Iran
You are absolutely right, and if you want to put forward your—
12,832 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them
- Hansard source
- Hansard source
Iran
I apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I get really annoyed when others do that but I have just done it as well. I will move swiftly on and get to the main point of my speech. Since the beginning of the crisis, the Government and Prime Minister have been clear that our approach has been guided by what is in the best interests of the British people and our country’s security. Unlike some Members across the House, the Prime Minister was clear that we would not be dragged into a US-led war with no apparent plan and without reflecting on the impact. I am also proud that the Foreign Secretary convened more than 40 countries to help build international pressure to open the strait of Hormuz. I was chatting to my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Selly Oak prior to this debate. It is hugely important that we build those international alliances because we cannot do that on our own. I ask the Minister to address in closing the economic impact on the UK of not getting the peace process back on track and trade flowing through the strait. This recent conflict shows the regime in Iran has no scruples about hijacking the world economy by blocking the strait, and we have seen the consequences. And, again, we should of course condemn the Iranian regime. I said that I would mention Raytheon UK, based in my constituency, and I am proud that it is leading the consortium that has won a £20 billion contract to build the British Army’s new AI training systems. Training like that is now key to the nature of war and how we fight war, and I am very proud that my town is going to play its part in that endeavour. Finally, I pay tribute to the Prime Minister for his leadership, which has put Britain back on the international stage. Working with our allies is the only way we can deal with these issues.
- Hansard source
Iran
I liked the right hon. Gentleman saying earlier that he and I have discussed Ramsay MacDonald in the 1930s, over a tea and no other beverage. I very much messed up my words when I was trying to answer my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell). I was trying to make the point that the problem we have with these malign influences and hostile states is the drip-feeding of disinformation. It does not come all at once and say that people should support Russia. This drip-feeding is really concerning, and that is a real challenge for us to tackle, is it not?
- Hansard source
Regional Accents and Social Mobility
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship this morning, Sir Roger. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh and Atherton (Jo Platt) for securing this debate, and for hosting the excellent recent event on regional accents. Yesterday, we celebrated Black Country Day—a moment to recognise the history, the heritage and everything wonderful about the Black Country, including our distinctive accent and dialect. However, in various polls over the years, the Black Country and Birmingham accents have frequently been cited as the least favoured in the UK, and they face unfair stigma, classism and stereotyping. I take this opportunity to clarify that Black Country and Brummie are not the same thing—as any Black Country person will say: “Ar bay a Brummie—arm from the Black Country!” As my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton North East (Sureena Brackenridge) said, we are often mocked and judged for our accent. When I tell people that I am from Stourbridge, I am often met with a blank look, but when I say that it is near Dudley, I can hear what their brain is thinking before they say, “Dud-laay”. One time, it is funny—but when it happens repeatedly, it can become demeaning. However, ours is one of the oldest and most historically preserved dialects in the UK, retaining roots from Old English and early Middle English—surely something to be proud of. The Black Country accent has been associated with laziness, lower intelligence and a lack of sophistication, but that is far from the truth. Our accent is history that we can hear in every single word, shaped by hundreds of years of grit and graft. It is the sound of proud, hard-working folk who led the industrial revolution, helping to develop the modern world. In fact, Shakespeare himself would have probably understood Black Country people better than Londoners, as our dialect is so closely linked to Old English, with phrases like “Ow bist yow?” and “bostin fittle”. I remember my parents and teachers discouraging my accent due to biases and stigma, leading to beliefs that I could face discrimination or be seen as inferior in the working world. Other Members have alluded to similar prejudices with their accents. I was criticised for saying “buz” instead of “bus”, or “doower” instead of “door”, and I was told that my accent could impact my chances of getting on in life. The Sutton Trust report on accents highlighted a case in 2013 of a primary school in the Black Country that banned students from talking in Black Country dialect. No wonder some feel the need to tone down their accents. When I came to this place, my accent got a mixed reception from constituents, with comments such as, “No one will listen to you with that stupid accent.” However, I also had many people saying how great it was to see someone in Parliament who sounds like them, and my view is definitely more of the latter. As I have got older, I have become prouder of my accent and what it represents, but I still find myself slipping into that telephone voice—or “spakin’ proper”. It is a hangover from years of being told that my accent would hold me back or cause me to be judged. No one should be judged for how they speak, nor should it affect their life chances. It is heartening that, in recent years, we hear a broader representation in the media of the wonderful range of accents up and down our country. However, we would be naive to think that prejudice is not still harboured in some quarters. In this place, there are a variety of accents, as we have heard this morning, to represent the towns, villages and regions up and down the country. I think that helps elected Members to be more relatable to their constituents and to encourage aspiration. We are not inferior for how we speak, nor should we hide it, and I will continue to champion the bostin Black Country for as long as I am here.
- Hansard source
Regional Accents and Social Mobility
That point made me think about the fact that a lot of regional dialects and accents have been lost over the years simply because people have moved away or been forced to tone them down. That is another reason why it is important to embrace our regional differences, so that we do not lose any more of these precious dialects and accents.
- Hansard source
Engagements
I can do this. Can I thank my right hon. and learned, and very dear, Friend for everything he has given to our party and our country? There were few who believed we could make the changes needed to bring in a Labour Government after the general election of 2019, when he became leader. Today, though, because of his service and his leadership, children are growing up in a fairer Britain. We stand tall on the world stage, and every day, we have seen his decency and his courage shine through. My family and I thank him and his wonderful family for their cherished friendship, and I am certain that everyone will join me in wishing him and his family the very, very best for their next chapter.
- Hansard source
Iran
Life for ordinary Iranian people is getting ever more difficult. Right now, they are caught between a rock and a hard place. There is the brutally repressive and theocratic regime’s systemic economic mismanagement and rampant corruption, and an inhumane and suffocating package of US sanctions that hurt the Iranian people long before any regime official feels the pain caused. The two devastating waves of US-Israeli military strikes in just over a year have pushed the country to the brink, making virtually every aspect of daily survival an enormous struggle for most ordinary Iranians. The latest developments in relation to the rapidly re-escalating conflict between Iran and the United States are incredibly alarming. This could easily become an all-out full-scale war with devastating consequences, not just for the people of Iran but for the wider middle east region and, of course, for hundreds of millions more, with the economic and environmental impacts reaching across the globe. By actively seeking to assert unilateral US hegemony, the Trump Administration are dragging the middle east and the wider world into a perilous situation that is worsening by the day. It is abundantly clear that diplomacy and international law are in tatters. We can see this by three recent developments. The first is the illegal and indiscriminate US-Israeli 40-day military bombardment of Iran. That was following the equally illegal and unwarranted 12-day barrage of the country in June 2025. Both were launched when the Iranian Government were sat around the negotiating table. Secondly, there is the rapid unravelling of the subsequent ceasefire under Trump’s maximalist attitude, with his having stopped the military campaign which his Administration had started in the first place without agreement or approval internationally. Thirdly, there is US Secretary of State Marco Rubio declaring the launch of a campaign systematically to dismantle the International Criminal Court under the pretext that that global tribunal is interfering with US military and law enforcement operations, and thereby threatening US sovereignty. There is no doubt that we are entering a phase in which the US feels emboldened. It is giving short shrift to the basic tenets laid down in the UN charter and in international law. Iran is the arena in which it can wage war at any time, all while demanding that independent and sovereign countries such as the UK fall into step and provide direct support without question. If there is no consideration of entering a protocol of diplomacy, that is the abandonment of international law and basic humanitarian principles. Despite the rhetoric of those on both sides of the conflict claiming some sort of major victory, the reality remains that Iran, and primarily the beleaguered Iranian people, have suffered immense loss and devastation, while the Trump Administration have clearly failed to achieve any of his constantly shifting objectives. We now witness a new cycle of rapidly worsening tit-for-tat military action, with the Islamic Republic Government targeting commercial shipping in the strait of Hormuz and US assets in neighbouring countries, and the US launching blunt-force bombardments, primarily of cities and areas along Iran’s southern coast, but also elsewhere in the country. Innocent Iranian civilians are the casualties of war. The Trump Administration on the one hand cite the illegality of Iran’s attempt to exact a toll on the strait of Hormuz—“It’s an international waterway”—but on the other talk about exacting their own 20% tariff on traffic through the strait. That blatantly demonstrates the US imperialist aims regarding control of the strait and the wider Persian gulf. It is completely in line with the various recent stances the US has taken with regard to Venezuela, Greenland, the Panama canal and even neighbouring Canada. This should serve as a stark warning to all countries, particularly those attempting to appease Trump by accelerating their own militarisation in compliance with his diktats, as was recently demonstrated at the NATO gathering in Turkey.
- Hansard source
Iran
Trump is absolutely throwing his weight, his heft and his influence politically and militarily across various parts of the globe. His behaviour is in contravention of international law. It is heinous in the extreme, and he is a danger to—to use a broad phrase—world peace. There is no doubt about that. However, Ukraine and other parts of the world, such as Kashmir, are very much on the brink. We have seen mass displacement and ethnic cleansing of millions. We have seen—I may be wrong, and pardon me if I am—the biggest humanitarian disaster in Sudan. When we amalgamate all those crises in various bits of the world, we see that the world is on the brink—it is on a precipice. I have often quoted the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in this place, and it says: “It is now 85 seconds to midnight.” That is the closest the world has ever been to annihilation. A lot of that is down to environmental aspects, but it is also down to politics, politicians and the political decisions that are made in various parts of the globe. I would like to think that there would be the international leadership to say, “No.” The right hon. Gentleman is well aware of my position on military spending: I think we have higher priorities than that because our nation has crumbling infrastructure, some 3.5 million people and rising using food banks, and 14% of children living in food insecurity. Those are the issues in my inbox and those are the things that I want to tackle.
- Hansard source
Iran
My hon. Friend touches on something that I want to expand on further: spending for defence is not limited to weapons, drones and so on. I regret that my Labour Government have cut overseas development aid, which is an echo of what Donald Trump did with the US Agency for International Development package. Even the most marginal, minute bit of analysis appreciates that overseas development aid is an investment in more dangerous, volatile parts of the world to combat another hot political topic in this country at the moment: immigration. There is more than one way to spend to secure our borders. The UK must join the moral and principled calls for an immediate and lasting ceasefire, to be followed by a swift resumption of negotiations. We must also openly denounce and separate ourselves from the Trump Administration’s dangerous and hypocritical tactics, specifically Trump’s willingness to initiate and pursue illegal wars while claiming to negotiate. Above all, we must keep it in our minds that the vast majority of Iranian people desire peace and wish to rebuild their shattered country. This devastating war has set back the vital efforts of and the painstaking progress made by civil society and trade union activists, who have been valiantly struggling to achieve genuine freedom and social justice and to steer Iran towards a democratic, popular, fair and progressive transition. The future of Iran remains the sole preserve and remit of the long-suffering and long-struggling people of Iran themselves—and absolutely only them.
- Hansard source
Iran
Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is about quality not quantity?
- Hansard source
Iran
I agree with everything that the hon. Gentleman has said so far—he is making an excellent speech. Does he agree that the actions of Trump and, therefore, Netanyahu are not born out of a passion for the liberation of the Iranian people but are an imposition of imperialist forces, and with imperialism naturally comes capitalism? It is ordinary Iranian people who are suffering on the back of that.
- Hansard source
National Energy System Operator: Blackout Risk
Last week the Committee heard from Claire Dykta, the director of strategy and policy at NESO, who told us: “Operational decisions are taken by authorised, trained personnel only.” Her comments were confirmed by Alastair Martin, the chief strategy officer at Flexitricity, who, in the same session, said: “I do not think the idea that the head office at NESO told the control room what to do is plausible.” Does the Minister agree that it is important for public reassurance, especially at a time of threats to energy security, that the line is not crossed in any way between properly evidenced scrutiny on one hand and conjecture on the basis of rumour, which is verging on scaremongering, on the other?
- Hansard source
Peak Cluster Pipeline and Project
The North Sea Transition Authority deals with many private sector companies around oil and gas drilling. I agree that it is a public quango, but surely the right hon. Member agrees that it does not have responsibility for what Shell or BP do in the North sea any more than it has responsibility for what Peak Cluster may or may not do through Cheshire and underneath the Liverpool bay?
- Hansard source
Peak Cluster Pipeline and Project
The important thing for my residents is this: does this project work and is it safe? Those are the two key points. I note that my hon. Friend the Member for Wirral West (Matthew Patrick) is in his place today. He has been challenging these plans on behalf of his community, as have I and my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Sarah Russell). This is not a done deal, and Peak Cluster needs to listen to the community’s concerns and act on them. Does the Minister agree with all those points?
- Hansard source
Estate Regeneration
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) on securing this debate. I want to speak about the importance of housing-led regeneration. Done well, it transforms lives, rebuilds communities, unlocks economic growth and creates places where people want to live, work and raise families. Yet for many communities across the north, that aspiration remains out of reach. Too many families live in ageing homes that are expensive to maintain, difficult to modernise and increasingly unfit for today’s needs. In many neighbourhoods, outdated layouts and ageing infrastructure no longer meet the needs of the communities they serve. Without significant intervention, 100,000 social homes could be lost over the coming decade, further reducing the supply of affordable housing. It is against that backdrop that the interim findings of the Renew inquiry are so important—I declare my interest as chair of the Westminster group for the inquiry. Led by the Northern Housing Consortium, the inquiry highlights the vital role that regeneration can play in addressing housing needs, supporting economic development and strengthening communities across the north of England. The Renew report found that more than half a million good-quality homes could be unlocked through regeneration and renewal programmes, demonstrating the scale of the opportunity before us. The report highlights the transformative impact that regeneration can have on people and places. Beyond increasing housing supply, it offers an opportunity to create healthier, more sustainable communities, to reduce energy costs for residents, and to improve the overall quality of life in neighbourhoods that have experienced years of under-investment. Importantly, regeneration delivers benefits that extend far beyond housing alone. Investment in homes can help attract investment in infrastructure, town centres and local services. It creates jobs, supports skills development and gives communities greater confidence in their future. The impact therefore reaches well beyond the development site itself, generating wider social value and helping to create vibrant, sustainable places. However, successful regeneration cannot simply be done to communities; it must be delivered with communities. Residents should be at the heart of regeneration plans, helping to shape the future of the places they call home. A good example can be found in the Gleadless Valley regeneration project in Sheffield. Residents’ involvement has shaped the vision for the valley to include commercial and community space, improved parks, paths, and jobs and training for local residents. Lara Joyce, from the Gleadless Valley tenants and residents association, described the process as “making hope feel safe again”. That clearly demonstrates the importance of building trust with residents and ensuring local voices are heard throughout the process. What is particularly encouraging is the growing recognition that the success of regeneration should not be measured solely by the number of homes delivered. Its value can also be seen in a stronger local economy, improved wellbeing and a more resilient community. The challenge now is to turn that ambition into delivery. If we get regeneration right, we will not simply build more homes. We will rebuild neighbourhoods, revitalise businesses and restore pride in communities. That is why housing-led regeneration matters, and why it deserves our continued support.
- Hansard source
Infrastructure Adoption
I rise to present a petition on behalf of residents of Mid Cheshire pertaining to unadopted estates in my constituency. Around 4,700 households—equivalent to more than 12% of all properties across Northwich, Middlewich and Winsford—are on new build estates where basic infrastructure such as roads, drains and sewers remain unadopted by public authorities. The petition, alongside an accompanying online petition, has been signed by over 720 people. The petition states: The petition of residents of the constituency of Mid Cheshire, Declares that homeowners and tenants in newly built properties are waiting too long to see their streets and sewerage infrastructure adopted by the relevant authorities; and further declares that residents are living with years of uncertainty and potential financial liabilities. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to (a) develop a clear standards framework for infrastructure adoption; (b) ensure that housing developers, local authorities and water utilities work together to bring about the timely adoption of infrastructure; and (c) if necessary, legislate to ensure infrastructure is adopted. And the petitioners remain, etc. [P003219]
- Hansard source
Iran
I have long called in this House for the proscription of the IRGC. Last year, the Joint Committee on Human Rights, on which I sit, undertook an inquiry into transnational repression, which found that Iran was one of the most flagrant perpetrators of transnational repression globally. The IRGC uses proxy criminal networks, surveillance and direct threats to silence journalists, opposition groups and the Iranian diaspora in this country. How will they be protected by the proscription?
- Hansard source
Iran
The right hon. Lady raises the JCPOA and the negotiations with Iran 10 or so years ago. Do you think we are closer to a nuclear negotiation today than we were back then? Do you think that negotiating at the start would have been a better approach in this conflict?
- Hansard source
Iran
I thank the right hon. Lady. She talks about the UK’s military support in the conflict. I wonder whether she is suggesting that we should have provided support to the Americans during the initial attacks, as some Opposition Members suggested, or whether she is talking about other types of military support. If she could make that clear, that would be helpful.
- Hansard source
Iran
We want the Minister to go on and on, so we will keep the interventions going. On diplomatic relations, I put on record my condolences on the death of His Highness the Father Amir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani. I thank the Minister for the UK’s leadership in countering Iranian actions in both the strait of Hormuz and this country. I also put on record my own thanks to service personnel who are acting in the region in our interests.
- Hansard source
Iran
Open-source media has highlighted that when the US and Israel struck Iran many months ago, a certain target was destroyed in Tehran. Overnight, a large proportion of Scottish independence media died, which underlines the point about division and protecting the right to self-determination and democracy in this country. Through social media and other means, we are allowing foreign states to play into political division in the United Kingdom. Could my hon. Friend give some insight as to what we are doing collectively to protect against those threats?
- Hansard source
National Security
As Russia becomes increasingly boxed in in Ukraine, it looks towards horizontal escalation. I welcome today’s announcement and the move to proscribe some of these groups. The IRGC, GRU and the SVR—multiple different organisations—are seeking ways to undermine our democracy, using physical, electronic, financial, diplomatic and a multitude of other avenues to try to undermine the right to self-determination, the centrality of democracy in the western world, and, importantly, the way in which we govern. As we move towards an increasingly fractious and dangerous period of time with Russia and in the middle east, will the Minister, in her summing up, say what more we can do to clamp down on hostile state disinformation, Russian disinformation in particular, on social media?
- Hansard source
Waste Management Sites
As my hon. Friend knows—we have discussed this many times—we in Newcastle-under-Lyme know all about the impact that the idea of profit over people can have on the health and wellbeing of communities such as hers and mine, and about the consequences of landfill sites. She is right to say that this is a case of the state going missing in action. I look forward to working with her to ensure that we get the policies needed to keep our communities safe, our air clean and our people living in the situations we want them to live in.
- Hansard source
Waste Management Sites
You have never said that before, Dr Murrison. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing the debate. As I said in my intervention, I know she is committed to working on the same issues that I have spent much of my first few years in this House working on. In my first Westminster Hall speech as the MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme, I said I would not stop going on about Walleys Quarry landfill site until it is closed, capped and restored. It is now closed; capping is, broadly speaking, in operation; and soon, all being well, we will be able to get it restored so that local people in my community can use it. I am proud that after almost a year and a half since the closure notice was issued, we finally chased the cowboy operators of that landfill site out of our town and shut Walleys for good As my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood described, and as the Minister knows, because I have told her many times, for far too long, my community was blighted by respiratory irritation, headaches, disrupted sleep, mental health strain and a constant foul odour in the air from high levels of hydrogen sulphide. We were blighted by pollution and constant worry. Children could not play outside, schools could not open their windows and, disgracefully, it reached the corridors of the Royal Stoke hospital. Furthermore, many older people were left housebound. My hon. Friend talked about putting people before polluters. I would say we must also put people over profits. These operators—I am afraid to say this, but I will be as polite as I can—took the proverbial out of my constituents. The sooner we hold those who did so to account, the better it is for all of us. They had no interest in operating safely, no regard for the community and no idea how to be a good neighbour to those who suffered the worst excesses of their criminality. My relationship with the Environment Agency has changed in recent years. With our zero-tolerance approach to waste crime, we finally got Walleys closed—just 147 days after my party won the election. This transformed life for my community. It is a shame to say this, but for years we had a Conservative Government, a Conservative MP, a Conservative county council in Staffordshire and a Conservative Newcastle-under-Lyme borough council, and to quote a Prime Minister, “nothing changed”. It should not have taken a change in Government for action to be taken, for the criminals to be held to account and for the damned site to be closed. I acknowledge the campaigning work of my predecessor; I am just sorry that his colleagues were missing in action. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson), is a friend of mine, and I am not directing this at him personally, but my community was let down by the Conservative Government, and we will not let his colleagues forget it. It is unforgiveable that local people in Blackpool, Newcastle-under-Lyme and other parts of the country are left living in unliveable situations such as this, so I would be grateful if my hon. Friend the Minister touched on the benefits of a fit-and-proper-person test for those seeking a permit to operate a landfill site. I also urge the Minister to engage with her colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government regarding planning permissions, as noted by the hon. Member for Chippenham (Sarah Gibson), for homes being built in the shadows—or should I say fumes—of landfill sites. Until we get a grip of the waste sector and the crime we find in it, we should not be building homes around those sites. As I have done many times, I thank all those who helped to get the job done and close Walleys Quarry, including my colleagues in Government and in the Environment Agency, who worked with us to ensure we could clean our air and give the good people of Newcastle-under-Lyme the quality of life that they deserve. There is more to do, and I look forward to working with colleagues in Blackpool and around the country to ensure that we do it.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Hospitality Sector
I am grateful to my hon. Friend—he knows he is my friend—for giving way. I am enjoying his introductory remarks. Although I will not comment on the specifics of the pilot, I was married at the Dunadry hotel in his constituency, so I will take any opportunity to celebrate the hospitality sector in Northern Ireland. It is world-renowned, and it is loved by all those who get to enjoy it. It is second only to Staffordshire.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Hospitality Sector
I am grateful for the Minister’s belated congratulations. My wife probably feels like she has been married to me for a lifetime, although it has been three and something years.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Hospitality Sector
I just want to put on record that I did not go to get anyone; she found me.
- Hansard source
Independence Referendum
4. What discussions he has had with the First Minister of Scotland on a second independence referendum.
- Hansard source
Independence Referendum
If these are indeed the last Scottish questions for the Secretary of State, we on these Benches will miss him almost as much as his Scottish Labour colleagues will do. If it is his swansong, when is he going to bring something—anything—to the table to help break this constitutional logjam? It could be an idea, a suggestion or a proposal. Here is a last question for him: if we are in a voluntary Union, which they all say that we are, what is the means for Scotland to leave it?
- Hansard source
Devolved Powers
5. Whether he has had recent discussions with Cabinet colleagues on the devolution of further powers to Scotland.
- Hansard source
Devolved Powers
Devolution appears to be all the rage at the moment, and the Secretary of State will know fine well that the Scottish Parliament recently voted to devolve energy powers back to Scotland. So in this new spirit of renewed co-operation and trust that we are apparently about to start to see, can I ask the Secretary of State when the UK Government will respect the vote of the Scottish Parliament and devolve energy powers back to Scotland?
- Hansard source
Young People
The Minister will know that the Secretary of State is regularly to be heard talking about his many, many good friends. Does she believe that the Prime Minister-elect is one of those good friends, and, while we are on the subject of young Scots, will it not be awkward when the Secretary of State’s job is taken by another young Scot in the shape of the hon. Member for Rutherglen (Michael Shanks)?
- Hansard source
Young People
I note the Minister’s doughty protestations on behalf of the Secretary of State, but noting that is one thing. What message does she have for the 800,000 young Scots who were unable to vote in the 2014 referendum about her party’s continued dogma preventing young people in Scotland from having a say on their constitutional future?
- Hansard source
Iran
Does the right hon. Lady not recognise that everything she has just accused the Government of not doing is exactly what her Government did not do for 10 years? The IRGC is exactly the same now as it was when her party was in government. I am not a great supporter of the Labour Government, as Labour Members will be quick to say, but please do not take the moral high ground when it comes to proscribing the IRGC.
- Hansard source
Iran
I too congratulate the Minister on his appointment and welcome him to his place. Call me naive, perhaps, but I honestly believe that there is nobody in this Chamber who, for all the absenteeism and manifest faults, is a supporter of, or an apologist for, the regime in Tehran. It is a regime that has for decades sought to export its version of Islamic revolution across the world by organising and financing armed groups and militias while simultaneously being absolutely brutal in crushing any form of dissent within its own borders. It was always the hope that one day the people of Iran, weary of the internal repression and worn down by the collapsing economy, would turn against the regime, overthrow those leaders and begin a new chapter in the history of that wonderful country. There have been moments in recent years when we thought, indeed fervently hoped, that that could happen. Many of us here will remember the Woman, Life, Freedom movement, which swept across Iran in late 2022, when those incredibly brave Iranian women took to the streets in their tens of thousands to protest against the murder of Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian woman who died in police custody having been arrested for not wearing her hijab properly in public. Those brave women and girls were soon joined by students, by workers, by members of ethnic and religious minority communities, who had had enough of the subjugation of women, the repression of minorities, the religious fundamentalism, the police brutality and the endemic Government corruption. And so, to the cry of “Woman, life, freedom,” and in an act of incredible bravery and in deliberate defiance of the regime, they removed their headscarves. Of course they knew that in so doing that bravery would come at huge personal cost to so many of them as individuals and to their families. As Professor Azadeh Kian, director of the centre for gender and feminist studies at the University of Paris, said at the time: “What these women are doing in Iran is a revolution, at least a cultural revolution.” But it was a revolutionary act which could not be tolerated by the regime, and it was one which the regime punished the only way it knew how: with extreme violence. In the immediate aftermath of those protests, hundreds of protesters were killed and thousands more were arrested. In the short term, the streets were cleared; but no matter the wishes of the regime in Tehran, no amount of brutal repression would crush the dreams of millions of predominantly young Iranians. It was only a matter of time before they would take to the streets again, and they did so at the end of last year, on 28 December, in the biggest display of civil unrest since the ’79 revolution. Millions of Iranians took to the streets. They took to the streets amid a collapsing currency, soaring inflation, a deterioration in living standards and so much more. It spread quickly to over 200 cities. In the inevitable crackdown that followed, thousands of protesters were killed and the IRGC, using live ammunition, turned on unarmed protesters on 8 and 9 January. In the days that followed, tens of thousands were arrested and there were verified reports of mass killings, putting the death toll at upwards of 30,000. The Iranian regime’s brutality is almost beyond comprehension, but it must have known that those popular uprisings would only become larger and more frequent. It must have known in late January or early February of this year that as its economy collapsed, with its continual brutalisation of women and girls, the imposition of strict religious laws and the suppression of minorities, the people of Iran had had enough, and that pressure was building. As sure as day follows night, the regime’s grip on its population was loosening, but on 28 February, President Trump began his illegal war. One of Trump’s many and varied reasons for that massive aerial bombardment was to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, but this was the same President Trump who, following the 2025 bombardment, told us: “Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran…Obliteration is an accurate term!” His assessment was backed up by his Israeli allies, who announced that “we significantly damaged the nuclear program, and I can also say that we set it back by years, I repeat, years.” Yet in the face of what was happening inside Iran, the United States and Israel, between them, took the decision to attack. It was in that first wave of American attacks that 165 wee girls, aged between seven and 12, were killed when a US bomb hit their school while they were sitting in their classrooms. That same evening, Trump announced, “to the great, proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand”. I suspect that for many Iranians, particularly the parents of those dead children, freedom had never felt further away. Five months on from that initial attack, the freedom that was promised to the people of Iran has turned out to be no more than the gimmicky soundbite we suspected it might be. Over the past five months, it has become clear that in this ill-conceived, illegal war of choice—although it remains unclear whether it was Trump’s choice or Netanyahu’s—there is no plan, no strategy and no sign of an off-ramp to bring the war to an end. All it seems to have achieved is to have all but destroyed Iran’s civilian economy, thereby harming the very people Trump said he was acting to liberate, while at the same time giving the regime in Tehran a huge strategic advantage, one that they are currently exploiting to great effect. One would have hoped and expected that in the White House, when they were scenario-planning this attack, someone would have asked the obvious question: “What will we do if the Iranians block the strait of Hormuz?” Unfortunately for the rest of the world, when someone is so desperate to deflect and hide from a scandal or a crisis at home, the bleeding obvious can sometimes become obscured. In response to that attack, the very first thing Iran did was to cut off the strait of Hormuz—one of the most strategically important waterways in the world—leading to what the International Energy Agency has described as the “largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market”. Iran’s response sent fuel prices rocketing, and the cost of just about everything else that relies on oil—either for its manufacturing or its transportation—soaring. There is not a family anywhere in the United Kingdom who have not paid a direct price for Trump’s reckless behaviour. Even if this war were to end tomorrow, the economic shockwaves would continue for years to come. The European Central Bank recently warned that a prolonged conflict will likely trigger a period of stagflation and a period of low growth rates accompanied by inflation, and push major energy-dependent economies, including Germany and Italy, into technical recession by the end of 2026. Since the initial attack back in February, Trump has told us time and again that in one form or another, Iran has been defeated, that it is begging for a peace deal, or that the strait of Hormuz is about to return to normal service. None of that has been true, and every ceasefire that has been brokered has collapsed within days. The dire economic consequences of Trump’s war of choice continue.
- Hansard source
Iran
I thank the hon. Gentleman for that question. It is a difficult question to answer, but I can tell the House what should not have been done, and what will never work. You do not free people from oppression through indiscriminate aerial bombardment. You do not free people by killing them, or by killing the children of the people you purport to be there to liberate. Of course there are ways in which any democratic country can support a freedom movement within a repressive regime, but what America has done with its Israeli allies is the antithesis of what should be done. All they have done is strengthen the regime, polarise the world, and irreparably damage the movement for freedom within Iran.
- Hansard source
Iran
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his—as usual—erudite explanation. The point he is making is fundamentally correct: this was not done to help liberate the people of Iran from an oppressive theocracy. It was done for American security, and because of an American belief that they had some kind of God-given right to the mineral wealth that is below the ground in the middle east and beyond. That is what this war is about; it is not about liberation. Even yesterday, having U-turned on his latest plan for the zillionth time, Trump announced: “We’re going to knock out all their power plants.” Even after all that has happened—even after all that this man has said—he is still planning to knock out power plants, the power plants that supply the electricity that keeps the lights on in the houses of the people he is supposedly determined to liberate. As we all know, targeting civilian infrastructure is a breach of international law, but sadly, what regard has either Trump or Netanyahu for international law as this year develops? This reckless and illegal action has set back the cause of human rights in Iran by decades. It has strengthened the position of the regime in Tehran, allowing it to portray itself as the victim, rather than being made to account for its appalling human rights record. America and its allies have sacrificed international law and have once again shown that their doctrine of “might is right” will somehow prevail. That has brought financial hardship to every single home in every single community, in every single part of the United Kingdom, and for what? The world is less safe, the Iranian people are suffering more, and the Epstein scandal has not gone away.
- Hansard source
Waste Management Sites
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I congratulate the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) on securing the debate. It is so important that I speak on this issue, as in my constituency we have an incinerator operated by a company called Viridor, which has been in operation for the last 12 years. Like the example in Fleetwood, it processes waste from all around the country, very little of which is produced by the actual residents of Runcorn. Local residents have to live with the problems that hon. Members have talked about this afternoon, including dreadful smells at times and rubbish strewn around the approaching roads from the heavy goods vehicles that deliver the waste. There is noise 24 hours a day—the HGVs have an operational licence for 24 hours a day, and there is the mechanical noise from the plant itself. Every day, 275 HGVs are allowed to go in and out of the plant. I have stood there, endlessly watching one after another. The noise and smell are horrific, with 3,000 tonnes of waste processed in the plant every day. The air pollution at times is a disgrace. As we have heard, people cannot hang out their washing. There are even layers of dust on cars. There is a physical and mental effect on health. Local residents cannot sleep or open their windows. Light pollution from the headlights of HGVs coming down the road is constant through the night, which is worse in winter, of course. As a consequence, local house prices are severely devalued. Why should residents have to move, when some have lived there all their lives? Now, even if they wanted to move, they cannot sell their homes because of the incinerator and they feel trapped. On that note, I ask the Minister to consider offering financial support to those families who are unable to move because they cannot sell their homes due to the proximity of incinerators such as the one in Runcorn. To return to the operator, in December 2023, Viridor paid out £1 million across 180 local households to keep them quiet. They signed a non-disclosure agreement so they could never talk to the press about the conditions they live in. That £4,500 per household is a lot of money for some of my residents, and would have been especially welcome at Christmas. It was meant to keep them quiet and it is a disgrace. I would like to echo the points made about the Environment Agency. It should be timely in its response; it is no good residents ringing and the Environment Agency coming out a week later, when the smog or smell has gone. There are now also issues with vermin such as rats and flies, and concerns about diseases spread by birds flying in and out of operating doors left open. Those doors are meant to shut between each delivery but are left open for birds to fly in and out, potentially spreading disease. The burden of proof is always on the residents to clock and document all this. Why should it be that way? I again ask the Minister to shift the burden of proof from the residents and give the Environment Agency the power to shut down the operation until the complaint or issue is sorted. It is often not just one major incident, such as a fire—it is a continual build-up, wearing down residents until they are desperate. They feel forgotten and unheard. Deprived towns such as Runcorn have been used as a dumping ground for the nation’s rubbish. The least the Government can do is listen to residents, let their voices be heard and compensate them for what is happening to their day-to-day lives.
- Hansard source
Engagements
While his own MPs may have sent him off without resorting to VAR, I have some good news for the Prime Minister: under his tenure, 76% of England football matches have been won, which is the greatest, most successful record of any Prime Minister in history. In his remaining days in office, while he carries out whatever meetings, reviews or motivational talks he has planned, will he commit to ensuring that his greatest legacy is that finally, on Sunday, football is coming home?
- Hansard source
National Energy System Operator: Blackout Risk
There is complete chaos at the National Energy System Operator. Whistleblowers are phoning politicians to express their concerns about blackouts. Independent investigators have had to be appointed, and NESO had to cut the interconnector for exports, without notice, in order to guarantee supplies. I wrote to the chief executive, Fintan Slye, two weeks ago, but I have had no reply to my detailed question. There is arrogance and complacency from the Minister. Can he guarantee that there will be no blackouts? Does he have complete confidence in the chief executive? And will the independent investigation be published for us all to see?