the investment for those who have experienced sexual harm as a result of the conflict. Will the Minister tell us what progress has been made in that area, how that money has been spent and its impact to date? As we see increasing brutalisation in war, we have to focus even more on how we use international law to hold actors to account, and on the pace of that process, because it takes forever and a day to bring people to account. We also need a different vision for how we build diplomacy, whether that is a focus on the post-conflict opportunity of trade, on reciprocity in co-operation, on security and stability, or on where we can use pragmatism and protection to build rules and rights. We must take the seeds of London and the shoots of Berlin so that they grow into a settlement that works for people on the ground in Sudan. Will the Minister also look at the role of civil society? Up to 2023, civil society played a major role in maintaining stability in Sudan. Being able to work with local leaders is crucial to increasing their opportunity to build the bridges that are necessary to de-escalate the risks we see. How are we not only investing but inspiring community organisations and actors to use their accountability and creative diplomacy, and how are we providing the necessary support that they need to build for the future?
I oppose the E1 settlement plan and welcome this Government’s action against extremist settler violence. My constituent Ruth Jacobs and others have raised with me that, with Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur approaching, British Jews are facing an elevated threat, so what steps have the Government taken to ensure that these measures do not contribute to further antisemitism or undermine the security and confidence of Jewish communities in Birmingham Edgbaston and across the UK?
UK Finance estimates that two thirds of all fraud cases are enabled online. Jonathan Fisher’s recent review into fraud recommended that an anti-fraud levy be placed on digital and communications platforms. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we ensure that economic crime enforcement agencies are properly funded to protect us all from predatory scammers on the internet?
18. What discussions he has had with representatives of hospitality businesses on the potential impact of business rates relief on the sector.
I recently stopped by the wonderful Koh-I-Noor Indian restaurant in Priestwood to meet its owner, Kamran, and to speak about the realities of running a family-owned restaurant. He told me how rising costs were making it challenging for him to invest and grow his business. I genuinely welcome the Chancellor’s action on cutting business rates for pubs and music venues ahead of the Budget, but will the Minister look at what more he can do to support the hospitality and retail businesses at the heart of our local communities?
When I speak to parents in Bracknell Forest, they tell me of their anxiety about what their young people might be exposed to online and their feeling of powerlessness—they do not feel that they have the tools to do anything about it. Today’s statement makes it clear that this Government believe that the power to act lies squarely with the tech companies, and that they should get on and fix their platforms so that our young people can be safe.
In my constituency, more than a quarter of households failed to receive speeds of more than 30 megabits per second, and 11 of our 15 local areas rank among the worst-performing 10% nationally. Does the hon. Lady agree that a delay to the switch-off would afford remote coastal households enough time to adapt?
Unfortunately, although the Green Paper highlights the importance of Welsh-language broadcasting, it is largely silent on Cornish-language content, despite Kernewek’s recognition in the Media Act 2024. Will the Minister ensure that these ambitions are translated into practical opportunities for Cornish-language content so that our national minority status is properly reflected?
16. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of changes to regional funding arrangements on the economies of local communities.
As the furthest southerly Labour MP in the UK, I note several recent announcements of funding going to the north of England and mayoral strategic authorities. I have been very encouraged by the Prime Minister’s comments on Cornish devolution, and there is no requirement for Cornwall to join a mayoral strategic authority, but can the Minister elaborate on how changes to regional funding arrangements will support the Cornish economy?
I hope the whole House will join me in condemning the personal attacks and smears that the Foreign Secretary faced over the weekend. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] I congratulate my right hon. Friend and the Prime Minister for the strong stance they have taken. Does he agree that the acts of violence perpetrated by the settlers in the west bank must be called out for what they are: settler terrorism designed to forcibly remove Palestinian communities?
I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, which will come as a welcome addition to the debate. I was proud when this Government took the historic decision to recognise the state of Palestine. However, the very prospect of a single unified Palestinian state is, as we have heard, under enormous threat from the expansion of illegal settlements in the west bank. Having visited that area with Members from across the House earlier this year, the sheer scale of the E1 settlement makes it clear that Israel is determined that there should be no possibility of a contiguous Palestinian state. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that anyone—and I mean anyone—who believes in a just and lasting peace in the middle east must also oppose illegal settlement expansion and the violence that so often comes with it?
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. She is absolutely right that it is a timely moment. The quintet is to make a good-offices visit to Khartoum from tomorrow. Does she agree, first, that the UK Government have to continue supporting the diplomatic work of the quintet and, secondly, that the Government will continue to make a difference by sanctioning those individuals involved in facilitating this dreadful civil war?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham and Rainham (Naushabah Khan) for securing this important debate, and I welcome the Minister to her place. Sudan is now in its fourth year of conflict—four years of violence, displacement and starvation. Up to 400,000 people have been killed in a war that has displaced more than 14 million people and left 34 million—two thirds of the population—in need of humanitarian support. Behind those numbers are people’s lives, stories and unimaginable trauma and grief—a family forced to flee their generational home, a child suffering from malnutrition, a woman, girl or baby who has survived sexual violence or who has died because of sexual violence. Those are some of the stories that my Barking constituents have shared with me. I have spoken to constituents with family links to Sudan, who fear for their loved ones. Others are horrified by the events and the international complacency. Sudan needs an immediate ceasefire and aid. That is why I support the Government’s efforts to keep the Sudan conflict high on the international agenda. I commend the former Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley (Yvette Cooper), for all her efforts, and in particular for chairing a special session at the UN Security Council in February that focused entirely on Sudan. She placed the importance of women’s rights at the top of the agenda. In Sudan, it is women and children who have been disproportionately impacted.
My hon. Friend makes an important point and underlines the vulnerability that women and girls face across the world. Indeed, a staggering one in four Sudanese people are at risk of sexual violence, and women and girls are disproportionately impacted. In the UN report into the siege of El Fasher, one woman described being raped “in front of the bodies of my mother, my father and my slaughtered brother.” I cannot imagine the fear that Sudanese women feel every day. Will the Minister confirm that the £20 million programme to support victims of rape will continue? In an unstable world where there is humanitarian suffering beyond comprehension, we too often feel forced to consider which crisis we care about the most. The truth is that humanity and compassion have no boundaries; they are not diluted by proximity, ethnicity or religion. There is no hierarchy of humanitarian suffering that we should be outraged about. Indeed, my constituents frequently express to me their deep frustration that the media and Government do not shine a brighter light on what is going on in Sudan. More than just talking about the appalling situation in Sudan, we need the UK Government to take action. Will the Minister confirm that the UK will continue its arms embargo and sanctions regime until there is a ceasefire in Sudan? In July, sanctions were introduced against a further 11 individuals and organisations. The individuals and organisations on that list reveal a glimmer of the web of dark money and corporate interests that are exploiting this conflict for their own greed. Commercial brokers, real estate management companies, capital holding corporations, mining companies—the list goes on. All those organisations and individuals have blood on their hands. Sanctioning individuals is not enough while the arms keep flowing. The UN independent international fact-finding mission for Sudan found reasonable grounds to believe that there is a transnational network running through companies and intermediaries in the UAE. Will the Minister say what the UK is doing, and what more it can do bilaterally and through the UN Security Council, specifically to press the UAE regarding these credible and mounting allegations? In the light of the allegations, will the Government review UK arms licensing arrangements with the UAE? I appreciate that she cannot go into detail about any further sanctions that the Government might be considering, but can she reassure us that that work is under way? I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham and Rainham again for securing this important debate, and I thank all Members who have participated for their powerful speeches. Finally, I ask the Government to take more action to stop the genocide in Sudan, to support a ceasefire and to help the Sudanese people to find their future.
I place on record my support for the Foreign Secretary for taking this strong stance today. As the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) said, “At last!” Finally, we can breathe, but we still cannot breathe like the Palestinians deserve to be able to breathe while they are still being occupied, and it is so welcome that our Government have taken this position. The situation needed Britain to lead, and today Britain has led. I am equally proud of our Government for taking this stance. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that Britain needs to continue to show this leadership to ensure that the two-state solution happens and that the Palestinians are free of occupation?
I beg to move, That this House has considered the conflict in Sudan. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I am pleased to have secured this debate, because it comes at a critical moment. The war in Sudan is now entering its fourth year. It has been labelled the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, yet for some reason it still barely registers in political discourse. Last week, a humanitarian convoy delivering lifesaving aid to Kadugli, where communities are at risk of famine, was attacked. A UN report has found that sexual violence is widespread and is being used as a weapon of war in Sudan, and that at least 13 victims have died, mostly after brutal gang rapes, with the youngest victim only nine years old. For millions of Sudanese people, the war is a daily struggle for survival. I suspect that many people in this country could not explain why a paramilitary force operating in Sudan stands accused of genocide. The gap between the scale of what is happening and the attention that it receives is part of the reason why it has been allowed to go on for so long. Just now, I was listening to the Foreign Secretary’s statement on the banning of Israeli goods that come from illegal settlements. The main Chamber was packed, and rightly so, but I would argue that the crisis in Sudan requires the same attention. The United Nations puts the number of people in Sudan who need humanitarian assistance this year at 33.7 million, which is more than in any other country on earth. There are 90 million people displaced inside Sudan, and more than 4 million have left it entirely, which is equivalent to the population of Greater Manchester. More areas are in or at risk of famine than anywhere else in the world. However, the UN’s own response plan for Sudan is funded at only 40% of what is needed this year. That shortfall already has a body count: hospitals in Darfur have closed for want of money to keep them running, cutting off tens of thousands of displaced people from anything resembling care. During the summer recess, I took part in a parliamentary delegation to Egypt, where I saw at first hand the impact of Sudan’s conflict on the region. My visit brought it home to me that this is a regional crisis—one that cannot be contained within Sudan’s borders.
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. I urge the Government to listen to his comments and to continue to place that pressure. Egypt is the single largest host of people fleeing the conflict, with about 1.5 million refugees, which places significant pressure on communities and services already stretched thin. At a UNHCR registration centre, I heard directly from Sudanese refugees, including elderly women and young children, some of whom had travelled roughly 1,400 km from the Sudanese border just to register—the same distance as from London to Rome. Their journeys underscore the human reality of displacement. They are not just another statistic; they are families who walked away from everything they owned, because staying had become more dangerous than leaving. Egypt has played a prominent role in stabilising the region, but its ability to manage the crisis alone is reaching breaking point. The question for Britain is not just how much we spend on humanitarian assistance, but whether our support reaches people where they are and where the need is greatest. The registration centre I visited is facing immense pressure: some 4,000 refugees a day against capacity built for 4,000 a month. UNHCR’s Egypt operation has a funding requirement of $133.5 million for 2026, but was only a quarter funded by the end of April, leaving a gap of more than $99 million. That operation is currently receiving no UK funding at all, despite the UK’s own record showing what effective support can achieve. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office-funded North Africa migrant and development project, delivered through the International Organisation for Migration, has reached more than 22,000 migrants and host community members in Egypt since 2024.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The medical challenge that people were facing came across strongly in our conversations. We must ensure that aid reaches the right people in the right place in the right way. That point cut through; I hope others will listen to it. Alongside our humanitarian duty, this matters to Britain because the consequences of Sudan’s war are already being felt across the region and beyond. With little prospect of peace or self-reliance in Sudan or the countries hosting its refugees, more people are being forced into dangerous onward journeys towards Europe. Between 2024 and 2025, the number of Sudanese refugees arriving in Europe rose by 232%. In 2025, Sudanese nationals made up 11% of small boat arrivals to the United Kingdom. Funding refugee protection, registration and support for host communities is the right thing to do. It is also how we prevent further displacement and exploitation and stop people being forced to make these journeys later. But funding is only part of the answer. Aid can mitigate the consequences of the conflict, but it cannot end it. However well the registration centre I visited with colleagues is funded, it will still be processing the consequences of decisions made by armed men many hundreds of miles away. Only a political solution can resolve that. The war did not begin as, and has never really been, a contest between two equally matched armies with equally clean records. The Rapid Support Forces are the direct descendants of the Janjaweed militia responsible for the Darfur genocide of the early 2000s, absorbed into the Sudanese state rather than disbanded. When fighting broke out between the force and the regular army in April 2023, it inherited the old militia’s methods along with its personnel. The United Nations fact-finding mission concluded in February this year that the killing of civilians in El Fasher after the city fell to the Rapid Support Forces last October met the legal definition of genocide. Tonight, in a city called El Obeid, the same force is massing outside the walls in very much the configuration that it used in El Fasher. The United States Department of State has already warned that mass atrocities may follow if El Obeid falls too. I want to be clear that the responsibility is not one-sided. Sudan’s regular army has bombed populated areas indiscriminately, and militias fighting alongside it have carried out abuses of their own territory that they have retaken, but there is a difference between that record and what happened at El Fasher. That difference is exactly why the two sides cannot simply be told to agree a ceasefire and be trusted to keep it I raise that history because it explains why calls for a ceasefire keep failing. It is not a dispute that ends with both sides simply agreeing to stop. It also explains why the international effort to end this war has gone almost nowhere. The Quad—the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates—published a peace road map almost a year ago. It has achieved almost nothing, because Saudi Arabia and Egypt want the Sudanese army preserved as the backbone of the state, while the UAE wants its political role dismantled. Those positions were never reconciled, only written around, and Sudan’s own Government formally rejected the road map at the Security Council in February. That rejection barely registered here. Nor is the damage confined to Sudan and Egypt. Chad has closed its borders, after cross-border drone attacks killed its own soldiers. Fighting has spread into Ethiopian territory around the Blue Nile. While the world’s attention is elsewhere, Russia has been negotiating a 25-year naval facility at Port Sudan in exchange for weapons—a foothold on one of the most consequential trade corridors on earth, secured while the country hosting it burns. A war that we are content to fund our way around rather than to resolve is a war that keeps generating problems that Britain will eventually have to deal with on someone else’s terms. As the penholder for Sudan at the UN Security Council, the UK has significant diplomatic leverage. The Government must use it, maintaining pressure for humanitarian troops, for civilian protection, for unimpeded humanitarian access and for a civilian-led political process, including through the Berlin principles agreed earlier this year. That leverage will carry more weight if we are not undercut by our own arms licensing decisions. Evidence from United Nations experts and from Amnesty International has repeatedly linked the United Arab Emirates to weapons reaching the Rapid Support Forces. Hundreds of millions of pounds of UK arms licences to the UAE have been approved during this war. I would welcome the Minister’s assurance that those licences are being tested properly against the risk that British-made equipment will end up fuelling, however indirectly, the same conflict that we are asking the Security Council to end. I also urge the Government to reaffirm the commitment they made earlier this year to the UK’s £146 million of humanitarian funding for Sudan, while extending meaningful funding to organisations on the ground, including for the UNHCR’s work with refugees in neighbouring countries, rather than focusing solely on Sudan itself. Britain has both the means and the diplomatic standing to act. We can help to ensure that people displaced by this war receive the protection and support that they need, while using our influence to address the conflict that forced them from their homes in the first place. Many of them want to return to their home: I heard that loud and clear. I think of the women I met at the registration centre who had walked 1,400 km simply to queue in the baking heat, just to be counted. The least this House can do is make sure that they are not forgotten, and the least that our Government can do is recognise the scale and impact of this humanitarian crisis.
I thank all colleagues for their approach and for contributing so powerfully to this debate. They have drawn to our attention some matters of detail to address in the crisis that we face, from the impact of gender-based violence to the role played by other actors in the region. It has been an important discussion and I thank everyone for their contributions. I welcome the Minister to her place. I thank her warmly for her response, and particularly for her commitments to addressing gender-based violence in the region and for her assurances around arms licences and the embargo. I also thank her for her commitment to proactively bringing the issue to the Floor of the House; it is incredibly important that we have space to do that. Notwithstanding the fact that colleagues in this room have done a lot of work on the issue, we need to keep up the political pressure and ensure that this humanitarian crisis is given the attention it needs. Despite the clear assurances from the Minister, there is clear consensus in this Chamber that we still need to do more. Our place on the world stage means that it is incumbent on us as a nation to go further, not just for the stability of the region but for the people of Sudan, who are at the heart of this humanitarian crisis. They are looking to the international community to facilitate an end to the suffering. I hope that we can continue to work in a constructive manner, directly with the Minister and more widely, to bring an end to this situation.
I thank the Secretary of State for this major step forward—it is a massive intervention in this space. She has rightly given the industry time to think about how it is going to approach these issues, but we cannot wait forever. Time is of the essence, and our young people are being put at risk every single day, so can the Secretary of State assure the House that while this legislation is being developed and while we look at the issues around it, the Government will continue to press these companies to act with the urgency and sense of moral leadership that they should be acting with?
I thank the Foreign Secretary for his clear-sighted commitment not only to talk about a two-state solution, but to actually try to act to achieve it, as the only foundation of a safe Israel and a free Palestine. I also thank him for his clarity that international law matters and on who it is who is putting the two-state solution at risk: the current Israeli Government. It is good to see the Foreign Secretary working across the world on this. We can see that we have partners in this mission, but we know that there are also those who would oppose what he is seeking to do. Sadly, we have already heard talk that there will be retaliation, particularly from Israel and America, if the ban goes ahead. Could he reassure the House that we will not acquiesce and bend to such pressure, and that the only action that could ever be acceptable to us to make us contemplate reversing this ban would be a halt on the E1 development and a permanent end to settler violence?
T3. Child trust funds were designed to give every child the same financial start, regardless of who they are. However, trust fund savings are currently taken into account when assessing an 18-year-old disabled person’s financial contribution to their social care, meaning that they do not get the same financial start as their non-disabled peers. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that all young people benefit in full from their child trust fund?
What conversations has the Chancellor had with the Department of Health and Social Care on providing compensation to those harmed by valporate and vaginal mesh, as per the Hughes report, which was published over two years ago?
The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) is absolutely right to say that what is behind this is the deep unpopularity of President Milei; it is not anything actually that the UK has done. It is to the credit of this House that we are entirely united, whichever party we are from, in saying that the Falkland Islands are British and will remain so. Does my hon. Friend agree that those who try to make political points to separate us actually do those who oppose us a favour, and that what they should do is say that the UK Government, His Majesty’s Opposition and all of us in this House are entirely united on this subject?
Like many, I have a close allegiance to the Falkland Islands and the islanders. As a 19-year-old young British soldier, I did my first operational tour of duty in the islands in 1990 and subsequently went back in 1992. Does the Minister agree that while the Falkland Islanders state that they wish to be a UK overseas territory, they will always remain that? To put this into perspective, in the latest referendum, 99.8% of Falkland Islanders voted to support that position, on a 92% turnout. To put it into perspective again, only three islanders voted against.
I thank my hon. Friend for all her work on this issue. I struggled with my own mental health after the traumatic birth of my son, as I think she knows. It was friends and family, including my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume), who helped me, but in York we also have fantastic local groups like Menfulness, founded by Dr Jack Woodhams. Will she praise them and thank them for getting men to talk, whether through sport, football or walking?
As the youngest parent in this place, I warmly welcome the Secretary of State’s leadership and that of our Prime Minister. Will she look at AI-enabled smart glasses, which could be filming our children, and the content from them that is being put online? Will she also look at loopholes in VPN usage—in particular, with app-based browsers—as she looks to progress the measures?
The Minister is understandably burdened by the need to be diplomatic. Is the reality not that President Trump can review whatever position he likes, and the Argentinian Government can make whatever threats they like, but it does not make a jot of difference to this country, because the Falkland Islands will remain British?
Like parents and grandparents in Hartlepool, I find it incredible that technology companies even had to be asked to put software in place that protected against child sexual abuse. Having been asked, they apparently have said no. As the Secretary of State rightly points out, there will be further loopholes that need to be closed. Would it be better just to assume these companies’ moral bankruptcy and not ask in future, and just to legislate straightaway?
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey and Friern Barnet (Catherine West) on securing this vital debate. The conversations I have with my Jewish constituents and friends about safety and security are heartbreaking. We must reflect on the fact that in this country, in 2026, Jewish people are talking to their MPs about emigrating for their own safety, about changing their names to avoid discrimination, and about escorting their children to school because they fear what might happen if they do not. When Jewish people are attacked on our streets and so many people feel unsafe in the place they call home, it is a national emergency and deserves to be treated as such. The prejudice they face is old, but it is never far from the surface. I know from my time as a whistleblower on antisemitism in the Labour party to the Equality and Human Rights Commission that, when our politics tolerates it, hatred and ignorance can rear their ugly heads. That is why I am proud that this Labour party and this Government—under different leadership—have taken important steps through record funding for the safety of the Jewish community, the social cohesion plan, and banning groups such as the IRGC. Those are actions, not words, but we all know that so much more needs to be done. When I recently met the leaders of the four synagogues in my constituency of Altrincham and Sale West, they made that very clear. That message has been reinforced in my meetings with the Jewish Leadership Council. This is not just about the immediate safety of Jewish residents; it is about creating a society in which we do not need security services guarding synagogues and schools. Crucial to that is education. That brings me to the issue on which I will press the Government today: antisemitism on campus. The Union of Jewish Students, which I was proud to work with as a student and a student union officer, and which I am proud to have hosted here as a Member of Parliament, has reported a 413% increase in antisemitic incidents since the 7 October massacre. The situation remains completely unacceptable. From being held responsible for the actions of the Israeli Government to hearing fellow students defend Hamas, Jewish students are routinely made to feel unwelcome and scared at a time that should be one of the most enjoyable experiences of their lives. I welcome the Government’s existing work with universities across the country on adopting best practice guidance put forward by the Union of Jewish Students, but we must urgently go further faster. I therefore urge the Minister to work with colleagues on current regulatory gaps, which mean there is a lack of clarity and accountability on the oversight of students’ unions. These gaps must be filled to ensure that we do not have a postcode lottery on the tolerance of antisemitism on our campuses. I also join colleagues in asking the Minister to set out a clear timeline for the implementation of the Protecting What Matters strategy, which was a welcome step forward in tackling extremism at universities, but which must be backed up by results. Similarly, following the Macdonald review, there must be an approach that balances respecting academic freedoms and the ability to protest with the absolute right for Jewish students to feel safe on campus. That is a balance that has been lost at times in recent years, but it must now be restored. When we debate antisemitism and Jewish safety, we are right to point out all that is wrong and the action needed to put it right, but I would like to end by talking briefly about something that should give us all hope: The Rabbi & The Imam project. Through the project, my constituents, Rabbi Dovid Lewis from Bowdon shul and Dr Nasser Kurdy from Altrincham and Hale Muslim Association, go into schools to talk about their faiths and to promote a simple message of humanity and understanding. Programmes like that see off intolerance before it is able to take root. They are essential to the safety of all faiths in this country and to long-term protections for religious freedom and expression. The Rabbi & The Imam project offers a reminder that, although antisemitism and the violence it fosters remain a national emergency, there are amazing projects and amazing people doing incredible work to tackle it. We must match that spirit and commitment to unity in this place if we are to make this country a safer place for Jewish citizens.
4. What fiscal steps he is taking to support the renewal of high streets.
In Altrincham and Sale West, we know how much our pubs and bars contribute to the local high streets of which we are so proud. That contribution goes beyond their economic impact; they create the sense of community that is so important to local people. The Government’s 20% cut in business rates was indeed welcome to them, but I know from events that I have held locally with the Altrincham business improvement district that they still face challenges and need more support. Will the Chancellor update the House on what more he will do to support all hospitality businesses in constituencies such as mine?
I wholeheartedly welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, both its content and its tone. I would like to ask about his discussions with our colleagues and allies in other countries who are looking to implement similar sanctions. The Netherlands Government announced their intention to reimpose sanctions in July and will implement them on 22 September. Will my right hon. Friend ask them why that has only taken them two months, when we are going to take eight to nine months?