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

What Britain's parties say and do in public, recorded from the source.

Every entry links to Hansard, Parliament, the Electoral Commission or the party's own channel. Every party is tracked by the same rules. Methodology

Labour Party

Sitting MPs
404
Entries, last 7 days
552
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

Conservative and Unionist Party

Sitting MPs
118
Entries, last 7 days
148
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

Liberal Democrats

Sitting MPs
71
Entries, last 7 days
120
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

Reform UK

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
8
Members
270,000 CLAIMED

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

Scottish National Party

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
14
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

Green Party

Sitting MPs
5
Entries, last 7 days
1
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 4 Nov 2026

Plaid Cymru

Sitting MPs
4
Entries, last 7 days
8
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

All parties, latest first

Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,868 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

  1. ParliamentLabourNeil Duncan-Jordan

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    I thank the hon. Member for his intervention; I will deal with AI sovereignty a bit later in my speech. We should ensure that, like a socialist Government’s approach to energy or water, the public have a stake in the development of AI technology, to ensure that the value it creates is captured and shared for the good of society as a whole. Previous waves of technological change have brought with them huge economic disruptions, but the human and social costs that followed were not inevitable. They were the product of political choices, as Governments left workers and communities to absorb the shocks alone.

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentLabourNeil Duncan-Jordan

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend’s point about no place being left behind as a result of the AI revolution. I will develop that point a later. We can already see the first signs of AI impacting on work here. We have record numbers of young people not in employment, education or training because many entry-level jobs have disappeared.

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentLabourNeil Duncan-Jordan

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    Yes, young people and their employment prospects are intrinsically linked to the debate about the future of AI. The hon. Gentleman is right that we have to get that right for those people to have a future. We also need the Government to introduce a raft of measures to manage AI-driven changes to work. Those measures should include an employment levy on companies that replace large numbers of workers with AI, training subsidies for displaced workers, redeployment programmes to move workers into sectors with skills shortages, and a job subsidy scheme for workers and companies at the sharp end of industrial change, along with, of course, stronger social security support for those who face unemployment. We know that if it is left to the market, firms will often reach for the crudest form of automation, stripping out roles and degrading the work that remains. The alternative is that we start to advance the case for dignified work, and recognise that that will mean having meaningful worker involvement in every step of the process. The involvement of workers in adoption is often what turns a promising tool into a productive one. That is why I agree with the TUC that the Government should strengthen the Employment Rights Act 2025 to give workers a real say in decisions. There should be a duty on employers to disclose their use of AI, and a right for the workforce to be consulted and negotiate over how AI is introduced. One of the biggest challenges of AI is to ensure that everyone gets a fair share of the gains. The AI and big tech corporations in the US stand shortly to become some of the wealthiest and most powerful private actors in history. Their wealth has been built on public research and public investment, as well as all our shared written inheritance, which has trained the models they use. The fact that our tax system taxes income from work far more heavily than income from capital gives firms a direct tax incentive to automate a worker out of a job rather than employing them, and could see AI facilitate a further shift of national income away from labour and towards capital, eroding the tax base that funds the public services that we all need and want.

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentLabourNeil Duncan-Jordan

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his second intervention—let us see whether he can make it a hat trick before I finish. The reality is that AI is here now. We have to deal with how it impacts on today’s workers and future workers as well. This is not one generation against another, and I know the hon. Gentleman understands that. The Government could seek to equalise tax treatment, actively explore widening the digital services tax to include AI companies, which it currently excludes, and raise the level of the tax from 2% to the European average. We cannot allow the use of machines to be made artificially cheaper than employing people. It is important to look at AI sovereignty, which the hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) mentioned earlier. The UK is growing increasingly dependent on US tech, and owns little of the data infrastructure and AI models on which the future economy will increasingly rely. This repeats the pattern of recent decades in other sectors, whereby essential national infrastructure has passed into overseas ownership and money has flowed offshore, leaving British people with less and less control over the essentials of a good life. That dependence not only creates security risks, as has been mentioned, but prevents the UK from capturing and distributing any AI windfall. We need to give UK companies a meaningful chance to compete. The Competition and Markets Authority could use existing powers to take on the concentration in the cloud market, which underpins the AI companies’ business models. A progressive sovereign AI programme should involve an industrial strategy that seeks to expand public investment in the sector and impose strict conditions on private access to public assets, alongside active support for models such as co-operatives, public interest companies and other democratic ownership models, so that the gains of AI can be captured and shared throughout the UK. At the heart of this debate is the role of the public. Big decisions about AI, such as where data centres are built and how AI is deployed in public services, are being taken with little democratic input.

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentLabourNeil Duncan-Jordan

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    One data centre, even a modest one, uses the same amount of electricity as 100,000 homes. The bigger the data centre, the more electricity it uses. Very few of them run off renewables, so that is another issue we need to address. The communities that host the infrastructure see the costs, in water, energy and land, without getting any of the benefits that we have discussed. These big debates are why the Government must embed ongoing public and democratic oversight of the AI transition and legislate for community benefit where infrastructure is built, including a share of the value created locally. We must ensure that the AI revolution does not lead to more power being in the hands of a few who can determine our future. Governments must build independent, publicly funded alternatives to ensure that AI is developed for the common good. Only public investment can support AI that prioritises social and environmental challenges. We need an “AI for the people” strategy—one that starts to recognise the challenges we face and has the ideas to meet those challenges head on.

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentLabourNeil Duncan-Jordan

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    I thank all Members for their contributions to an excellent debate that showed we need to have more of this discussion. I will make some very quick points. First, we need to act with speed, as I think was accepted by a number of Members. As the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) mentioned, we cannot wait 25 years. We also need clear democratic oversight of what is happening. We cannot allow people we do not know and do not control to make our futures for us. We have to be in control of our own destinies. That is very important and will require global regulation. We will have to work with other authorities across the globe to come to the necessary arrangements. Finally, the protections we will need must ensure that the next industrial revolution, which is already here in effect, benefits everyone and not just a few. Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentLabourNavendu Mishra

    Community Cohesion

    5. What discussions he has had with the Northern Ireland Executive on community cohesion in Northern Ireland.

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentLabourNavendu Mishra

    Community Cohesion

    I thank the Secretary of State for that answer. What assessment has he made of the level of online co-ordination during the recent unrest in Belfast, and what discussions has he had with the Police Service of Northern Ireland and other security partners about addressing that issue?

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentLabourNaushabah Khan

    NHS Corridor Care

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) for bringing this important matter to the House, and for talking so eloquently about her experiences on the frontline. Few issues speak to the state of our national health service more than this one. Since being elected, my inbox and advice surgeries have been inundated with heartbreaking and, frankly, harrowing stories from constituents who have either experienced care in a hospital corridor themselves or have witnessed the experiences of loved ones. May alone saw more than 90,000 instances of patients receiving care in clinically inappropriate settings, which is almost 3,000 people every day across our nation. In their most vulnerable hour, patients are being stripped of privacy and dignity, and left without a call bell or even sometimes access to a toilet. I will give Members some examples of the cases that have been raised with me. One constituent wrote to say that their mother, who was on end-of-life care, was treated in a corridor. I cannot even begin to imagine how distressing that must have been. Another reported on how she was treated in a single patient cubicle that had been stripped of its bed and fitted with six chairs, and hearing other people’s medical history, watching their cannulas being inserted and, harrowingly, witnessing a confused elderly man beg for his daughter. I look to Conservative Members—unfortunately, not many of them are here—when talking about this and about exactly how we got here, because the normalisation of these practices over 14 years of Conservative Government has brought us to this point. Indeed, it was under their watch that 12-hour waits in A&E rose twentyfold. Lord Darzi’s report laid it all bare. We inherited a health service in a critical condition and broken by over a decade of under-investment.

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentLabourNaushabah Khan

    NHS Corridor Care

    I thank my hon. Friend for raising that very important issue. Yet while corridor care was rising in our hospitals, the previous Government did not count the numbers. I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), who as Health Secretary chose to publish the official data, because how can we fix what we cannot measure? I also welcome the steps taken by the Government to turn the tide on the mess we inherited, such as the millions of extra appointments delivered, bringing waiting lists down from record highs, and the commitment to end corridor care by 2029. However, corridor care does not begin in the corridor itself, as many Members have noted. It begins with the hospital bed that cannot be freed, as well as the lack of investment in the wider landscape and the lack of support in our communities. This January, the data suggested that one in 10 NHS beds were occupied by people who were medically fit to leave but had no safe place to go—a failure that costs the state £2.7 billion a year, and that costs some of our constituents their lives.

    Hansard source
  11. ParliamentLabourNaushabah Khan

    NHS Corridor Care

    The hon. Member makes a very powerful point. I will come to adult social care in a moment. We simply cannot end corridor care at the front door of the hospital when the back door remains jammed shut. I welcome the steps taken to reform adult social care—a £3.7 billion funding boost for local authorities—but it is clear that we must go further. I eagerly await Baroness Casey’s independent commission on adult social care. However, I am concerned that the review’s terms of reference call for recommendations to be implemented in a phased way over a decade. That is simply not fast enough. Social care reform must work in lockstep with NHS reform. A commission reporting in 2026 and 2028, with implementation stretched over a decade and beyond, will not be able to enact the scale of change needed to meet our targets. I urge the Government to move at pace.

    Hansard source
  12. ParliamentLabourNaushabah Khan

    NHS Corridor Care

    No, I will not take any further interventions, thank you. Lastly, I would like to pay tribute to the nurses, doctors and staff who keep Medway hospital in my constituency of Gillingham and Rainham running. In this House, we all receive correspondence from frustrated members of the public regarding the state of our NHS. However, it is the staff who carry the moral injury of apologising, shift after shift, for conditions that they did not create.

    Hansard source
  13. ParliamentLabourNatasha Irons

    National Youth Strategy

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield (Harpreet Uppal) for securing this important debate. As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on youth affairs, I know the importance of services for young people, and I welcome the Government’s leadership on this issue. When I meet young people in my constituency or through my work on the APPG, I am struck by how tough it is to be a young person in Britain today. Whether through the 73% cut in youth services over the last decade, a housing crisis that prevents some young people from moving on to the next stage of their lives and means that others grow up in temporary accommodation, or youth unemployment, our young people are growing up in a world that is economically challenging, internationally volatile and often hostile to them. Our young people are just as ambitious, just as determined and just as willing to work for their future as anyone who has gone before them, and in that context of hope, opportunity and ambition for our young people, the national youth strategy is so important. Around £1 billion has been taken out of the sector since 2010, more than half of council-run youth centres have closed, and the statutory framework is often too weak. We have been left with a postcode lottery for youth provision, where spending on youth services can range from as little as £1 per young person in one area to £137 in another. Co-created with young people, and backed by £500 million of Government investment, the national youth strategy is a 10-year plan to provide young people with somewhere to go, something meaningful to do and someone who cares. Although I wholeheartedly welcome this landmark strategy, for it to have a truly meaningful impact it must be backed by statutory protections for the services that our young people rely on. That is why I introduced the Youth Services Bill last year, which aims to strengthen the statutory duty on local authorities by introducing clear, measurable benchmarks for what sufficient youth provision looks like. It includes expectations around qualified staff and accessibility, and it embeds the conditions needed for long-term improvement through joined-up safeguarding, quality standards and meaningful youth voice in the design and delivery of services. I have seen at first hand the impact of a lack of statutory protections for youth services. In Croydon, London’s youngest borough, the council shut down the youth engagement team, a group of wonderful youth workers who were a critical link between the voluntary sector and the council. The lack of statutory protections meant that it could be closed down without real consultation with young people, the NHS or the police. Protecting our youth provision is not about placing unrealistic burdens on local authorities; it is about making a practical investment in our young people’s future and financial savings for our communities. As has been outlined, for every £1 we save on youth services, we save up to £6.40 in social value. Although I wholeheartedly recognise and welcome this strategy, I urge the Minister and the Government to think again about how we can provide statutory protections for our youth services.

    Hansard source
  14. ParliamentLabourMr James Frith

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) on securing the debate, which speaks directly to the kind of country and society that we want to create for everyone we represent, and our friends and family—the type of country and society we want to live and thrive in. The Government recognise that AI is, as Members have said, already changing our economy, the delivery of public services, our expectations of each other and the ways in which we interact and engage in debate. For me, it is not merely the latest thing, or the something new and shiny that is so attractive to politics and politicians; in my mind, it is equivalent to a new atmosphere in which we now all expect to feature and play our part. We see the potential of AI in everything from scientific discovery to better public services and stronger economic growth. The Government have a clear responsibility to make sure that the change at the heart of this debate reinforces rather than weakens the fabric of our society. That includes standing up to big tech firms when we deem it necessary—examples will follow—when they facilitate harm to UK citizens. As so many Members have powerfully made the argument for, it also includes developing sovereign capability—determining what comes next and honing it for best benefit. As we bring this debate to a close, it is important that we continue to consider those questions. We must collectively decide how we build a better society in an AI-enabled world. AI must serve us, and not the other way round. The Government recognise the pressure to internationally compete on AI. That means we need to actively shape the transition towards it to secure benefits for the UK while managing risk or, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) put it, exert the domestic control that we need. That is why we are working hard to ensure that the UK has the capability, access and influence it needs in the technologies that will shape our economy, public services and national security. It is why we established the sovereign AI unit with £500 million to enable the Government to back promising UK firms. The UK already attracts the third highest private investment in AI.

    Hansard source
  15. ParliamentLabourMr James Frith

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    If I am considered worthy to meet in a few weeks’ time, I will be very happy to do so. This is not about self-sufficiency or about turning away from trusted international partners; it is about ensuring that where the UK has genuine strengths—in research, talent, creativity and innovation—we can translate them into long-term economic benefit. Significant private investment is now flowing into areas that would have seemed like science fiction even a decade ago, including therapies that slow or reverse biological ageing and AI-accelerated drug discovery that could compress timelines for curing major diseases. If realised, such developments would profoundly reshape expectations of health, work and the role of the state. That is why the Government have already committed to ambitious plans to transform services and digitise government, as set out in the road map for modern digital government published earlier this year.

    Hansard source
  16. ParliamentLabourMr James Frith

    Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

    The Government’s principle is to regulate at the time of deployment or at use. I understand the right hon. Gentleman’s argument, but it is important that we strike the right balance between innovation and regulation. Of course, as I will come on to discuss in more detail, where there have been examples of harm we must call that out and call in those who caused them. The Government have already committed to ambitious plans to transform services. For a radiologist, that means access to the best tools for detecting cancer—tools that can save lives and cut waiting lists in our NHS. The public sector is where it is perhaps most crucial that the Government ensure that we embed frameworks, standards and guidance to ensure that AI is deployed in a way that is fair, transparent and accountable. We are doing so with the data and AI ethics framework, the AI playbook, and transparency standards that ensure the public can understand how systems are used. We are also supporting UK firms that provide third-party AI-assurance ecosystems, demonstrating that AI systems are safe and reliable as well as creating new jobs. That is critical not just for risk management but for building businesses, building confidence in those deploying AI, and building trust in the systems we use. To the points that were made about the job market, AI has the potential to enhance job roles and the performance of each of us at work, but it is necessary and reasonable, as my hon. Friend the Member for Poole pointed out, to distinguish the jobs that are most at risk—those least likely to be enhanced and most likely to be replaced. That is a very reasonable proposition. We recognise that one of the primary areas where people will interact with AI is in the labour market. To zone in on labour markets, and the issue of young people and entry-level jobs, an estimated 12.8% of all people aged 16 to 24 in the UK are not in education, employment or training. That goes well beyond data-entry or access-level jobs, or a potential shift of culture in relation to entry-level jobs. To date, there is little conclusive evidence that AI is reducing employment. However, the International Monetary Fund estimates that around 70% of UK workers are in exposed occupations. Around half of those exposed workers are in high complementary roles, where AI will enhance rather than replace their work. The Government are committed to supporting the worker experience through the AI transition, and have a proud record of advancing workers’ rights. To that end, earlier this year the Government established the AI and the future of work unit, bringing together expertise from across Departments and industry to monitor how AI is affecting jobs, wages and opportunity in real time. We are putting in place the institutions, data and cross-Government co-ordination needed to ensure that AI transforms the labour market, that workers are supported and that opportunities are widely shared across society. We are also investing in people, because the opportunities of AI will be realised only if the workforce are equipped to harness them. That is why we have launched one of the most ambitious skills programmes anywhere in the world. Our AI skills boost programme is already delivering results. In an answer given to the House last week, I referred to the early careers funding and work on curriculum reforms to come, such as an AI-inclusive GCSE in computing. This is about ensuring that workers at every stage of their career, and whether in small businesses, large firms or public services, have the tools that they need to thrive in an AI-enabled economy. AI will have—is having—seismic impacts on our working lives and productivity, and we must embrace the democracy this gives us. We must democratise access to AI to ensure that communities across the country reap the benefits. Central to that effort is ensuring that support is delivered to the graduates and young people entering the world of work for the first time. Much has been made of the rising level of NEETs. Programmes such as TechLocal are creating new jobs, traineeships and professional training, while scholarships and fellowships are supporting the next generation of researchers and innovators. Nobody is waiting 25 years to tackle the threats, however. AI harms are very real, and we do not sit idly by when it comes to tackling them. We are not standing still. The AI Security Institute is conducting world-leading research to understand the capabilities and impacts of advanced AI. In response to the generation of vile and degrading non-consensual sexual deepfakes on Grok earlier this year, the Prime Minister himself, and the Government, stood up to Grok and X and won that fight. We have criminalised the creation of non-consensual sexual deepfakes and legislated to require platforms to remove them. Separately, we have banned nudification apps and criminalised AI tools designed to create sexual abuse material, as well as learning the importance of sovereignty when considering the recent switching off of the latest Anthropic AI tool. I was asked a specific question about the social media ban. I was a proud early adopter of the policy and I am pleased to say that it remains the Government’s intention to update the House before recess. The UK is proactively responding to the AI revolution—we are shaping it. AI has extraordinary potential to improve healthcare, accelerate scientific discovery, personalise education, strengthen public services and drive economic growth. We will harness the opportunities across every region and community to shape UK society for the better for all.

    Hansard source
  17. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Prime Minister, who is attending the NATO summit. Working with our allies, we are strengthening Europe’s role in the alliance, which remains the cornerstone of our national security. Yesterday the Prime Minister met with the Prime Minister of Norway, and I am sure the House will join me in wishing good luck to the England team ahead of the world cup quarter-final. This week, we mark the awful anniversary of 7/7, a day when people travelling through London on a bright summer morning had their lives ended and changed forever, including my best friend James Adams. We remember all those affected by those terrible attacks, and we will always stand against terrorism. The Labour party also pays tribute to Sir George Howarth. He was a champion for Knowsley, a distinguished colleague and a wonderful gentleman. We will miss him deeply, and our condolences are with his wife, Julie, and his family. This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

    Hansard source
  18. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    That is not bad for someone who represents a premier league side, but two years since the election, the hon. Member still needs to engage with the facts about the Tories’ failed period in government. His colleagues now accept that. The former Treasury Minister, the former Communities Secretary, the former Health Minister and the former Immigration Minister—and that is just the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick)—wrecked the country and helped wreck the Tory party, and now wants to do it all over again with Reform.

    Hansard source
  19. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I agree with my hon. Friend: Bev Craig will be a brilliant mayor for Greater Manchester. I am proud that Labour is putting power over bus services back in the hands of local leaders. This Government have extended franchising powers, capped fares and invested to deliver better services, and we are ensuring that children can enjoy free bus travel this summer. I am sure my hon. Friends will want to get behind Bev in Greater Manchester so that we can defeat Reform’s divisive candidate and drive forward the agenda under a new mayor.

    Hansard source
  20. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I am delighted to welcome the shadow Housing Secretary to the Dispatch Box. He, of course, could have been doing that job every week if he were better with numbers. He was the Foreign Secretary in the Government who botched Brexit, the Home Secretary in the Government who decimated neighbourhood policing and one of the shortest serving Education Secretaries in our history. The right hon. Gentleman asks about a very serious issue, and every decision we have taken has been based on public safety and delivering justice for victims. Let us talk about the context. The last Labour Government built 28,000 prison places. We are building 14,000 by 2031, and we have already delivered 3,200. The Tories closed 23 prisons: Gloucester—closed; Shrewsbury—closed; Portsmouth—closed; Holloway—closed; Northallerton—closed. And what is it now? A block of flats. That is why we have to have an early release scheme and why we passed the Sentencing Act 2026, and we are putting in community powers locally to make sure that we protect the public.

    Hansard source
  21. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    This is a very serious issue and the right hon. Gentleman is experienced in this House. He knows that while he was Home Secretary, the Conservative Government had an early release scheme that let out 10,000 offenders—10,000. They had six schemes within a year. They had a scheme that they announced on 6 June 2023, another scheme on 17 October 2023, another scheme on 8 March 2024, another in April, another in May and another in June—all before the election. That is why the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), it is rumoured, called the election in the first place. They left a system with just 83 empty cells. That is what the previous Justice Secretary inherited when she came into office. That is why we had to pass the sentencing scheme. The right hon. Gentleman has not said what the Conservatives would do now to fix the system. Of course we think of every victim. That is why we are notifying victims and are in discussion with all victims. I sat, last week in my surgery, with a victim of grooming gangs. All of us want to see offenders locked up. That is why we must have prison capacity.

    Hansard source
  22. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    The right hon. Gentleman has not proposed what the Conservatives would do if they were in office. They released 10,000 under four different schemes, with no impact assessment when they released them, no victim contact when they released them, and no warning. They did it on the sly. Let us be clear: we have more probation officers, while the Conservative Government cut probation—decimated it—because of Chris Grayling. We have invested £700 million in probation. We are rolling out the largest programme of tagging in our history. We are forcing offenders to stay boxed in certain areas, rather than where victims are. We are creating alcohol, pub, football and driving bans. We are implementing income reduction orders. We are expanding chemical castration for sex offenders. None of that happened when they were in power.

    Hansard source
  23. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I have got to say, this is rich coming from the right hon. Gentleman. The Conservatives had 14 long years in power; they wrecked neighbourhood policing—he was Home Secretary; prisons were at bursting point—that is why they called the general election; and they let out offenders in secret—and that why we have the Sentencing Act 2026, which passed through this House and the House of Lords. We are getting thousands more bobbies on the beat, toughening up probation—they decimated it—and we have to have the space to lock up dangerous criminals. That is why we passed the Sentencing Act.

    Hansard source
  24. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    Let us be clear: there is no proposal before this House to scrap trial by jury. The right hon. Member needs to do better and get on the detail. There is a threshold change. Margaret Thatcher made a change to jury trials. David Cameron made a change to jury trials. The vast majority of criminal cases in this country are dealt with by magistrates—again, which the Conservatives cut. We are restoring the magistery, so that they can do more. We are investing in our courts—the Conservatives ran our courts down. We are modernising our courts, we are introducing digital ID, and we need reform.

    Hansard source
  25. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    The right hon. Gentleman insists on proving that he cannot count. We lost 16,000 police officers when the Conservatives were in power. The British people have not forgotten what they did to our country. After two years of this Labour Government, I will compare our record with theirs every day of the week. Their record is the biggest fall in living standards in recorded history; our record is the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation. Their record is wrecking our criminal justice system; our record is bringing down violent crime. Their record is millions of people stuck on NHS waiting lists; our record is cutting NHS waiting lists at the fastest rate in history. Their record is cutting defence—the right hon. Gentleman was a reservist—and hollowing out the armed forces; our record is the biggest boost to defence funding since the early 1990s. Their record is plunging hundreds of thousands of children into poverty; our record is lifting half a million children out of poverty. I will take our record over theirs any day of the week.

    Hansard source
  26. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    This case involves horrific offences against vulnerable children. I know that all Members of this House will join me in paying tribute to the victims, who have shown remarkable bravery in coming forwards. It is evident that these children were failed dreadfully, and Glasgow city council must urgently act on the recommendations of this review. I know that my hon. Friend has written to the Scottish Government to request an independent inquiry, and the SNP should consider that request with the gravity that it deserves.

    Hansard source
  27. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    Well, everyone can see that the Reform leader is just trying to distract from the fact that he is up to his neck in sleaze. He has serious questions to answer and he cannot run away from them. Labour is not going to be part of this circus. I hear it is the people versus the establishment: the City trader, Putin-admiring, professional politician who is pals with crypto billionaires versus Count Binface. There have been unqualified joke candidates in the past—let’s see what the people of Clacton decide.

    Hansard source
  28. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    The hon. Member raises a very serious issue. I will arrange for Beth to meet the Security Minister to discuss the matter in detail. The hon. Member also mentioned the Hillsborough Bill, and I am confident that it will be before the House in the coming days.

    Hansard source
  29. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    My hon. Friend is right that our protections must keep pace with evolving threats such as deepfakes. I know that she has been in discussions with Ministers on the issue. We will look at her amendments closely. We are absolutely focused on protecting our democracy against foreign interference.

    Hansard source
  30. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I am very pleased that the hon. Member raises the issue of votes and democracy. But I have got to say this to the Greens: during the local elections, a Green councillor in Lewisham described me and the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), as “coconuts”. The Green party looked the other way, kept the candidate in post and rewarded them with the council job—I am not making this up—of cabinet member for healing. The Greens could start the healing process by stopping such racist language.

    Hansard source
  31. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I commend my hon. Friend for the difference that he has made and for his hard work to bring Pride in Place funding to his constituency. He lists an amazing record in two years, and we have got three more to go.

    Hansard source
  32. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I say to the hon. Gentleman that everyone is equal before the law. That is the foundation on which the openness, tolerance and generosity of this country rest. Let us be clear: there is no two-tier justice in this country. The hon. Gentleman was elected as a Reform Member of Parliament and clearly aspires to become one once more. Given reports that concerns were raised with the National Crime Agency about the £5 million gift to the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), he should be asking where did the money really come from?

    Hansard source
  33. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    My hon. Friend is right to champion the huge potential of Cornwall. We are absolutely committed to devolution and putting power in the hands of local leaders. Conversations with local authorities such as Cornwall are ongoing, and we will confirm next steps as soon as possible. I know that Ministers will be happy to update him.

    Hansard source
  34. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    The hon. Member is right that we inherited record levels of pollution, and we are determined to tackle that and clean up our waterways. We have acted by banning unfair bonuses, introducing jail time for lawbreaking bosses and unlocking £104 billion of private investment to rebuild vital infrastructure to deliver cleaner waters, and we also have the clean water Bill. Of course I will arrange for her to meet the Minister.

    Hansard source
  35. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the future: it is coming home. I echo my hon. Friend’s sentiments on Jude Bellingham. Not only is he making Stourbridge proud, but he is a source of pride for the whole nation. In Great British Railways we are seeing the biggest overhaul of our railways in a generation. We will work with all partners, such as local authorities and local businesses, to drive investment, support economic growth and deliver a better service for her constituents.

    Hansard source
  36. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    We are raising defence spending to keep this country safe in an increasingly volatile world. That does require tough decisions, and the Department for Transport will set out £700 million-worth of savings from roads funding, but we will consult on the next road investment strategy and set out decisions in due course. I reassure the hon. Lady that safety would come first.

    Hansard source
  37. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I have the honour to say that His Majesty the King has accepted our advice to grant Ruth Ellis, the last woman to be hanged in the United Kingdom, a conditional pardon. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] While the pardon does not claim that she was innocent of killing David Blakely, it replaces the death penalty with a sentence of life imprisonment to recognise a profound injustice in this exceptional case. I know that her grandchildren, Laura Enston and Stephen Beard, are in the Gallery with us today. We hope that this pardon brings a measure of peace to Ruth Ellis’s family, who have carried the weight of what happened to her for over 70 years.

    Hansard source
  38. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I know that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is discussing the budget at this very time. Tackling fraud and error in the welfare system is a priority for the Government, which is why we passed the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Act 2025, giving the Department for Work and Pensions more powers to stop fraud in its tracks, recover money lost and prevent overpayments.

    Hansard source
  39. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We owe a profound debt of gratitude to the Gurkhas who have served this country courageously. We are listening to the needs of the community and already improving access to healthcare and community support. Ministers have met veterans and the Government in Nepal for constructive discussions on pensions, and those will continue. I will be happy to ensure that my hon. Friend is kept updated.

    Hansard source
  40. ParliamentLabourMr David Lammy

    Engagements

    We are backing business with the lowest corporation tax in the G7, we have delivered the small business plan with the largest crackdown on late payments in 25 years, we are bringing down costs for businesses through five major trade deals, we have secured £365 billion in private investment since the election and unemployment is down, with over 400,000 more people in work than this time last year.

    Hansard source