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. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

   Engagements

   Q5. I thank the Prime Minister for his service; he is a good man, and I wish him very well for the future. Politics is not a joke. Every other party in this House, except Reform, has put forward as their candidate in the Clacton by-election a comedian with a dustbin on his head—[Interruption.]. It might be—if hon. Members will listen—that a man with his head full of rubbish is a fitting representative of the mainstream parties in this House. I think the Prime Minister endorsed the bin man, but will he clarify who, if he will not put up a Labour candidate, he wants to win in Clacton?

   Hansard source
2. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

   Safety of Wimborne Road

   I wish to present a petition on behalf of residents in Wimborne about road safety in the Walford Mill area. This location is on the route of three local schools, is close to a nursery, GP surgery and local shop and sits alongside elderly residents’ flats. The area includes a complex junction and an ancient bridge that has a pavement on just one side. Despite two large housing developments increasing both the use of the route by pedestrians and traffic, no meaningful improvements have been made to the ability for people to cross the road. The installation of a zebra crossing and a pedestrian refuge would provide a clearly defined, protected point for crossing Wimborne Road. This would not only enhance safety but offer reassurance to families and the wider community, reducing the likelihood of accidents, encouraging more people to walk to school and improve traffic flow. While work is finally expected to take place to introduce pedestrian crossings elsewhere, this does not present a solution. My constituent Rosanna, who is in the Gallery today, started this petition, which now has 1,766 signatures. The petition states: “The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to support the installation of one pedestrian crossing and one pedestrian refuge near Knobcrook Bridge and the BP garage on Wimborne Road. And the petitioners remain, etc.” Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the constituency of Mid Dorset and North Poole, Declares that Wimborne Road is a bustling thoroughfare used by a mix of vehicles and a significant number of pedestrians each day; further declares that despite its heavy use, there is an insufficient number of zebra crossings and refuges along Wimborne Road; further declares that an insufficient provision of safety measures poses a daily risk to all pedestrians, including the hundreds of school children who traverse this road en route to one of the multiple schools that Wimborne Road connects. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to support the installation of one pedestrian crossing and one pedestrian refuge near Knobcrook Bridge and the BP garage on Wimborne Road. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003224]

   Hansard source
3. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Susan Murray

   Independence Referendum

   Some 54% of Scots now back nuclear power, and the SNP tells them that they cannot have it. In May, over half of Scots—57%—voted for parties committed to the Union. Now, I know that some parties might describe that as nearly 60%, but it is definitely a majority. However, the SNP’s answer, as we are hearing, appears to be another referendum. There is a pattern whereby a majority of Scots disagree with the SNP, and the SNP decides the majority is wrong. Will the Secretary of State back the single transferable vote so that Scots get what Scots vote for?

   Hansard source
4. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Susan Murray

   Engagements

   Q15. I wish the Prime Minister well in what he does next. The future of communities like mine in Mid Dunbartonshire is uncertain in areas where hyperscale data centres are set to be built. The large data centres in Scotland’s planning system could demand more power than the whole of Scotland needs at its winter peak. Can the Prime Minister assure my constituents that they will not find themselves fighting for electricity during the cold winter days?

   Hansard source
5. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Sarah Gibson

   Waste Management Sites

   It is a huge pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison, as I know that much of what I am going to say will be familiar to you. I thank the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing this debate. Waste facilities provide an essential public service, but communities living alongside them must not be expected to bear the consequences of weak regulation or poor waste handling. Two problems are affecting residents in my constituency: the persistent landfill gas odour around Lower Compton, and the growing fire risk over the last few years caused by lithium-ion batteries entering the household waste system. The Environment Agency has received almost 4,000 odour reports over the last three months. As the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood mentioned, the system is not working. Residents have described an overpowering sulphurous smell entering their homes, disrupting their sleep and preventing them from opening their windows or using their gardens. Many have reported headaches, nausea, coughing and feeling unwell. When I visited the landfill site, I was left with a headache and felt unwell for several hours. Although that is only my experience, it gives me some understanding of what the residents have been repeatedly describing. I have pressed the Environment Agency and the operator for action, raised the issue at Prime Minister’s questions and written to the Environment Secretary. The sustained pressure has secured action for my constituents, but we now need evidence that it has actually produced results. The Environment Agency has managed to trace the principal source to an open landfill cell, requiring permanent capping, improved gas extraction and changes to the type of waste being handled. I welcome the completion of the capping works, but for residents it will be a question of whether they can breathe clean air and live normally, not whether the project is said to have been completed. The UK Health Security Agency found no evidence of actual toxic risk, but its monitoring site is not downwind of the site—it is to the west. Although its finding is welcome, it also found strong evidence of odour annoyance and acknowledged that people may experience headaches, throat irritation, stress and sleep disruption. That exposure, although perhaps not as toxic as we expected, is not acceptable, especially for people with respiratory conditions. The issue seems to be that responsibility is completely fragmented. The Environment Agency monitors permit compliance and the UKHSA assesses the health risk, but the local authority considers statutory nuisance. Residents are having to navigate an institutional maze while the smell continues. Will the Minister introduce a clearer joint response framework, with one lead body responsible for co-ordinating monitoring and health advice? We also need to understand why it is happening. The Environment Agency identified an issue with the trommel fines, which can contain sulphate-bearing materials and contribute to the production of hydrogen sulphide when mixed with organic waste. Although the operators are changing the way they handle those materials, it was extremely worrying that when I asked the Environment Agency, it did not seem to be aware of where the responsibility lies for testing how much of the wrong types of material go into the trommel fines as they go into the landfill site. Will the Minister consider who is responsible for independent sampling and whether compositional controls can be better implemented? The second issue affecting the same constituents is lithium-ion battery fires. Recent fires have, in theory, been caused by the crushing of lithium-ion batteries, which sparks a fire that is very difficult to put out. That is putting waste workers, firefighters and nearby residents at risk. The Government must start to properly enforce the existing retailer take-back duties, make return schemes more convenient and more visible, and ensure that producers meet the full cost of collection and treatment. Finally, drawing on my 20-odd years as an architect and my experience in local government, I believe the planning system must properly assess the risk of building our homes, schools and care facilities near to waste infrastructure, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western). Waste sites are necessary, but communities should not be expected to tolerate unacceptable odour and risk of pollution and fire. My constituents have shown extraordinary patience, but they should not have to fight to be heard any more than those of the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood.

   Hansard source
6. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Rachel Gilmour

   National Energy System Operator: Blackout Risk

   I should remind the House of my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. For 30 years, I have been a member of the GMB trade union, where I was greatly supported as a whistleblower, and I have just joined the board of WhistleblowersUK. With that in mind, what is the Minister doing to actively protect whistleblowers who come forward with serious concerns about both public and private organisations, and will the Government heed Liberal Democrat calls to establish an office of the whistleblower to better help and protect these individuals?

   Hansard source
7. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Mr Will Forster

   Engagements

   Q10. We have all enjoyed watching England’s success in the world cup in the last few weeks. As his last act as Prime Minister before leaving office, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree to grant us a bank holiday so that we can celebrate England’s win?

   Hansard source
8. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Mr Will Forster

   National Energy System Operator: Blackout Risk

   These allegations are extremely serious. If it is true that NESO bosses instructed control room staff to conceal evidence of grid instability from public scrutiny, that is a shocking breach of trust from a taxpayer-owned body. The investigation must be genuinely independent and its full findings must be published openly, not quietly filed away. However, let us also be clear about the fact that this is not a verdict on renewables, much as science-denying climate change sceptics wish to push that idea. It is a warning sign that our grid is straining under record heat, that ageing gas plants are failing, and that there have been years of under-investment in storage and capacity. The Government must get very serious about grid resilience. Will the Minister guarantee protection for those who have come forward, commit himself fully to a genuinely arm’s length investigation, and guarantee full transparency in respect of the findings of that investigation?

   Hansard source
9. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Mr Alistair Carmichael

   Engagements

   Q4. Like others, I have always respected the Prime Minister as somebody who was in politics because he wanted to give service to his country, and he has earned our gratitude for that. In my constituency, those who volunteer as coastguard rescue officers also do so from a wish to give service to their community. In the time that remains for him in office, will the Prime Minister ensure that the money paid to them properly reflects the respect that they earn for their service?

   Hansard source
10. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Mike Martin

    National Energy System Operator: Blackout Risk

    I am curious about this mantra that there have not been any blackouts. Over the past six months, businesses in the St John’s area of Tunbridge Wells have complained of blackouts. I surveyed my constituents who live in the area, and 60% said that they had experienced some blackouts—not long-term ones, but intermittent blackouts. Will the Government engage with me on this issue and give my constituents some guarantees that the situation will improve?

    Hansard source
11. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Marie Goldman

    Regional Accents and Social Mobility

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I thank the hon. Member for Leigh and Atherton (Jo Platt) for introducing this really interesting debate. I have not been in a debate that has brought such a lovely smile to my face in a long time. We are celebrating diversity, which is what regional accents are really about. We should be celebrating diversity much more, rather than trying to tell people to do things differently, and it is a real opportunity to do that, so I have genuinely enjoyed listening to this debate. I probably have a fairly neutral accent, but that does not mean that I have been immune in my life to people telling me to change it. I represent Chelmsford in Essex. Essex has a fairly well-known accent, thanks to programmes such as “The Only Way Is Essex” and “Gavin and Stacey”, which obviously celebrates other parts of the country as well. I really like the Essex accent, because it is really interesting—not just the tone of voice that people use, but the way that they say certain words, just as Members from across the country have highlighted with the phrases that they use. I am originally from Devon and grew up in the west country, which has quite a strong accent as well. The hon. Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles) talked about teachers encouraging students to tone down their accent, and I was also told that as a child. I was privileged to take part in readings that we celebrated in the cathedral every year at my school when I was 12 or 13 years old. I remember doing a practice run and there was a line in the reading I had to do that said, “The old man’s past it,” but I said “past” the way that we would in Devon. I was told by a teacher, “That was very good, but you need to tone that down a little bit,” and I did. I remember another word: my parents have always said “tuth”; I remember being mocked about that once, so I now say “tooth”— I am slightly ashamed to say that I corrected my accent. I have not been immune to that. I am a linguist, and although I might have a fairly neutral accent in this country, I know that when I have lived abroad and tried to speak another language, my accent has stood out. As much as I like to think that I have a good French or German accent, compared with native speakers I stand out a mile. I know how difficult and uncomfortable that can be for people. We need to make sure that people feel comfortable in whatever job they are doing. We are privileged to be able to do this job. As other hon. Members have said, it is important that we represent the people who have elected us to this place, and that we give people the opportunity to see people who look and sound like them. Many hon. Members have spoken very passionately about how important it is to them and to their constituents that people are here, standing up, being heard, speaking and sounding exactly like the constituents who elected them. That is incredibly important. The hon. Member for York Outer (Mr Charters) mentioned how important it is that more broadcasters are encouraging regional accents. I commend those broadcasters. It is hard to be inspired if we only see people who look and sound like something completely different from us. If we are seeing something that is familiar to us, it is more inspirational and gives us more courage to take part, so I commend those broadcasters for giving that a platform. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) talked about blank stares when we hear an accent that we do not completely understand. He is right to point that out. When we have those blank stares, it is hard to make a connection; but the more we hear different accents, the more we get used to them, and familiarity breeds friendship. That is why it is so important that we expose ourselves to many different accents, regions, customs and traditions. Various hon. Members have mentioned the Sutton Trust’s 2022 report. I want to highlight a particular statistic mentioned in that about university students. The report found that, across all stages of life, individuals are concerned about how their accent affects their ability to succeed. That is worrying enough, but it went on to say that 33% of university students, 19% of employees and 18% of university applicants felt that. I want to draw out that difference between 18% of university applicants and 33% of university students. Something goes wrong between applying for university and being at university: that concern gets worse. We must tackle that, and I encourage all universities to reflect deeply on what they can do, because that is not the right way around. People should be going to university and thinking, “Hey, isn’t this great? I fit in, and I am accepted—in fact, I do not just fit in; I stand out in a good way.” We should definitely be looking more at that. Hon. Members mentioned other studies, including a University of Edinburgh study that suggests that individuals with regional accents find themselves code switching to be taken seriously. Other hon. Members mentioned the fact that students alter their pronunciation to avoid negative judgment. Returning to question of linguistics. I like reading; I can see words in front of me even when I am just speaking. I can see the way that the word is written, so I think about how I am going to pronounce it. But pronunciation changes over time. As a linguist, as much as I find that a little bit frustrating sometimes, I have to understand that language is constantly evolving. I think we should embrace that. If we think back 200 years, there are many words from 200 years ago that we do not even use now or that have changed over time, and we should embrace that and be joyful about how things change over time.

    Hansard source
12. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Marie Goldman

    Regional Accents and Social Mobility

    The hon. Member reminds me that my aunt sadly lost her partner a few months ago. He was three days off his 90th birthday, and he was a true Cornishman. He had lived in Cornwall his entire life—in a very small area of Cornwall, in fact. He was incredibly well known, and I had the privilege of being able to love spending time with him. Listening to the way that he spoke and the stories that he used to tell was just beautiful, but the phrases that he used to use are unfortunately dying out. They will be lost over time, so we have to take advantage of modern technology to record some of these things, so that they are not lost and we should also continue to encourage them in our schools through spoken histories. I thank the hon. Member for raising that.

    Hansard source
13. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Marie Goldman

    Regional Accents and Social Mobility

    There are so many lovely stories to tell about this subject, and that is why this has been such a lovely debate. We genuinely should be continuing to encourage the retention of regional phrases, stories and poems, and I thank the hon. Gentleman very much for bringing us that poem. In conclusion, my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I believe very strongly in a society with strong social mobility. Our regional accents, backgrounds and experiences should never hold us back from social mobility; people’s opportunities should definitely never ever be limited by their accent. I thank the hon. Member for Leigh and Atherton for bringing us this debate.

    Hansard source
14. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·John Milne

    Waste Management Sites

    The issue of enforcement is a serious one. An incinerator in south London has breached its air pollution limits almost 1,000 times in 18 months, but nothing has been done by the EA—no court proceedings, no licence suspension, nothing. A similar plant is planned for my constituency. Does the hon. Member agree that the Government must act now to ensure that all operators—be they water companies or waste management companies—are held to account when they break the rules? How am I meant to assure my constituents that they will be safe from health risks?

    Hansard source
15. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·James MacCleary

    Iran

    The picture in Iran remains volatile. We have seen renewed military strikes, threats against ships in international waters and rhetoric that keeps ratcheting upwards. Put together, that is the kind of mix that tips into a spiral that nobody in this House wants. The Liberal Democrat position has not shifted on this issue, and our leader has been consistent in this House. We opposed escalating the situation militarily from the start, because it contravenes international law and because middle eastern conflicts have a track record of running on long after the promises made at the outset, and of leaving the region worse off than it was before. What is needed now is diplomacy and restraint, backed by a real commitment to keep the situation from tipping back into something far worse. The UK Government should be working every diplomatic channel they have to get Washington and Tehran back to the negotiating table as soon as possible. Let me be clear: this was an illegal war started by a reckless and irresponsible President. Trump, together with Benjamin Netanyahu, led the US and Israel into this war without a plan. As a result, NATO is less secure and Trump has been humiliated by his arrogance. None of this excuses Tehran, however. The regime bears real responsibility for the instability we are seeing. It is funding terror groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, targeting shipping lanes, holding foreign nationals without cause and crushing dissent at home. Iran can also never be allowed to develop nuclear weapons, but that goal must be achieved through diplomacy not through force of arms. Roughly a fifth of the world’s traded oil moves through the strait of Hormuz, so anything that threatens shipping there shows up quickly in household budgets here in Britain, not just in the Gulf. Iran’s attacks on commercial vessels, on top of President Trump’s now aborted proposal to start charging for passage through the strait, have made already jittery markets more nervous still. Freedom of navigation is foundational to how trade works around the world. Shipping lanes should not be turned into leverage. The strait needs to stay open, secure and governed by international law, full stop. This Government should be co-ordinating with allies to steady the situation, keep commercial shipping protected and bring down the odds of things escalating further at sea. The fallout does not stay offshore.

    Hansard source
16. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·James MacCleary

    Iran

    Primarily, shipping needs to be protected from attacks in the strait of Hormuz. The first way to do that is to reach a settlement that keeps shipping safe in the strait of Hormuz and, as I said in my previous point, that is why we need to reach a diplomatic solution. A military solution is not going to keep shipping safe, because ultimately, shipping companies assess things by risk and as long as shipping is held to be at any risk in the strait of Hormuz, we will not see a resumption of previous trade levels. The fallout does not stay offshore. When oil prices climb, it is British households—our constituents—who feel it in transport costs, in the weekly shop and in energy bills. I hear daily from constituents who are feeling the financial pressure. Families who are already stretched thin do not need another external shock landing on top. The Government should not just be waiting for markets to calm down on their own. There are concrete steps available, including cutting fuel duty, bringing rail fares down, keeping on pushing bus fares lower and scrapping VAT on electric vehicle charging. All of that would ease the everyday cost of getting around. This moment should also sharpen the case for building real energy resilience at home.

    Hansard source
17. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·James MacCleary

    Iran

    Yes, of course. All our proposals are fully costed, and if the hon. Gentleman would like me to do so, I can send him more information on how we would pay for them. Every time that instability somewhere else sends a shockwave through our economy, it is a reminder of why weaning ourselves off volatile fossil fuel markets is squarely in Britain’s interests. I would also like to raise the situation facing British citizens held in Iran. Lindsay and Craig Foreman have now been in Evin prison for over a year, and today there are reports that Craig’s sentence has been extended by a further two years. There are reports of hunger strikes and conditions that remain harrowing. No British national should be used as a bargaining chip in a geopolitical stand-off. Their continued detention is not acceptable, and the Government need to treat their release as an urgent diplomatic priority, working with international partners to get them home.

    Hansard source
18. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·James MacCleary

    Iran

    It is a good challenge. Obviously, what I am talking about is a long-term solution. The military option has been tried. The United States, the pre-eminent military power on Earth, has expended a huge number of missiles and other military assets to try to bring Iran to a position that it wants it to be in. This has clearly not worked: Iran is still attacking shipping in the strait, and we are still seeing instability in the area. It is clear that the military option has not succeeded, and if the Americans cannot do it, frankly probably nobody can. We need to go back to the negotiating table to try to find a diplomatic solution, which I accept has so far been out of reach, but if we want a stable solution in the long term, it will come through diplomacy, not military means. I welcome the recent decision by the Government to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps under the National Security Act 2023, but a designation on paper matters only if it is backed by enforcement. This House will expect the Government to act firmly against anyone on UK soil intimidating dissidents, running cyber-attacks on British institutions or acting at the bidding of a hostile state. Finally, a word on Britain’s role: the Government have said that UK bases have been used by the US only for narrowly defined defensive purposes. That distinction is worth holding on to, and this House deserves ongoing clarity about exactly when and how British territory might be used if things escalate further. Our alliances matter, but they do not relieve the Government of a duty to make their own judgment calls on how sovereign UK territory is used. The priority now has to be stopping any slide into a wider war in the region, starting with the rebuilding of diplomatic channels, keeping shipping lanes protected and holding the line on international law, while backing our allies without handing over our own judgment calls. Above all, it means remembering that every step further into escalation has real costs for civilians in the middle east and families here at home. It is a reminder of the limits of armed force and of the fact that one of this country’s greatest strengths is our soft power—diplomatic, financial, cultural. Britain has influence that it can use to cool this situation down, rebuild some diplomatic momentum and help get the region and the wider world to the stability that everyone so desperately needs.

    Hansard source
19. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·James MacCleary

    National Security

    The Liberal Democrats will support the regulations, which are welcome if somewhat overdue. We have argued for years that the IRGC should face much tougher action here in the United Kingdom. Despite successive Governments recognising the threat, they did not act until now, so the regulations are very welcome indeed. The IRGC is central to the Iranian regime’s repression at home and its destabilising activities abroad. It is backing proxy groups targeting dissidents overseas and poses a direct threat to people here in the UK. The new designation powers recognise that modern threats extend far beyond conventional warfare. Espionage, cyber-attacks, foreign interference and intimidation carried out on behalf of hostile states all threaten our national security. I also recognise and welcome the designation of the Islamic Movement of Companions of the Right, and Russia’s GRU so-called Volunteer Corps. However, designation alone is not enough, so will the Minister tell the House what additional resources are being provided to ensure that the powers are properly enforced? How will the Government identify and prosecute those acting on behalf of those organisations here in the UK? I also hope that the Minister can say more about protecting those at risk. Members of Britain’s Iranian diaspora and our Jewish communities deserve confidence that the measures will deliver real protection. The regulations should from part of a wider strategy. Hostile states increasingly rely on cyber-operations, disinformation and political interference. Britain must continue to strengthen our resilience and work closely with our allies to meet those threats. The regulations are a welcome step, and the Liberal Democrats support them.

    Hansard source
20. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Helen Morgan

    Engagements

    Q8. After 16 years of Conservative Administration, Shropshire council’s finances were left in a disastrous state. After a Local Government Association peer review praised the Lib Dem administration for making significant strides since last May, that difficult financial situation remains. The right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) has promised Manchesterism for the rest of the country, but will the Prime Minister join me in urging him to remember that the rest of the country does not all look like Manchester and rural areas need a fair deal too?

    Hansard source
21. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Helen Maguire

    Waste Management Sites

    I will be talking about a waste site in Surrey, where unfortunately we have some very similar issues. I hope the hon. Lady understands that this is a national issue, not one that is confined to certain locations of the United Kingdom.

    Hansard source
22. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Helen Maguire

    Waste Management Sites

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing this very important debate. I must emphasise that this is a nationwide issue: it affects not just working-class constituencies but leafy Surrey, including Epsom and Ewell. I will set the scene. It is a peaceful early morning in the residential community on the edge of Epsom Downs, a picturesque, 600-acre area of unspoiled chalk downland with panoramic views of London. We are right next to the Chalk Pit, a waste-processing site in Epsom in Surrey. Crash! Bang! Boom! Residents are suddenly awoken. It is 6 o’clock on 20 July. They hear the scraping, clanking and banging of metal, the humming of industrial machinery and the roaring of the trommel. Workmen shout loudly. Car horns honk. Dust chokes the air. Lorries speed up and down the road. It does not end until late in the evening, and this goes on and on all day, every single working day. Could the Minister, and all those in the Chamber today, live with that constant noise, dust and disruption? Would the Minister be willing to accept this lack of action and change? My residents have no choice. Their homes are here. Their lives are here. This site was never meant to become what it is now when it went to planning 10 years ago, moving from a waste transfer site to a waste processing site. The management of this site is unacceptable, and my constituents—the residents—have long deserved better. Action must be taken, and it must be taken now. There are four systemic failures: planning by Surrey county council; enforcement by Epsom and Ewell borough council; the environment, whether dust, noise or the potential contamination of water, which is the responsibility of the Environment Agency; and accountability, because there is no single lead on this and one agency passes the buck to another. This has disrupted my residents’ lives for more than 10 years. On excessive dust, the atmosphere average is 10 micrograms per cubic metre; the Chalk Pit has an average concentration of 40 micrograms. On multiple occasions, it has exceeded the quality standard of 50, but let us remember that 10 is normal. There has been persistent noise, as well as breaches of permitted operating hours, with lorries leaving the site as early as 5.40 am when the operational hours should be 7 am until 6 pm. Then there is the impact of heavy vehicles: lorries regularly exceed the speed limit of 30 mph on roads that are simply not designed for them. Tests cannot fully capture the human impact and the unintended disruption to daily lives, for years. A constituent said to me: “Hoped for a peaceful afternoon in the garden—no chance with the Chalk Pit at full throttle”. Another wrote: “So much for a quiet relaxing Saturday morning. My day off ruined.” One constituent said that it feels “like the trommel is at work in my living room”, And another said: “Our garden table, covered in dust—no chance of going outside.” When there has been monitoring, I have been told that operators are informed in advance when it will occur, so we can guess what happens: there is suddenly no noise or dust and the site does not operate. How is that effective monitoring or true accountability? There have been planning conditions, environmental permits, monitoring equipment for noise and dust, thousands of complaints, multiple inspection reports, and statutory guidance, yet the same problems continue. The issue is not a lack of legislation; it is the repeated failure of enforcement, of leadership—there is none—and of accountability. Why are my residents forced to continually fight this? Why are the authorities not taking action? There are three agencies responsible for the issue: Surrey county council, Epsom and Ewell borough council and the Environment Agency. The unending buck-passing must stop; someone must take the lead and act now. The governance is completely divided, with Surrey county council responsible as the waste planning authority, the Environment Agency responsible for dust and noise and for making sure water is safe to drink, and Epsom and Ewell borough council responsible for enforcement. The result? We have no single authority taking the lead, no organisation accountable for resolving the overall problem, separate investigations instead of co-ordinated action, and residents forced to navigate multiple regulators. It is a planning system that rewards non-compliance. Lack of enforcement leads to retrospective planning applications, which encourages operators to build first and apply later. That leaves planners mitigating impacts rather than deciding whether a development should occur in the first place, and creates the perception that compliance is optional. How can compliance be optional when it impacts my residents daily? In the case of planning, economic growth is often given greater weight than things such as residential amenity, environmental impact, long-term public costs and community wellbeing. Local views and the experience of my residents have been overridden since the site changed its use over 10 years ago. Residents and local councils have objected. Planning officers have raised concerns. Elected representatives have opposed proposals. And the Environment Agency described the site as “wildly out of character in a residential area”. Despite that, permissions continue to be granted, undermining confidence that local views and feedback carry any meaningful weight at all. Let us talk about enforcement. There are many planning conditions that could have been regulated, such as the operating hours. However, as we have heard, my residents are continually woken up at 6.06 am or even earlier, even though the operator is not meant to start before 7 am. There is continual noise nuisance, with the operator flouting the abatement notice. There is dust on a regular basis, which residents see on their tables and chairs outside or on their washing out hanging on the washing line. There are regular vehicle movements before 7 o’clock, and the number of lorries going in and out sometimes exceeds the permitted amount. However, enforcements work only if they are actually enforced. To help with that, residents have provided complaints, photographs, videos and witness evidence. Authorities have gathered noise monitoring data, CCTV, site inspections and monitoring reports, yet residents continue to report the same again and again. Breaches happen again and again, over and over, but the repeated breaches do not lead to action. Understandably, residents believe that breaches do not lead to consequences. All their efforts are just in vain. They feel like giving up. Why should they continue if there is no action? There are repeated findings without resolution. Those who are meant to regulate have repeatedly identified concerns—dust, noise, operating hours, site management and residential impacts. Instead of action, the response has included more inspections, more monitoring, more meetings, revised management plans, additional planning conditions and permit reviews—and still nothing changes. The same complaints continue. How many complaints are needed to trigger change? How many reports need to be conducted? How many dust tests and noise tests do we need? The lives of my residents are affected every single day, and all the authorities keep showing them is their unwillingness to improve their lives. A regulatory system should not simply document non-compliance; it should enforce compliance. Success must be measured by improvements in people’s quality of life. Effective performance is not the number of meetings held, reports produced or warnings issued. A high number of ongoing complaints highlights the need for urgent action. The true measure of successful site management is whether conditions and outcomes are actually improved for the people affected. Residents rightly expect and deserve that their elected representatives will help resolve persistent problems. In practice, councillors have limited to no influence. MPs cannot direct regulators, and residents cannot demand action; that creates a democratic gap. Those making enforcement decisions are not directly accountable to the communities affected by them, so there is understandably a loss of public confidence. Over time, residents question whether planning conditions have real value, whether environmental permits provide meaningful protection, whether complaints make any difference at all and whether regulators are measuring activity rather than results. Residents become exhausted and stop reporting incidents, yet the reduced number of complaints is sometimes treated as evidence that the problem has been sorted; it has not—residents are just exhausted and fed up of dealing with this issue day in, day out. The Liberal Democrats believe that community engagement in waste management is an essential part of the journey towards a more sustainable and circular economy. That means ensuring that local councils can operate waste management sites effectively, without unnecessarily impacting the lives of nearby residents. Residents should not experience excessive environmental effects, health impacts or disruption. We also believe that local communities must have a genuine stake in planning decisions that affect them. Proper consultation and community engagement must be at the heart of proposals for new waste management sites. Full consideration must be given to the environmental health impacts of waste management sites on local residents. We must go further, as the best waste management system is one that generates less waste in the first place. That is why we support embedding circular economy principles across the UK’s industrial strategy and product design, reducing the amount of waste that communities and councils need to manage. Effective regulation of waste management sites also requires a properly resourced oversight body, ensuring that our environment is protected and health risks are mitigated. That is why we support increased funding to the EA to ensure that it can enforce environmental standards and hold operators to account where sites cause harm to local communities, as in Epsom. The Government must also commit to an independent review into the entire waste crime system. In conclusion, the Chalk Pit in Epsom exposes wider weaknesses within the planning and environmental regulatory system: fragmented governance, no single accountable authority, poor co-ordination between regulators, retrospective planning reducing the consequences of unauthorised development, appeals that weaken local decision making, enforcement powers that are not consistently exercised, and residents whose concerns are not listened to. This is not just an issue of the absence of legislation; it is an issue of leadership, accountability and enforcement. Without effective enforcement, planning conditions and environmental permits become protections that exist only on paper, not in practice. The EA, Surrey county council and Epsom and Ewell borough council can conduct their site visits and tests and go home, and the contractors can clock in, do a day’s work and then clock out and go home, but my residents do not have that privilege. Their lives and their homes are there. They are entitled to a higher quality of life in their community. I urge the Minister to listen to the contributions made by myself and others today and to take action to end the suffering of my constituents in Epsom.

    Hansard source
23. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Gideon Amos

    Estate Regeneration

    It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Murrison. I congratulate the hon. Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) on securing the debate. His call for minimum repair standards seems very reasonable, and I am happy to echo it. I was pleased to hear the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) identifying the regular attendees in this Chamber—I am tempted to say that it takes one to know one. I am sure we will see him again; it is always a pleasure to have him with us in a debate. It is a shame that the constituents of the hon. Member for Basingstoke do not feel they have been fully consulted, as they should have been, on the regeneration project he mentioned. Regeneration, when done with genuine community involvement, can change lives in some of the best ways possible. Community involvement, consent and consultation are fundamental necessities if that kind of positive and transformative outcome is to be achieved. Regeneration is one of the best tools we have to help solve the housing crisis. It allows us to build the new homes we desperately need—including, crucially, new social homes—on brownfield sites, saving precious greenfield from development. It allows residents to exchange some of the coldest, leakiest housing stock in Europe for better homes that are affordable to run, while adding the kind of infrastructure that the hon. Gentleman referred to, such as GP surgeries, school places and playparks, which some estates built 60 years ago never had. Many Liberal Democrat councils are showing the way to do this. My Somerset councillor colleagues, including Federica Smith-Roberts, Tom Deakin and Lee Baker, have led the way on the regeneration of the North Taunton estate. There are 162 defective prefabricated concrete Woolaway homes, unfit for the 21st century, being demolished and replaced with 229 council homes for affordable rent—67 more than we had before. The scheme was built around a resident design group from the outset, not token consultations or consultation after the drawings were finished. Local community champions like Lesley Councill, who has done amazing work at the Priorswood community centre, helped to lead that involvement and deserve to be credited for a lot of the work. Existing tenants were rehoused during the works, with a guaranteed right to return. Another example is the Cambridge road estate in Kingston upon Thames, in the constituency of my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey). The Liberal Democrat council there insisted on subjecting the proposed regeneration scheme to the kind of ballot that the hon. Member for Basingstoke referred to. Those involved worked hard with local residents and the proposal received overwhelming support, resulting in 2,100 new homes and 871 new council houses—218 more than were on the site before. Those are not marginal examples; they are proof that the choice is not between going ahead with regeneration or getting community consent. With leadership and real involvement, communities can and do vote for more housing, not less. The Liberal Democrats want to see that ambition matched nationally, and we would go further. We want infrastructure to come first in these developments, so that regeneration comes with the GP surgeries, transport and drainage capacity that the extra density demands, rather than as an afterthought. As we have said: no doctors, no development. We would also get serious about the housing that already exists, but sits empty. There are more than 359 homes across the country that have been empty for six months or longer. Addressing that would ease the pressure to drive up to unsustainable densities in other parts of towns and communities, and would relieve pressure on greenfield sites. The same principle applies to our high streets. The Liberal Democrats want to see a properly funded high streets strategy that genuinely brings empty units back into use as accommodation and housing above shops, strengthens the town centre-first principle and supports property owners who want to do those conversions. We would deliver on our 10-year emergency home upgrade programme, starting with free insulation and heat pumps for low-income households, so that regeneration is not the only route to warm homes. We welcome the fact that the Government have made housing a priority. We have read that the new Prime Minister will want to increase the number of council and social rent homes being built. Does the Minister believe that the new Prime Minister will match the Liberal Democrat ambition to reach 150,000 new social rent homes per year? I am sure we would all be interested to hear that. We ask the Minister for an infrastructure-first requirement, so that regeneration schemes are properly funded to deliver the GP surgeries, schools and transport links that increased density requires; a national target for 150,000 social rent homes per year, rather than the market-led approach that we have at the moment; the delivery of a 10-year emergency home upgrade programme, starting with free insulation and heat pumps for low-income households, and a recognition that regeneration should never be done to a community, but done with and by the community.

    Hansard source
24. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Freddie van Mierlo

    Points of Order

    On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your advice on whether the Minister for Digital Government and Data, the right hon. Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray), may have given an incomplete answer that risks being seen as misleading the House. In a response to a question about cuts to funding for the Science and Technology Facilities Council, the Minister noted: “funding for STFC has not been cut.”—[Official Report, 1 July 2026; Vol. 788, c. 894.] Yet it is only true that there are no cuts if we exclude funding for time-sensitive projects. This has led to confusion among my constituents who are affected by the cuts. Madam Deputy Speaker, could you advise me on how one may seek to ensure that Ministers communicate clearly on matters of such importance?

    Hansard source
25. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Ed Davey

    Engagements

    I associate myself with so many of the Prime Minister’s comments today, but particularly with his remarks about Ann Widdecombe. She devoted her life to public service and her murder was truly horrifying. I support his campaign for a memorial to her in this Chamber. I also thank the Leader of the Opposition for her tribute to Ann, and for reminding the whole House and the whole country that we need to remember her for the way she lived her life. I have to make a confession: I have always been slightly jealous of Ann for appearing on “Strictly Come Dancing”. [Hon. Members: “There’s still time!”] Can I join the whole nation, and hopefully every nation, in wishing England well against Argentina tonight after their superb win against Norway? It is the last job of the Prime Minister to make sure that we win the world cup. Can I also pick up on a remark from the Leader of the Opposition about the by-election we are about to see in Clacton? I have to tell her that I cannot back joke figures with ridiculous policies, which is why I am supporting Count Binface. [Laughter.] As the Prime Minister finds himself with more time on his hands, can I recommend the new “Toy Story” film? For those who do not know the films, the main character used to be in law enforcement, but was mainly known for being a little wooden, and was replaced by a shiny new action figure from far away who thinks he can fly—and the name Andy is on everyone’s lips. Maybe the Prime Minister should give that a miss, but does he share my fear that when it comes to Britain’s national debt, the plan of the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) is “to infinity and beyond”?

    Hansard source
26. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Ed Davey

    Engagements

    Can I invite the Prime Minister to join me at Chessington World of Adventures? We have not always agreed across the Floor, but can I pay my own tribute—[Interruption.] I disagreed with Labour on Europe, and I have disagreed with the Conservatives on Europe! I say to the Prime Minister that, although we have not always agreed, I have always admired the way he has led his party, I have always admired the way he has been a true patriot, and I always admire the way he has worked with so many people across this House to do the best for the national interest. We thank him for his public service. One of the Prime Minister’s qualities that people most underestimate comes from his experience as a carer. He has spoken powerfully about looking after his mother through her battle with Still’s disease and the love and care he gave to his brother Nick. I know the Prime Minister agrees that we can and must do more for family carers. As he leaves No. 10, will he join me and other carers across this House to speak up for family carers, to be their voice and to get them the support they deserve?

    Hansard source
27. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·David Chadwick

    Engagements

    Q3. Two weeks ago, the news leaked that Powys teaching health board is considering taking the beds out of all but two community hospitals in Powys. Some 2,500 people have already signed my petition against those cuts. Does the Prime Minister agree that taking beds out of community hospitals is not a solution for the crisis in social care? Why did he not prioritise fixing social care when he had the opportunity?

    Hansard source
28. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Clive Jones

    Iran

    I congratulate the Minister for Veterans and People, the hon. Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) on his recent promotion. Most Members will agree that the repression of Iran’s population by its Government is an absolute disgrace, but Trump and Netanyahu’s illegal war on Iran has unleashed chaos across the region. This conflict, backed by the leaders of both the Conservative party and Reform UK, has put British nationals directly in harm’s way. Renewed US and Iranian strikes now risk damaging the region, dragging it back into full-scale war. Trump’s actions have caused immense suffering across the middle east, and have had real consequences for the people of Wokingham and across the UK. The conflict also reminds us that we cannot neglect our relationships with our European allies and that we cannot rely on Trump. Driven by ego rather than diplomacy, Trump’s reckless strikes have undone weeks of negotiations with Iran and shattered hopes for a peaceful resolution. Most recently, President Trump announced plans to impose a 20% tax on shipping through the strait of Hormuz, before reversing course just a few hours later. That proposal amounted to economic extortion, a flagrant violation of international law, and would have further increased costs for UK families already struggling with the cost of living. My constituents in Wokingham are feeling the effects. Rising instability in the strait is pushing up fuel prices at a time when household energy bills remain high. Will the Minister therefore consider Liberal Democrat calls to cut fuel duty by 10p, reduce bus fares to £1, cut rail fares by 10%, and remove VAT on public electric vehicle charging?

    Hansard source
29. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Clive Jones

    Iran

    I will not; I would like to carry on. Iran’s continued attacks on vessels in the strait are fuelling instability. The conflict shows little sign of ending while Trump refuses to acknowledge that military escalation has failed and admit that he was wrong. His reckless and unpredictable approach should strengthen the Government’s resolve to deepen co-operation with our reliable European allies. It is for those reasons that I urge the Government to back the Liberal Democrat proposal for a new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. Such a partnership would strengthen our economy, reinforce our security and help Britain respond more effectively to international crises. The Government must do all they can to encourage the United States and Iran to return to negotiations, restore stability in the strait of Hormuz and work towards ending this devastating conflict.

    Hansard source
30. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Charlotte Cane

    Waste Management Sites

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I congratulate the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) on securing this debate. I have several waste management sites in my constituency. At most of them, we just get the odd problem now and again, and we can deal with it by talking to them, but one causes particular problems. Grunty Fen sits in the heart of the countryside and is accessed from narrow fen roads. In normal operation, the residents of the nearest village, Witchford, suffer large volumes of heavy lorries and litter blowing from those lorries. The fen roads used by the lorries sit on peat soils, which expand when it is wet and contract when it is dry. The combination of the changing subsoil and the regular heavy lorries corrugates those roads vertically and horizontally, breaks the road edges away, and creates ever-growing potholes. The roads are virtually unusable by ordinary cars, let alone cyclists. The residents feel that they have no say in the timing and volume of the traffic, nor do they see extra funding for road maintenance. That would all be bad enough, but there have recently been several fires at the site. One such fire in April burned for about 17 hours, generated significant black smoke that spread over Witchford, and required an extensive fire and rescue response. The Environment Agency recently published the findings of its inspection. It found that the emissions from the fire breached one of the permit conditions. It also found that the fire risk assessment, emergency management plan and cell 11 environmental action plan failed to adequately identify and control the risks associated with fires. The operator, East Waste Ltd, has to rectify those issues, or the Environment Agency says it will take enforcement action. Meanwhile, the residents who have suffered from the fires—especially those with pre-existing respiratory illnesses such as asthma—fear further fires. They would like to see the site closed, at least temporarily, until all the changes are in place. As part of the plans for the new unitary authorities, the Government must ensure that councils have adequate powers and funding to monitor waste sites, and the Environment Agency needs the powers and the funding to enforce their proper management. Will the Minister confirm that there are plans to make sure that the Environment Agency does indeed have those powers and the capacity, and that it will use them?

    Hansard source
31. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Brian Mathew

    Waste Management Sites

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing this debate. Residents of the part of Calne that is in my constituency have long reported strong and unpleasant sulphurous odours from the Lower Compton landfill. The odours have at times been severe enough for people stuck in their homes to keep the windows shut—not a pleasant situation given the current heatwave—and have been reported by the local BBC as causing illness. This has been a periodic problem in Calne and other towns. I am pleased to report that, with the help of my neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Chippenham (Sarah Gibson), we have got the Environment Agency on the case. The offending landfill vaults are being closed and additional landfill gas wells will be installed to increase gas capture and reduce emissions from the site. Additionally, there has recently been a spate of fires at Lower Compton landfill, caused by batteries in vapes, endangering residents and staff. Every week in the UK more than 6 million vapes are thrown away instead of being recycled. When crushed, lithium batteries can spark, smoke or catch fire, creating a danger to waste facilities, those who work on them and those who live near them. I urge the Government to increase public awareness of how to safely dispose of vapes. Single-use plastic waste is another long-standing issue that needs to be addressed. None of us likes seeing waste plastic in the environment, where it can become a serious hazard to wildlife. It is bad enough seeing plastic waste on our streets and in our countryside, but with the UK exporting around 600,000 tonnes a year, much of it ends up in the developing world, where it can become an environmental hazard of massive proportions. A few years ago, a company in Swindon attempted to address the use of single-use plastic recycling using a pyrolysis process that chemically reduced the waste plastic into its polymer constituents, which could be used again and again to create fresh plastics. Although that company went bust due to the difficult economics, another company, Mura Technology, is investing in a similar process in Newcastle. However, it seems that the holy grail of a cyclical plastic economy will be reached only when the economics are right, so it would be timely for the Government to look at a single-use plastic tax to generate sufficient funds to invest in this process. We need local chemical recycling plants in every county in the UK. In the spirit of “polluter pays”, a tax on the production and use of single-use plastics is a must if we are to make the economics work for plastic recycling and thus stop this scourge on the environment.

    Hansard source
32. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Brian Mathew

    Waste Management Sites

    Could the Minister say a few words about a plastics tax, or a tax on single-use plastics, to make the recycling of plastics economic?

    Hansard source
33. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Alison Bennett

    Engagements

    Q6. I put on record my appreciation for the hard work of the Prime Minister’s ministerial team in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in tackling the absolute failings of South East Water. However, last Friday, 1,200 pupils at Downlands community school in Hassocks were sent home because they had no water. For those children, their parents and their teachers, that was another reminder of South East Water letting communities down. I am sure the Prime Minister will agree that something as basic as turning on the taps should never be in doubt. Before new housing developments are approved, does he agree that water companies should be compelled to confirm that they have the capacity to provide a reliable water supply to new homes?

    Hansard source
34. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Conservative·Wendy Morton

    Iran

    First, I welcome the hon. and gallant Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) to his place on the Front Bench. I also welcome this debate, because there are few greater responsibilities of Government than protecting the security of our country and defending Britain’s interests abroad in what is an increasingly dangerous world. I want to start by touching on the live situation, which remains precarious. It is clear that over the past week or so, escalation has spiralled because of Tehran’s serious violations of the ceasefire. We have seen Iran once again illegally attacking commercial shipping in the strait of Hormuz, violating Oman’s sovereignty in doing so, and striking our allies including Bahrain and Kuwait. They must stop. Full freedom of navigation must be restored in the strait of Hormuz, and the onus is on Iran to comply. Tolls are not the way forward, and we do welcome the decision by the US not to pursue this. But the question is: what will Britain contribute to efforts to secure the opening of the strait? Last week, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel) pressed the Foreign Secretary on that, and few answers were forthcoming. These are serious matters. I hope the Minister will be able to share more detail about what a multinational mission, which the Government have talked much about, could look like. Iran is not simply another difficult state; it is a terrorist regime that has brutalised its own people, destabilised an entire region, armed terrorist organisations, pursued nuclear weapons in defiance of the international community, supplied drones for Putin’s illegal war against Ukraine and threatened Britain directly through hostile activity and terror plots on our own soil. The regime in Tehran has spread fear through its proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis. It has imprisoned, tortured and murdered its own citizens for daring to demand basic freedoms. It has exported antisemitism, sponsored terrorism and sought to intimidate democratic nations, including our own. No one in the House should be under any illusion about the nature of the Iranian regime or the threat that it continues to pose. An end to the current conflict must address the reasons it began in the first place. We want a settlement that makes Britain safer, protects our close security allies and offers the Iranian people hope of a future free from the repression of the terrorist regime in Tehran.

    Hansard source
35. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Conservative·Wendy Morton

    Iran

    My right hon. Friend makes a really important point. Though we have tough days in this place, it is important that we remember why we are here and hold respect for one another. Deep down, we also understand the background to some of this conflict, so I agree totally with him. It is important that we use the right language in this place and have the right tone in these often difficult but important debates. In all this, we need to address the causes of the conflict, not just seek to pause it, and recognise that any lasting settlement must deal with Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, its sponsorship of terrorism and its willingness to use instability as a tool of statecraft, particularly on the strait of Hormuz. That is what we are facing and dealing with. Of course, Britain must play its part to help ensure that Iran can never again use the strait of Hormuz as a bargaining chip with which to threaten international security and hold the global economy to ransom. Those are the outcomes that Britain should be working towards. What are the Government’s objectives? What does the Minister believe success looks like? What support—militarily, diplomatically or otherwise—have the Government provided to our American allies during this latest phase of the conflict? What guarantees has Britain secured that Iran’s nuclear programme will be dismantled? Will we even be at the table like we were in 2015 for the joint comprehensive plan of action?

    Hansard source
36. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Conservative·Wendy Morton

    Iran

    Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker—I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is interested in what I have to say on these matters. He makes an important point, but in 2026 we are not dealing with what we faced 10 years ago, hence my asking the Minister what guarantees Britain has secured on ensuring that Iran’s nuclear programme will be dismantled. What commitments have been obtained on curbing Iran’s support for Hezbollah, the Houthis and other terrorist proxies? What mechanisms are there for monitoring and enforcing any agreement? What role has Britain actually played in shaping those outcomes? A ceasefire is not in itself a strategy. Peace is not measured simply by words on paper; it must be measured by whether Britain’s security is stronger, whether our allies are safer and whether Iran’s capacity to threaten the world has genuinely been reduced. On every one of those tests, Ministers have serious questions to answer to this place. The Iranian regime has already demonstrated how fragile any pause in fighting remains. The regime has continued to threaten international shipping in the strait of Hormuz and to menace our allies across the Gulf, where, I remind the House, there are also thousands of British nationals. When British assets were placed at risk, what was the Government’s response? When commercial shipping came under threat, where was Britain’s leadership? When our allies looked to one of their oldest security partners for reassurance, what practical support did the Government provide? Britain has historically played a leading role in Gulf security. We have built partnerships, provided reassurance and helped shape the international response to threats in the region, yet throughout this crisis there has been a growing sense that Britain has been reacting to events, rather than helping to determine them.

    Hansard source
37. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Conservative·Wendy Morton

    Iran

    I think we always make our position very clear on all these matters. This debate is about the situation we face today in the Gulf, and it is for the Opposition to ask the Government the questions, and for the Government to explain the answers to the Opposition. We will all have to sit in the Chamber and wait for the winding-up speeches at the end of the debate. Our allies once looked to Britain as a reliable and dependable partner; increasingly, that confidence is being tested. This is a time for action, not words. The strait of Hormuz is not simply a regional concern, but one of the world’s most strategically important waterways. Its security matters to global trade, to international energy markets and to British families who feel the impact when instability drives up prices. Iran cannot be allowed to use access to this vital route as leverage against the international community whenever it seeks concessions—preventing that must be a central objective of British foreign policy—yet where is the Government’s strategy to ensure that never happens again? Where is Britain’s influence in shaping the future security architecture in the Gulf? Where is our leadership? Instead, Ministers have too often appeared to be spectators, rather than participants. At precisely the moment when Britain should have been strengthening alliances and advancing our national interests, the Government have appeared distracted and uncertain. That matters, because influence is not something that Britain is automatically entitled to; it is something that we must earn. It depends on credibility, capability and the confidence of our allies that Britain will stand alongside them when it matters most. That confidence has been weakened by uncertainty over an unfunded defence investment plan, and by a Government who too often appear reactive, rather than decisive. Nowhere is that clearer than in the Government’s handling of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The decision to designate the IRGC as a foreign power state threat is welcome, but it is long overdue. It is not simply another military organisation; it is the principal instrument through which the Iranian regime suppresses dissent, exports violence and spreads extremism. It has crushed protests inside Iran, financed terrorism abroad, facilitated sanctions evasion, spread propaganda, intimidated dissidents living here in Britain and repeatedly threatened our national security.

    Hansard source
38. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Conservative·Wendy Morton

    Iran

    The hon. Gentleman from the SNP makes a very interesting point, but what did his party ever do on that front? I also remind Government Members that they have been in power for two years. They have had plenty of time. It is no good always throwing the “14 years” argument at us. They have had two years. Our security and intelligence services deserve enormous credit for disrupting Iranian-linked plots against individuals in this country, but they should not be expected to carry that burden without the full backing of Government. Earlier this year, when protesters in Iran faced violent repression at the hands of the IRGC, the Opposition repeatedly offered to work constructively with Ministers to pass emergency legislation. Those offers were ignored, valuable time was lost and the threat continued. The Government must explain how the designation will be enforced. How will those acting on behalf of the IRGC in Britain be identified? How will Iranian financial networks operating in the United Kingdom be dismantled? What steps are being taken to prevent our financial system from being used to launder funds linked to the Iranian regime and its terrorist activities? When will Ministers finally be able to say that Iran’s corrosive influence inside Britain has properly been disrupted? Announcements alone do not keep the public safe; enforcement does. We should not forget the Iranian people. Our argument has never been with them; indeed, no people have suffered more at the hands of their regime than the people of Iran. Millions of brave Iranians have risked everything in pursuit of freedom, democracy and the rule of law. Many have paid with their liberty, and many with their life. Tens of thousands were slaughtered earlier this year simply for wanting the basic freedoms that we enjoy.

    Hansard source
39. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Conservative·Wendy Morton

    Iran

    My right hon. Friend makes an important point. It is important that we remember the victims and their families. That should push us to continue to seek not just answers, but actions and outcomes. Britain should always stand with those who seek freedom, and against those who seek to crush it. The conflict has exposed some uncomfortable truths for us at home. National security depends on economic strength. Every threat to the strait of Hormuz sends shockwaves through global energy markets; every escalation in the Gulf has consequences for British businesses and households; and every hostile state that we seek to deter requires us to have credible military capability that supports our diplomacy. That is why Britain must match its global ambitions with the necessary resources. We continue to believe that Britain should spend 3% of GDP on defence by the end of this Parliament. The threats facing our country have changed, and our response must reflect that reality. The crisis underlines why energy security is national security. We should strengthen our domestic energy resilience, expand secure sources of supply and reduce our dependence on hostile regimes that seek to weaponise energy for political gain. A stronger economy, greater energy security and stronger national defence are not separate objectives. They are essential parts of the same national strategy of making Britain more resilient, more self-sufficient and better able to defend our interests in an increasingly dangerous world. Iran remains a grave threat. Its ideology has not changed, its hostility towards Britain has not changed and its sponsorship of terrorism has not changed. We should not judge success simply by whether the missiles have stopped for today, but by whether the regime’s ability to threaten us is weakened, Britain’s security is stronger, our allies are safer and the Iranian people are closer to freedom. That requires more than expressions of concern and carefully worded statements; it requires a Government with clear objectives, a coherent strategy and the determination to use British influence in defence of Britain’s national interest. That is the leadership that has been so clearly missing throughout this crisis.

    Hansard source
40. 15 Jul 2026·Parliament·Conservative·Sir Roger Gale

    Regional Accents and Social Mobility

    I am sure that the whole House will have appreciated the contribution by Strangford’s own answer to Professor Henry Higgins. Question put and agreed to.  Resolved, That this House has considered regional accents and social mobility.

    Hansard source