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

12,832 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andrew Pakes

   Rewiring the State

   It is a pleasure to welcome my right hon. Friend to her place. The greatest shift of power in rewiring this country we have seen started in Rochdale in 1844, when the Rochdale pioneers came together and created and inspired a worldwide movement. We now have our first ever Labour and Co-operative Prime Minister and an historic commitment to double the size of the co-operative and mutual economy, highlighting the vital role of double devolution, which is not just about giving power to institutions; it is also about giving power directly to people to take part in creating their own solutions and power in their communities. What assessment has my right hon. Friend made of the machinery of government and its ability to deliver on this fantastic ambition?

   Hansard source
2. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andrew Lewin

   EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

   It is good to see you in the Chair, Ms Butler, in the first week of a new term. I congratulate the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) on securing this debate. Brexit has been an unmitigated failure: our economy is smaller, thousands of UK businesses have stopped exporting to the EU altogether and our position in the world has been diminished. I put on the record my thanks to the former Prime Minister and Chancellor for all the work that they did on a repair job in the first two years of this Government, but, in the brief time that I have today, I will focus on what comes next. I am pleased to see the Minister in Westminster Hall today and I welcome him to his role. I will talk specifically today about the importance of a youth mobility deal, because a visa-based scheme for 18 to 30-year-olds to allow them to travel freely between the United Kingdom and the European Union is something I have advocated for since my first few weeks in this place, and publicly since April 2025. The Government are in active negotiations with the EU about a youth mobility scheme as we speak. The prospect of such a deal has proven popular with the public; every poll on the subject consistently shows that there is broad support for a youth mobility deal. However, this is a moment to be courageous and ambitious, because we read in the media that there is a live debate about the number of people who will be subject to a youth mobility scheme—100,000, or slightly more than 100,000. In a context where net migration to the United Kingdom has fallen from a record high of over 800,000 to less than 200,000, I hope and believe that that should give Ministers the space and the confidence to agree an ambitious youth mobility deal. This negotiation is also a test of our Government’s ability to secure an agreement. Lots of pro-Europeans engaging with this subject and watching this debate want to see our Government engage in something that meaningfully moves our relationship with Europe forward. Achieving a youth mobility deal can be a test of that. I admire the Prime Minister’s courage in saying that he is going to walk towards difficult issues. With respect to the European Union and the opportunity for a youth mobility deal, I think that he and the Minister can walk towards an opportunity and I hope that they can secure it this year.

   Hansard source
3. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andrew Cooper

   Rewiring the State

   May I congratulate the First Secretary of State on her appointment and welcome the creation of No. 10 North as part of the Government’s commitment to drive good growth in every postcode? In that vein, is she aware of the series of funding decisions that have been taken by the Science and Technology Facilities Council that, taken together, will shift publicly funded research and development activity from north to south? The Prime Minister has already committed to intervening over Jodrell Bank, but will the First Secretary look at the broader issue and consider how the balance of R&D spend across the country can support economic growth in every region?

   Hansard source
4. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

   Rewiring the State

   I welcome the First Secretary to her place, and I thank her for making her first constituency visit to Portsmouth North and the fantastic Griffon Marine. As Portsmouth is a coastal city, residents are rightly furious that Southern Water continues to pump sewage into our seas. We have had hardly any rain this summer, yet sewage pollution and rising bills continue while private companies make profits. It is abundantly clear that privatisation under the Tories has failed the British public again and again. Could the First Secretary of State set out a little more detail of the Government’s plans to reform the industry and give the public greater control over our water companies?

   Hansard source
5. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Sobel

   Representation of the People Bill

   As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for fair elections, the largest APPG in Parliament, I am delighted to welcome the Bill as a significant culture shift for our democracy and a generational step towards fairer politics. I also welcome the Minister to her place, as she is a trusted friend and ally on fair elections. The APPG’s loss is certainly the Government’s gain. It is fitting that the Representation of the People Bill is the first piece of legislation to come to the House under the Government’s new leadership. The Prime Minister’s long-standing commitment to free and fair elections, support for young people and commitment to cleaning up our politics is well known, and I look forward to this being the first of many steps that he will take to make our politics fit for the future and reflective of the United Kingdom in which we live today. The Labour party is the party of change: system change, culture change, democratic change. I am proud to be part of a party that has always fought to strengthen our democracy. We must now do that for a new generation, by facing up to the triple threat that disinformation, dark money and a failing electoral system pose to our politics. Westminster is unfortunately becoming dangerously outdated. A five-party electorate can no longer be represented by a two-party system. “Business as usual” and low voter turnout are changing everything. I am sad that my new clause 31 has been ruled out of scope today.

   Hansard source
6. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Sobel

   Representation of the People Bill

   I do not want to anger Madam Deputy Speaker, with whom I have served not just here but in other democratic forums, but my hon. Friend is absolutely right. The number of Members who signed new clause 31 shows the amount of support there is for this in the House; it reflects how many Members support change. I understand that this issue is not in scope of the Bill, but I trust our Prime Minister, who has long been supportive on this issue.

   Hansard source
7. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Sobel

   Representation of the People Bill

   I know the Minister has long supported changing the system of election to the House of Commons. The Prime Minister has also committed to it. Will the Minister confirm that the Government are actively considering changing the system from first past the post?

   Hansard source
8. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Adam Jogee

   Train Service between Stoke-on-Trent Railway Station and Manchester Airport

   Happy birthday to you for yesterday, Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to present a petition on behalf of hundreds of local people in Newcastle-under-Lyme who, like me, want a direct train connection between Stoke-on-Trent railway station and Manchester airport—a connection that will benefit constituents not just in Newcastle-under-Lyme but across Staffordshire, as can be seen by my colleagues who are here this evening. The petition states: The petition of residents of the constituency of Newcastle-under-Lyme, Declares that there is growing concern amongst residents and businesses about the poor connectivity between North Staffordshire and Manchester airport; notes that local people travelling to Manchester airport by rail must currently travel via Manchester Piccadilly on a train that passes the airport; further notes that the current reliance on a connection through Manchester Piccadilly risks a delayed journey, is inconvenient for bigger families with lots of luggage to carry, for older people, and for those who have mobility issues; further declares that too many people are forced to rely on a taxi which is often more expensive and is at the mercy of the M6, the A500 and the A34; further declares that a direct connection between Stoke-on-Trent and Manchester airport would be good for inward investment to this area, including for jobs for local people; further declares that a direct train connection will also help to ensure that Keele University and all the excellent businesses based at Keele Business Park are able to remain competitive with their rivals in other parts of our United Kingdom; and further notes the decision of August 2026 to confirm the roll-out of such a direct connection. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government, the relevant train companies and the relevant local authorities to successfully and speedily deliver the direct train line connection for passengers who live learn and work in North Staffordshire between Stoke-on-Trent railway station and Manchester airport. And the petitioners remain, etc. [P003233]

   Hansard source
9. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Seamus Logan

   EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

   My hon. Friend is making a humorous speech about bananas and sausages that is making me hungry. Yesterday, the new Prime Minister spoke of wrong turns going back as far as the 1980s. There is a wrong turn he could do something about, because the EU reset that the previous Prime Minister promised was a disaster. He gave away 12 years’ access to our waters in Scotland in return for very little. In fact, when the coastal and fishing growth fund was disbursed, there was a pittance for Scotland. Does my hon. Friend agree that, if the Prime Minister is serious about undoing wrong turns, he should have the courage to do something about Brexit?

   Hansard source
10. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Seamus Logan

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    The hon. Gentleman seems to be suggesting that the public were misled by the information provided to them about Brexit. Does he agree with that?

    Hansard source
11. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Seamus Logan

    Engagements

    Q12. The Energy Secretary will shortly choose between six National Energy System Operator pathway options for the strategic spatial energy plan, which will shape where and when energy infrastructure is developed over the next 25 years.ScotWind is key to Scotland’s industrial future: it represents £78.5 billion of potential investment, part of an overall package that Crown Estate Scotland estimates could support more than 21,000 jobs. However, this week the GMB union in Scotland, among others, has warned that the wrong pathway could deny energy transition opportunities for our world-class, skilled and experienced Scottish energy workers and industries. Given the last Administration’s betrayal at Grangemouth and Ardersier, can the Prime Minister commit today to selecting a pathway that will enable the full ScotWind pipeline, including floating offshore wind and the grid investment, to deliver Scotland’s energy potential?

    Hansard source
12. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I beg to move, That this House has considered the impact of the 2016 EU membership referendum on the UK. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship this morning, Ms Butler. May I also congratulate myself on securing this debate? It came as a bit of a surprise to me. I thought that there would be an overwhelming clamour to secure a debate to celebrate the 10 years since the Brexit referendum. I thought people would be tripping over themselves to ensure that they could tell us about all the wonderful things that have happened. It would have been an opportunity to go wandering through the sunlit uplands to celebrate the dynamic economic growth and political stability that had been secured, the fact that immigration was under control, and all the wonders of our new-found freedoms. Do you remember, Ms Butler? We were going to have our cake and eat it, we were going to secure the easiest trade deal in history, and of course we were going to take back control. From the lofty heights up there in the sunlit uplands, we could have peered down and admired all the shiny new hospitals that we had managed to build because of the £350 million we had saved weekly from the evil and wicked EU. Perhaps, in a more reflective moment, we could have thought back and wondered why we ever put up with those bendy bananas, the vacuum cleaners that lacked that extra Brexit suction, or EU lightbulbs that would not even light, and about how, thank goodness, the existential threat to the great British sausage had been removed and Brexit had saved us from all the barmy Brussels bureaucrats. There are some anniversaries that we look forward to, such as birthdays and weddings, and some that invite solemn reflection, such as the end of wars, the passing of great men and women, and great historical events. Then, of course, there is the Brexit referendum anniversary, which somehow feels so different from all the other things that we mark. Brexit is a rather extraordinary anniversary to celebrate.

    Hansard source
13. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I will just finish this point. It is 10 years since we embarked on what has turned out to be one of the most self-defeating exercises in political and economic self-harm inflicted in modern political history—a bizarre, destructive and economically illiterate political project that has made everybody in this country so much worse off. On that note, I give way to the hon. Gentleman.

    Hansard source
14. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I can assure the hon. Gentleman within a second that I am all for independence—but not for the bizarre notion that keeps on coming up that membership of the European Union means automatically losing independence. Tell that to the French, the Germans, the Italians or any of the other members of the European Union, who as far as I am concerned pretty much enjoy their own independence. That is what we want to do in Scotland. In the 10 years since the Brexit referendum, we have had seven Prime Ministers. Even a new Labour Government with a majority of 172 have not been immune from the instability of the Brexit era, barely making it to the two-year mark before they had to replace their first Prime Minister. Let us turn first to the economy. I am grateful, as always, to the House of Commons Library, which produced an excellent briefing for this debate. I really encourage colleagues to have a look at it. It is remarkably clear about the broad economic evidence. There is now substantial and significant consensus that the UK economy is smaller than it would have been had we remained in the European Union.

    Hansard source
15. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    This hon. Member more than agrees with the hon. Lady and thoroughly endorses what she says. It is not just Ynys Môn or Wales; every part of this United Kingdom has been impacted and hurt by this crazy project.

    Hansard source
16. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I am grateful to my hon. Friend because he brings us right up to date in the debate about Brexit. I listened carefully to the Prime Minister yesterday and what he had to say about European Union membership. I want to come on to that because we are at an important juncture. We have new opportunities to go forward, and I hope that this new Labour UK Government make the right choice. I will come to that, so I ask my hon. Friend for his patience, which I know he will be able to supply me with. I want to get back to the economics. It is now estimated that GDP is anything between 2% and 8% lower than if we had remained in the European Union. The Office for Budget Responsibility suggests a 4% reduction in productivity, and Goldman Sachs estimates that the UK economy is around 6% smaller than it would otherwise have been. I want to be clear: that does not mean that Britain suddenly became 8% poorer on the morning of 24 June 2016. Of course, Britain continued to grow, and we have experienced some economic growth. The argument is that the UK has grown less than it otherwise would have done. Brexit was never going to be a spectacular economic crash. If anything, it is more insidious than that. Brexit is more akin to a slow puncture. The economy keeps growing, the car keeps moving forward, but the driving gets tougher as we negotiate in a harsher environment.

    Hansard source
17. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    Indeed I do. They were almost as ridiculous as the extraordinary claims that were made about what would happen if we left the European Union, from the £350 million saved per week to the claims about bendy bananas and sausages. They were absurd, and the hon. Gentleman is right that it was a poor debate, but he cannot disagree with the evidence from the House of Commons Library and all the major financial institutions that Brexit has been an economic disaster. I do not think anybody could possibly disagree with that basic statement. I will come on to trade, because that is equally important. The OBR assumes that Brexit will ultimately reduce UK imports and exports by around 15% relative to the scenario had we remained in the European Union. Again, that does not mean that our exports have literally fallen by 15%, but the additional barriers created by Brexit mean we trade less than we otherwise would have done. That matters because the European Union is still by far our largest trading partner. In 2025, the EU accounted for 41% of our exports of goods and services and around half of our imports. So much for the idea that we would effortlessly turn our back on Europe and replace all that trade with new deals around the world. Yes, of course, there have been useful, good trade deals with the likes of New Zealand, Australia and India. They have benefits, but they barely touch the sides of the trade relationship we already had with the European Union.

    Hansard source
18. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    Most definitely. I thoroughly agree with the hon. Lady. It is hard to think of any sector that has not suffered as a result of our leaving the European Union. She is right to reference the steel sector, although it could be any sector. I am pretty certain that today we will hear quite a lot about how leaving the EU has disastrously impacted so many sectors throughout the United Kingdom. I want to get on to immigration. How do we start to deal with the subject of immigration? It is perhaps the saddest but funniest part of the whole saga. Immigration was supposed to be the one thing that Brexit would fix. That seemed to be the whole point of it: it was about taking back control and stopping uncontrolled immigration. But what did we find? Immigration skyrocketed and reached the extraordinarily high level of 1.47 million in the year to March 2023. Without a doubt, leaving the EU closed the door to EU immigration. Net migration from the EU has been negative since June 2022. The conveyor belt of talent that had been coming to the UK for the best part of the past two decades was stopped. After closing off Europe, we quickly discovered that we actually quite liked having EU people working in all our different sectors, from hospitals to farms, hotels, restaurants, universities, care services, businesses, the City and our creative sector. We all found that we actually needed people from the EU and people quite liked employing them.

    Hansard source
19. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I join the hon. Gentleman overwhelmingly and enthusiastically. He is absolutely right. It is hard to think of a sector that has remained untouched by the fact that we cannot access European talent. It is a problem for hospitality and restaurant businesses in constituencies like mine, and in the City, where many dynamic figures helped build some of the success stories that we see just a few miles from where we are today. Before Brexit, there was barely a small boat sighted in the channel, and now we are told that that is perhaps the single biggest issue that confronts this country. Various Prime Ministers and Home Secretaries have come up with a variety of different wheezes to try to stop those small boats coming to the UK, but all have been hampered because we left the one international agreement that might have dealt with returning some of those people to the European Union. When we left the European Union, we also left the Dublin III regulation—the one thing that might have achieved some of the ambition that people had about stopping small boats. Then there is the irony that Brexit did not just make it harder for Europeans to come here; it made it harder for us to move around Europe, too. British citizens are now third country nationals in their own continent. We can still travel across Europe, of course, but there is now a 90-day limit in a rolling 180-day period. For ordinary holidaymakers who have been away enjoying the sun, that might mean nothing more than the huge queues that we have seen in some airports across Europe—a minor inconvenience, perhaps—but for businesses it means more red tape, more restrictions and more unnecessary difficulties. For those in my former profession—musicians, performers and other creative professionals—it can mean a bewildering collection of different rules about work permits, visas, carnets and documentation. Brexit has been such a destructive and invidious political project that it has even managed to stop the music moving freely. This Labour Government gave a commitment that they would fix that. We are talking about ambitions, so come on, Minister: stop the Brexit imposition on music. Let the music move freely again. Let the current generation of musicians enjoy the opportunities that I had as a musician. Who knows, we might even have the Prime Minister on a European tour if he manages to get it fixed!

    Hansard source
20. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    Absolutely. We have had this issue for seven or eight years. I remember securing the first urgent question when it was recognised as a problem. We have had a long time to fix it. I see that the Minister is taking notes; one thing he could reassure the House on is that the music will move. Get it moving, because there is no reason why it should be stuck behind the English channel. We are told that all this is happening—and I am afraid to say that we are going to hear it again today—because it is the wrong type of Brexit. Who knew? Apparently, it was the wrong deal. Variously, it was the wrong Government—the wrong everything—but the hard Brexiteers got everything they wanted. They got everything they asked for and more: no customs union, no freedom of movement, no single market, no European court jurisdiction, no EU institutions and no going back. What we have now is not an accidental form of Brexit that just happened to emerge out of the ashes. It was everything that they fought for decades to achieve. The conclusion is that there is no magic Brexit. There is no Brexit where we get all the benefits of membership without the obligations. There is no Brexit where we have frictionless trade without accepting that the rules are necessary for frictionless trade. There is no cake and eating it. Lastly, there is the extraordinary position of this Labour Government. They know that Brexit is an absolute and utter disaster. There is no getting away from it. The evidence is right in front of them. I listened to the Prime Minister yesterday, and he was absolutely right to reference Brexit as one of the biggest issues that has damaged this country in the last 10 years. They know that our relationship with our largest trading partner is fundamentally broken, but they have tied themselves up in knots with these unnecessary and useless red lines. Instead of actually fixing the problem, they continue to tinker around the edges. There is a little veterinary agreement here, a little customs improvement there, a bit of mutual recognition, a bit of youth mobility, a bit of this, a bit of that—a bit of a big fat nothing, because that is what it is. The Government have their reset plans, which I am pretty certain is what the Minister will almost exclusively tell us about, but they are nothing more than the same old tinkering.

    Hansard source
21. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I have given way to the hon. Gentleman already. Sorry, but lots of people wish to speak. None of the Government’s plans solves the real problem, which is getting back into the EU. The British public are so far ahead of them on this, it is almost unbelievable. Rejoining the EU is by far the most popular option when presented to the British public. According to Ipsos, 58% of voters would back rejoining the bloc, with almost half supporting a new referendum after the next general election. Only 33% think that the UK should stay out. If only the Government had that in their manifesto, they would be an absolute shoo-in to continue in government maybe not just for the next Parliament, but for the one after that. Not everything that has gone wrong in the UK in the last 10 years is down to Brexit—of course not. We have had covid, the war in Ukraine, the energy crisis, inflation and 14 years of the chaotic Tories to help make matters much worse. But Brexit is a slow puncture rather than a spectacular crash, and since 2016 we have had to navigate the increasingly difficult terrain of all these international difficulties with a flat Brexit tyre. Brexit was sold as a moment when we would open our doors and regain our freedom, but all we have done is secure more paperwork. We were told that we would take back control, but immigration has skyrocketed to record levels. We were told that Brexit would free us from Brussels bureaucracy, but we have only created our own UK bureaucracy to deal with leaving the Brussels bureaucracy. Perhaps the best thing that we can do today is remember what was promised and what was achieved. We in Scotland most definitely remember. We remember back in another referendum—the referendum on Scottish independence—being told that the only way to secure Scotland’s EU future was to vote to stay within the UK Union. What happened to that? Brexit has been an utter disaster. It is a shameless project that has made everybody worse off. Let us reflect on that again, and hopefully in 10 years’ time we will be back in the European Union enjoying the prosperity that we deserve.

    Hansard source
22. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I have been listening very carefully and patiently to the hon. Gentleman, and he refuses to accept the reality. The House of Commons Library did us a great favour by bringing together all the evidence, which clearly suggests that there has been a fall in GDP and in the performance of the UK economy since we left the European Union. Is he credibly standing there and telling this House that there have been no impacts whatsoever of our leaving the EU?

    Hansard source
23. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I am grateful to have a couple of minutes to sum up what has been an excellent debate with some fantastic contributions. I secured this debate because I could not believe that in June this year, no one made any attempt to even recognise the fact that we had left the European Union 10 years ago. There was no carrying of the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) down the Mall in ticker-tape processions. There was nothing in the way of celebration or even to mark the event. I found that a bit unusual, which is why I secured the debate. I am pleased that I did, because we have heard some pretty scary things today. There were two words that came out loud and clear from practically every contribution: unmitigated disaster. That is the conclusion that any sane and rational person would have to make when they look at what has happened in the 10 years since we left the European Union. I listened carefully to my Conservative colleagues talk about the history of all this. They do not seem to be able to accept the forecasts that are clearly laid out in the House of Commons Library briefing. Maybe we have the wrong type of Brexit, the wrong type of Government, the wrong type of deal or the wrong type of House of Commons Library. I do not know what their real issue is, but they fail to accept and recognise that there has not been even a mixed response. It was quite alarming that the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood), who spoke for the official Opposition, could not even acknowledge that there have been difficulties over the past 10 years. My last word to the Government is that, yes, they can make progress, and we are all keen to support them in trying to improve the relationship with the European Union, but unless they are prepared to consider rejoining the European Union, which is what the vast majority of the people of this country want, I am afraid they will not be able to make much progress. It will just be more tinkering and making slight progress at the very edges of a very clear and distinct problem. I urge the Government to have a look at the benefits of rejoining the EU, even through some sort of examination or inquiry about what it could do. It is not good enough to just blithely say that we are not looking at it and we are sticking to our red lines, and it is not what the people of the country want. They want to be back in the European Union—a sensible place to be—and to end the unmitigated disaster that we have experienced in the last 10 years. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the impact of the 2016 EU membership referendum on the UK.

    Hansard source
24. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Graham Leadbitter

    Rewiring the State

    Can I remind the First Secretary that during this summer my constituency experienced the extensive Cairngorms wildfire? It was a major incident in difficult terrain that destroyed around 20 square miles of iconic hillside and forestry, threatened homes and businesses, and required the efforts of over 500 firefighters and volunteers. There are actions required of the UK Government, the devolved Governments and numerous public agencies and landowners, and I am pressing all of them on these issues. With the risk growing, my ask of the First Secretary is that the lack of military aerial firefighting capability within the UK be urgently reviewed, so that aerial assistance can be provided in these extreme and often prolonged incidents. What work is being done with our European neighbours in respect of mutual aid in tackling wildfires? We must recognise that exceptional local effort cannot be a substitute for national and international preparedness.

    Hansard source
25. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Dave Doogan

    Representation of the People Bill

    Just to develop the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee’s theme, the Minister is taking some steps to control foreign contributions and donations to politics, but why not just ban them? She touched herself on the malign influence of people who would seek to offshore their tax liabilities—not contributing to the business of Government—and then, from some offshore location, direct that Government in how to spend that money, which they will not be subject to the consequences of, and neither will they have to contribute. It is totally unjust. Why is it not banned?

    Hansard source
26. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Brendan O'Hara

    Rewiring the State

    A 15-minute statement on rewiring the state, yet Scotland does not merit a single mention—not even the Cairngorm wildfire. It is becoming increasingly clear that this Prime Minister is almost exclusively focused on pursuing an English domestic agenda. Having lost five parliamentary elections in a row and slumped to 17% of the vote last May, I can understand why the Labour party has given up in Scotland, but does the Minister think it is wise to make it so obvious?

    Hansard source
27. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Brendan O'Hara

    Representation of the People Bill

    Is it Conservative party policy to reverse the votes for 16 and 17-year-olds in Scotland? Every single piece of evidence that we can point to suggests that engaging 16 and 17-year-olds makes them better citizens. Does the right hon. Lady seriously want to undermine that?

    Hansard source
28. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·SNP·Brendan O'Hara

    Representation of the People Bill

    During this Bill’s Second Reading back in March, I said that the SNP generally welcomed its introduction, particularly its extension of the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds. We on the SNP Benches still do. Evidence is always helpful; unfortunately, the right hon. Member for Tatton (Esther McVey) is no longer in her place, but Scotland has had this in place for 12 years, and it has been an unqualified success. No serious person is planning to backtrack on it. That said, we do still have serious concerns about the Bill, because what is currently on offer is a far cry from what the Labour party promised during the passage of the Elections Act 2022. Back then, we all recognised that that Act was an appalling piece of legislation; it was nakedly partisan, and quite rightly, when opposing it, the Labour party promised to shred it. Now it is in power, I fear that it has chosen to tinker rather than shred. We can see for ourselves the levels of frustration that exist on the Labour Benches, because Labour Members know that this Bill was an opportunity to undo great democratic harms that were caused by the 2022 Act and introduce an entirely new system—one that would have fairness, equality, transparency and accountability at its heart. I fear that the Bill as it currently stands squanders that opportunity. The clearest manifestation of that frustration is the number of amendments to the Bill that have originated from the Government’s own Back Benches. There are scores of amendments—215 pages of them. I want to highlight a few that I believe would have significantly improved the Bill, had the Government taken them on. New clause 34, tabled by the right hon. Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne), would tighten up cryptocurrency. He explained in an intervention earlier that the Government’s position in the Bill does not go nearly far enough, and we agree. New clause 35, tabled by the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), would extend the franchise to those with indefinite leave to remain. Such a system has been in place in Scotland for more than six years, and it works well and has been entirely uncontroversial.

    Hansard source
29. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Richard Tice

    Rewiring the State

    I congratulate the First Secretary on her appointment. I am sure that the reforms planned to rewire the state are well-intentioned, but it seems that we are going from No. 10 plus the Cabinet Office to No. 10, No. 10 North, the Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Cabinet Office and a new OneGov Delivery Agency. We are going from two to five. Does she understand our concerns that she is increasing the size of the state, increasing the cost and slowing down decision making?

    Hansard source
30. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

    Engagements

    Q10. I applaud the Prime Minister’s focus on civil society and on support for young people, but the fact is that in his time as Mayor of Greater Manchester youth employment did not improve. In fact, it got worse and no amount of taxpayer-funded support is going to fix that. Will the Prime Minister accept that the way to get young people into work is to provide meaningful tax cuts for businesses and to ensure that people who can work should be working?

    Hansard source
31. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

    Rewiring the State

    I want to be constructive because I welcome the creation of a stronger centre, with a proper political centre in No. 10 and a corporate HQ for the non-political functions. My question to the Minister is: what is the residual point of the Cabinet Office in this new structure? Some 12,000 people are currently employed in the Cabinet Office and all its quangos. Some of them will be redistributed, but what is the point of that office in future? Likewise, what is the point of the Cabinet Secretary’s post? How is anything going to change when the same people are working in the same buildings, under the same incentives?

    Hansard source
32. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

    Representation of the People Bill

    The Bill contains a lot of useful tightening of electoral law, and we are having a very important debate this afternoon. It is important that we think about how we police donations from abroad and from home. I pay tribute to the remarks made by the hon. Members for Hexham (Joe Morris) and for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Rushanara Ali) about the impact of algorithms, social media and deepfakes. There are clearly threats to our democracy from technology that the Bill does not closely address. Let us face it: the Bill is not concerned with those questions. The claim is made that the Bill will defend democracy, but it is actually a flagrantly partisan attempt to kneecap Reform UK. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) and the hon. Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy)—always reliable—who made clear exactly what the Bill is about and who it is aimed at. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Walthamstow, too, for pointing out that the Bill exempts from any suggestion of a restriction donations by trade unions, which have given £17 million to the Labour party in the last five years, £10 million of that at the last election. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] They are delighted; they welcome it. Of course they are happy with that sort of support. This is partisan and highly partial legislation. I put on record my resentment and outrage on behalf of the people who have generously given to Reform UK, whom the Minister called “malign actors”. I wonder who she is referring to. She is talking about individuals, British citizens, who have made money and are choosing to donate it in support of political causes that they believe in, as is their right.

    Hansard source
33. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

    Representation of the People Bill

    No, I am not going to give way. It is their right to support a political cause in their own country, where they are registered to vote and of which they are citizens. It is absolutely wrong to traduce them in that way. Some suggest that the Bill will restore trust in politics, which is exactly what is needed, but what they mean is restore trust in the class of politicians and in the political parties that have got us into the mess that we are in—[Interruption]—including, I am afraid to say, the party of which I was a part. That is why I left it. We need change. I am glad to say that our democracy is actually working. A new force is arising, and it will put the interests of the British people, not the class of politicians and parties that got us into this mess, first. That is what the populist revolt is doing, demonstrating the effectiveness and vibrancy of our democracy. Let me turn to the amendments that I support, because we do have a real threat to our democracy, and let me make these points as seriously and soberly as I can. Our democracy is underwired by a series of principles and practices that were traditionally historically implicit in the system and therefore did not need to be stated. They did not need to be stated, but now they do, and they need to be stated because over the last couple of generations, we have brought into this country millions of people, many of whom do not understand or honour those implicit principles. Let me go through the changes that are necessary to make explicit formerly implicit principles. The first is that voters belong to this country, that they are citizens of this country with the allegiance and commitment that that brings. There were historically exceptions made for small numbers of Commonwealth citizens and Irish citizens who were in this country. That now needs to change. The number of Irish citizens is still very low, but there are now 2.5 million Commonwealth citizens resident in this country who are entitled to vote in our elections who are not citizens of the United Kingdom. That is wrong; it is time to correct that anomaly.

    Hansard source
34. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

    Representation of the People Bill

    No, I will not. The second implicit principle that we now need to bring to the surface is that we are one country, speaking a common language, taking part in a single election concerning matters about our country. That means election materials printed in English and the other native languages of the British isles. That might feel like a small thing or a petty one, but it is an important principle. How can we integrate genuinely? How can we bring our divided country together if we do not do our democracy in the same language? The third principle that was implicit before is that people vote in person. We now have a quarter of all votes in the last general election being cast by proxy. That is open to flagrant abuse, and we will restrict that. Lastly, the system depends on the principle that people vote individually, on their own; it is a secret choice. That principle is clearly not fully understood or honoured, as we have seen in the abuse of voting in recent elections—so-called family voting. It is already illegal, so we need to ensure that it does not happen.

    Hansard source
35. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Andrew Rosindell

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I am very confused. The hon. Gentleman seems passionate about independence for Scotland, so why does he not believe in independence for the whole United Kingdom?

    Hansard source
36. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Andrew Rosindell

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I thank the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) for allowing us to debate this issue, 10 years on from the sovereign decision of the people of the United Kingdom to leave a political union—that is the important message that seems to evade most people in this Chamber today. We were not part of a simple trading arrangement: under the Maastricht treaty, which the Conservative Government of John Major signed us up to without a referendum, our sovereignty was handed away to a political union. When my parents voted to join a common market, or to stay in a common market, in the 1970s, that was about free trade; it was about co-operation and working together as neighbours. But over the years it became a political union, and our laws—the laws that we are elected to make—were overridden by a massive unelected bureaucracy in Brussels. Our trade has to be global—

    Hansard source
37. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Andrew Rosindell

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    A Parliament that had no real power, as the hon. Member knows. Our democracy and our historic constitutional rights and liberties were gradually being eroded. I want this country to be prosperous. The real prosperity in the world today does not come with a diminishing market in the continent. The global market is there for us to grab if we take that opportunity. Unfortunately, the political establishment of this country has failed in the last 10 years to grab the opportunities that being independent has given us. Those in the civil service, those in government under Theresa May and the establishment in this country did everything they possibly could to derail Brexit. Under Theresa May’s agreement, we would have been half in and half out of the European Union. That would have been a disaster. Fortunately, the hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex (Sir Bernard Jenkin), myself and others voted against that deal, and gave us a Brexit that actually meant something. The opportunities are there for Britain to take if we choose to do so. The alternative is to go back into a political union and be subjected to rules, laws, regulations, the euro—all the things that come with being in the European Union—and free movement. If the people of Iceland had the good sense to say no, then we should have the good sense to think of the long-term future of our country, retain our independence, never go back to the European Union, but maintain good relations and trade co-operation with our neighbours.

    Hansard source
38. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Reform·Andrew Rosindell

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    The hon. Gentleman is making a powerful and correct speech, offering the facts. Does he not regret that, in all those years of Conservative Government after we had left the EU, we did not seize the opportunities to be more radical, to ensure that the benefits of Brexit were properly realised? Does he also repudiate John Major’s Government for bringing in the Maastricht treaty, which created political union in the first place?

    Hansard source
39. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Plaid Cymru·Llinos Medi

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    My constituency has one of the busiest roll-on roll-off ports, in Holyhead. There has been an announcement regarding passport requirements for travel between the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Teithiau Elfyn, a local tour company, has warned me of the serious economic impact of such short-notice announcements. Does the hon. Member agree that the Brexit agreement has not worked for the people of Ynys Môn or Wales, and has had a negative impact on the economy?

    Hansard source
40. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Plaid Cymru·Liz Saville Roberts

    Strengthening the Union

    If this is a Union of equals, let me turn to the wildfires that we suffered in Wales and England this summer. The Rhinogydd mountains of Eryri national park are the last true upland wilderness in Wales. They burned for over two weeks in July, causing immeasurable damage to peatlands and wildlife. Despite heroic work by local firefighters, there were no UK-wide resources available, including the military, to tackle this ecological disaster. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to ensure that the Welsh Government have sufficient resources in the face of overwhelming climate change?

    Hansard source