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
347
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

Conservative and Unionist Party

Sitting MPs
118
Entries, last 7 days
89
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

Liberal Democrats

Sitting MPs
71
Entries, last 7 days
64
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
9
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

Green Party

Sitting MPs
5
Entries, last 7 days
0
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 4 Nov 2026

Plaid Cymru

Sitting MPs
4
Entries, last 7 days
2
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

All parties, latest first

12,868 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

  1. ParliamentLabourDr Scott Arthur

    Sudan

    I thank the Minister for his statement and the level of reassurance he has given us. I also thank the hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam), who yesterday introduced me to three men with a connection to Sudan. They were all absolutely distraught by what is happening, and I really felt for them. They asked why we were not discussing the situation more; all of us, not just the Minister, have to ask why that is. The men had two questions. First, can the Minister confirm that we are not exporting weapons to the United Arab Emirates for use in Sudan? Secondly, the Minister has told us that the cut to aid has not affected the women and girls who are fleeing the region into Chad, but are those women and girls getting all the support they need?

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentLabourDr Peter Prinsley

    Health Bill (Sixth sitting)

    I have received representations from rural dispensing practices in my constituency about the provision of vaccination services. I understand that dispensing general practitioners are having difficulty securing the funding to provide vaccinations, particularly the new meningitis vaccination for young people. Does the Minister envisage that the change being proposed will have any effect on that arrangement?

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentLabourDr Peter Prinsley

    Health Bill (Seventh sitting)

    I am not entirely clear why there is a problem with the financial incentive. People coming off lists that they have been on for a long, long time may well have a clinical condition that is changing. In my practice, I deal with the management of children with glue ear, who need to have grommets. From time to time, the condition fluctuates and the glue ear goes away. Equally, the reason that we do a tonsillectomy is that people get recurrent acute tonsilitis, but it is actually quite a good idea for people to wait some time because often the recurrent acute tonsilitis simply settles down and they do not need their operation. Sometimes, when a patient comes into hospital for an operation on their tonsils and I ask them, “When did you last have an attack of tonsilitis?” they say, “I can’t remember.” We have to take account of the fact that the condition of the patient may fluctuate.

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentLabourDr Peter Prinsley

    Health Bill (Seventh sitting)

    I am interested to hear what the Minister has to say, but does she agree that this is yet another reason why we must go full speed ahead to get the single patient record sorted out?

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentLabourDr Peter Prinsley

    Health Bill (Seventh sitting)

    I am listening carefully to what the right hon. Member has to say. I wonder whether he could present us with a concrete example of where precisely elected local government involvement in the commissioning of services in ICBs has been essential, because it seems to me that what an ICB needs is expertise in commissioning. We need people who know how to commission services. Although I understand the importance of representation, I think that what we really need is expertise in commissioning.

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentLabourDebbie Abrahams

    Connect to Work Programme

    I am pleased to present the Work and Pensions Committee’s second report in our employment support for disabled people inquiry series. Our first report, “Disability at Work”, examined workplace issues impacting on disabled people and those with long-term health conditions, who I will now refer to as disabled people. These include challenges finding employment and then staying in work. Today’s report looks at the Government’s Connect to Work programme, an employment support programme that aims to reduce health and disability-related economic inactivity. One of our labour market’s most persistent and challenging issues is the disability employment gap. With nearly one in four of the working-age population being disabled, equivalent to 10.4 million disabled people, it is quite staggering that only 5.5 million disabled people are employed when we know millions more want a job. It is a disability employment rate of 52.8%, compared with 82.5% for non-disabled people—a disability employment gap of nearly 30%. After historical falls, the gap has remained around 30% since 2012, and it remains above the OECD average. Disabled people and people living in disabled households are far more likely to live in poverty than any other group. The extra costs that disabled people face and the lack of employment opportunities are key factors. As most disabilities are acquired, many disabled people have been employed before becoming inactive or unemployed. Their skills and experience are being wasted—a lost opportunity for the individuals, their families, and indeed the country. Last year, the Committee commissioned an economic analysis of the potential savings in Department for Work and Pensions spending and returns to the Exchequer from programmes like Connect to Work, and how such programmes could make that difference. That analysis was modelled on previous successful employment support programmes, and the economists estimated that if 5% of currently unemployed or inactive people—including disabled people—moved into employment, that would generate £20 billion over the life of the Parliament. The Committee’s inquiry on employment support for disabled people showed that there are multiple barriers to work, including features of the workplace itself, issues preventing people from finding and getting into work, and things making it difficult to remain in work. Rather than attempting to cover all those issues in a single report, we felt it would be much more helpful to produce a report on each aspect. We also hope to report on Access to Work once the Government have published their proposals for reforming that scheme, which we hope will be very soon. Our “Disability at Work” report highlighted the structural and cultural factors in workplaces that continue to limit opportunity. We found that barriers facing disabled people in workplaces are present across all stages and aspects of employment, from recruitment to workplace adjustments, employer attitudes and opportunities for progression. The report I present today complements that report by focusing on the support people need before entering work, or when they need help to get there. Our message is clear: closing the disability employment gap requires a joined-up system, not isolated programmes. Let me recognise the significance of Connect to Work, a major, evidence-based programme with real potential. Launched in October 2024, it is intended to support up to 300,000 people—principally disabled people—into sustained paid employment over five years. It is part of the Government’s broader welfare reform strategy to reduce health-related economic inactivity, a strategy that is both economically important and, more importantly, central to improving lives. The Committee is clear that we welcome Connect to Work. The programme is voluntary, grounded in well-established supported employment models, and combines national scale with local flexibility, offering scope for more tailored and responsive support. Models such as individual placement and support, and the supported employment quality framework, demonstrate strong outcomes in sustained employment, as well as in confidence, skills and wellbeing. These approaches are personalised, integrated with services, focused on real jobs and provide ongoing support. Connect to Work adopts these principles, which is one of its greatest strengths. The programme is well designed, but success depends on delivery. A key feature is its devolved delivery model. Local authorities have flexibility to design provision based on local needs, but with that flexibility comes risks—risks to do with, for example, consistency of delivery; workforce capacity; integration with health, skills and local services; funding certainty; and managing the transition between programmes. We heard that different commissioning approaches can lead to variation in service quality and uneven experiences for participants. The Government need to find a balance between flexibility and consistency. The Committee’s central conclusion is that Connect to Work’s strengths will matter only if that translates into consistent, integrated and properly resourced support on the ground. To date, delivery has not been without difficulty. We heard that early implementation has been more complex and more burdensome than expected. The Department for Work and Pensions acknowledged that aspects of the early process were “clunky and unsatisfactory”. Local authorities told us that delivery plan processes were lengthy and administratively demanding, and guidance was at times unclear or inconsistent. Finally, engagement by the Department seemed to vary across areas. Programmes of this scale depend not only on policy design, but on systems, processes and relationships. Early friction risks undermining confidence and delaying impact. In addition, more than £1 billion of employment support funding devolved to local authorities from Connect to Work for other employment support programmes this year needs to be clearly defined. There should be monitoring of outputs and outcomes. We welcome the steps that the Department has taken to address that, and the Committee will return to this issue to assess progress. Successful delivery needs skilled practitioners and specialist expertise. Some local authorities were confident that they had the necessary capacity, but we also heard of difficulties recruiting staff with the necessary skills, loss of expertise during delayed commissioning, and a wider shortage across the sector. Without the right people to deliver them, even the best designed programmes will not succeed. We therefore call on the Government to set out clearly how they will ensure sufficient capacity, co-ordinate workforce development and address gaps. Perhaps the most significant part is integration. Connect to Work sits alongside other national initiatives, such as Work Well. Its success depends on services delivered by numerous providers, such as those to do with health and skills. Integration, particularly with the NHS, is essential. Where systems are joined up, outcomes improve. Where they are fragmented, people fall through the gaps. Effective triage, clear pathways and strong local partnerships are therefore critical. This is not simply about programme delivery, but a coherent network of support. We recognise the significant investment that the Government are making, but we identified concerns about rigidities in financial management across financial years, and uncertainty beyond the current spending period. For a programme of this scale, long-term certainty is essential, so that local authorities can invest in staff and the infrastructure needed to support delivery. That confidence needs to extend beyond the end of the current spending period. We therefore call on the Government to provide a clear statement of intent about the programme’s future. We also heard concerns about gaps in provision during the transition from the work and health programme pioneer to Connect to Work. In some areas, that left individuals with limited support at a critical time. While the Government have acknowledged these gaps, we are not persuaded that their full impact has been adequately assessed. This points to a broader issue, which is the need for better system-wide planning when programmes change. As noted at the outset, this report is part of a wider programme of work. There is also our “Disability at Work” report. In addition, we have identified Access to Work as a crucial piece of the puzzle; it plays a vital role in supporting people once they enter employment, enabling necessary adjustments and support in the workplace. We therefore intend to examine it in more depth once the Government have set out their proposals for reform. Before I finish, I thank the Committee team, particularly Polina Eaton and Paul Owen, and everyone who provided written and oral evidence to us and attended engagement sessions with us. I believe that our report sets out a balanced assessment of Connect to Work. The programme should help disabled people to get genuine access to meaningful, sustainable employment on equal terms, but its success is not guaranteed. That depends on effective and consistent delivery, a skilled and supportive workforce delivering the programme, integration across services and sustained Government commitment. The policy is sound; the test now is whether the strong foundations that the Government have established translate into consistent, high-quality support in practice. That requires programmes and systems that work together to close the disability employment gap. I commend this report to the House.

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentLabourDawn Butler

    Business of the House

    In Brent, the support staff at Woodfield school face a cut in hours that equates to a cut of about £4,000 in their wages. The school is suggesting that it will fire and rehire them. The staff are on strike. The National Education Union is trying to negotiate, in order to save services, terms and conditions and jobs. Will the Leader of the House support me in ensuring that issues to do with special educational needs and disabilities funding do not jeopardise the care of children, or the terms and conditions of support staff?

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentLabourDawn Butler

    Windrush Day

    It is an absolute and wonderful pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) and her beautiful tribute to the Windrush generation and her constituents. I know how much they appreciate the fact that she calls for this debate in Parliament every single year, and I concur with her on the beautiful exhibition in Portcullis House. However, I slightly disagree on raising the Windrush’s anchor. I have had this conversation with Sir Patrick Vernon, and I would prefer the money to be spent on a learning centre and an educational trust. I feel that would be a more worthwhile spend of money. My mum and dad came here on British passports. They would be considered part of the Windrush generation, and they are extremely proud of coming on their British passports. The way they were taught English in school was way better than how we were taught English in school, and we often got into trouble for how we spoke, because we were not speaking the Queen’s English. I remember being in the garden with my father one day and asking him to sing the national anthem. He started singing “God Save the Queen”, but I wanted him to sing the Jamaican national anthem, because I wanted to learn it. There is a deep history there. As my hon. Friend said in her moving speech, some politicians are trying to divide us, but there is so much that unites us. The Windrush scandal has been such a painful time. The first time I heard of it was when Winston, as I will call him, came to see me in my surgery. He had been working for the council for 40 years and was looking forward to his retirement, but when it was time for retirement, he was told that because he was not legally here, he would not have access to his pension. I was absolutely stunned by that. Sometimes constituents do not tell us the full story, and I thought that maybe there was more to it, but on further investigation I found that it was just a complete injustice. Winston was embarrassed and ashamed. I would say to him that it was not his embarrassment or shame to carry, because this was something done to him by the British Government. However, there is a lack of understanding of the pride that this generation brings with them, as seen in how they carry themselves, how they speak and how they dress. People carrying things in a plastic bag is a no-no in the Jamaican community. If it is see-through, it is called a scandal bag, and is embarrassing because nobody should see what someone has in their bag. There is a lot of pride, which is why this has caused such embarrassment and shame. I asked Jacqui McKenzie, who is the head of immigration, asylum and Windrush cases at Leigh Day, about the cases she is currently dealing with. The first issue, she said, is the excessive delay, with some people waiting four years. Many of them are very elderly, and the stress of the wait has caused illnesses such as dementia. We should hold our heads in shame. There are problems with claims for loss of earnings and the impact on people of a life lived in limbo, waiting for a decision, or in shame, waiting for the Government to acknowledge they belong in the country. That has a profound effect, and the fact that it is not considered is unacceptable. People were sacked from their jobs and they did not get their promotions. Some people could not find places to live or to rent, and as I have mentioned, they did not get their pensions. All of this is unacceptable. Caseworkers are currently not sufficiently trained. Constituents have told me that caseworkers have said to them, “Whereabouts is that?” or, “Are you sure?” when they present information. Teachers have contacted me saying that they can vouch for the West Indian children they taught in their schools if we need evidence, and that is how the community is coming together to try to right these wrongs. Jacqui also mentioned the misinterpretation of demonstrating lawful status, which has led to cases being refused incorrectly. For example, two brothers, now in their 30s, applied for indefinite leave to remain in 2008 as children of settled Windrush parents. The Home Office wrongly refused their application, but years later the Home Office admitted it had made a mistake. However, it has not corrected the knock-on effects that the error caused, and those brothers are still waiting for justice five years later. I have constituents who went to Jamaica to visit family or bury a relative, and when they went to the airport, they were told they could not come back and they were stuck in Jamaica. We have cases of people stuck in Jamaica for 10 years—10 years! One resident who is stuck in Jamaica has plenty of evidence, but he has been refused compensation based on having no lawful status, which is wrong. He was offered £10,000, but then was told that giving him that amount of money was a mistake, which has retraumatised him, and he is now showing signs of dementia. There are problems with requests for updates, and there is a lack of transparency and a lack of care. All of this is unacceptable. As my hon. Friend mentioned, there is also a discrepancy between claimants in decision making. In exactly the same cases, sometimes in the same family, when people have presented their information, they have been given different awards. Some get no award, some get £10,000 and some get £40,000. All this shows that the system is not fit for purpose. The scheme should be moved from the Home Office, which should never have been the administrator of a scheme when it was responsible for the injustice it has inflicted on others. We also need a truly independent appeal mechanism, as well as more experienced staff. At the moment, constituents have to go to the ombudsman, which means they have to go to their MP, who has to sign the application, so we need a straightforward appeal system. The current system is built to retraumatise people who have been wronged. Lastly, we need a Windrush inquiry. We really need to know and understand the cause of the scandal, but also why it is still ongoing. We should be providing redress instead of causing trauma. Next year is the 10th anniversary of this scandal, and the consequences and injustices are still ongoing. It is our job to do this, and when the Minister gets to her feet, I hope she will commit to our putting these injustices right.

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentLabourDawn Butler

    Windrush Day

    My hon. Friend and I co-chair the all-party parliamentary group on women in Parliament. There are many times when we agree on things, believe it or not—people think we do not agree across the House sometimes. Does she agree that not only was the racism real then but it is really disappointing that that generation is now saying that what is happening on our streets and the abuse that they are getting today is very reminiscent of what happened when they first came to the country? We must set a better example and ensure that parliamentarians stop stoking division and hate in our country.

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentLabourDavid Williams

    Business of the House

    There are plenty of great pubs across Stoke-on-Trent North and Kidsgrove that I could invite the Leader of the House to, but today I want to talk about Wendy, Val and residents at Bradeley village in my constituency. Time and again, they fundraise and hold community events to raise money for good causes; most recently, they raised £1,000 for a local sight loss charity. Will the Leader of the House please join me in saying thank you to Wendy, Val and everyone in Bradeley village, and can we make time for a debate on the role of community champions so that we can recognise all they do for our local communities?

    Hansard source
  11. ParliamentLabourDavid Burton-Sampson

    Draft Conversion Practices Bill

    I congratulate my hon. Friend on bringing forward the draft Bill and on all her work on it. Having grown up as a gay person in the early ’90s, I know what it is like to feel as if you are not normal and do not belong. There are some parties, particularly Reform UK, whose Members are not in their places, and seemingly, from the words of the shadow Minister, the Tories, who would take us back to the days of section 28. Does the Minister agree with me that alongside this draft Bill that prevents the evil practice of conversion therapy, we must also protect the freedoms of the LGBTQ+ community to be their authentic selves in our society?

    Hansard source
  12. ParliamentLabourDave Robertson

    Health Bill (Sixth sitting)

    We have heard a few times about Conservative fears about redundancy payments and so on. Why did they not add NHS England to the list of organisations covered by the modification order when they had the opportunity to do so? Is the hon. Lady aware of a reason why that did not happen when the Conservatives were in government?

    Hansard source
  13. ParliamentLabourDave Robertson

    Health Bill (Sixth sitting)

    The modification order is a piece of legislation that is often used in the public sector. It means that when people from a lot of public sector organisations are made redundant and find alternative employment at another state-funded organisation, they are not entitled to a redundancy payment. During their 14 years in power, it would have been entirely possible for the Conservatives to add NHS England to the list of organisations covered by the modification order. That would have prevented the costs that the hon. Lady has mentioned several times. It just seems like they did not take the opportunity to do that, and now they are saying that they should have done that when they were in government.

    Hansard source
  14. ParliamentLabourDarren Paffey

    Ports and Port Connectivity

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) for securing a debate on this important issue. Ports handle 95% of Britain’s physical trade; sea freight accounts for the majority of the UK’s international freight but, as we have heard, the grid and road and rail infrastructure outside the port gates are too often treated as an afterthought. If the Government are serious about economic growth, decarbonisation and national resilience—as I believe they are—we need to see changes in how we approach this. The port of Southampton, in my constituency, demonstrates why. It is Europe’s leading cruise turnaround port and the UK’s second-largest container terminal. Three million passengers come through each year, and it is an important gateway for vehicles, manufactured goods and international trade, dealing with more than £71 billion of value every year. It supports 45,000 jobs nationwide, and anchors a wider Solent maritime cluster, worth £10.6 billion. I know this debate is not a competition for the best port in the country, but Southampton would make a very strong case. In spite of all the strengths and benefits I have just listed, Southampton is not just a stereotypical rich south-eastern seat. Too many communities around the port experience severe deprivation and limited opportunity. Some recent More in Common research found that 58% of 18 to 34-year-olds coming into the workforce in coastal communities are considering moving away, most of them citing a lack of jobs. The investment we are asking for is not just about expanding ports for the sake of it; it is about redistributing that value back into the communities that generate it. That investment locally can be a catalyst for national growth. Southampton has been leading on this: we delivered the UK’s first commercial-scale cruise ship-to-shore power facility. That cut 5,000 tonnes of carbon and has generated £150 million in gross value added benefits in 2024 alone. Private investment in and around the port is moving ahead, but the constraint is often the public infrastructure outside its gates. I struggle with the fact that we have two ship-to-shore plug-in points, but we can use only one of them. If we plug the second one in, the lights in Southampton go out. If the one UK port that is already leading on shore power cannot fully utilise that potential for another decade—we have been told that the grid expansion will not come until 2036—how much later will the rest of Britain be? In the meantime, our European competitors will spend years investing in their infrastructure, getting greener shipping services and stealing a march on their competitors. There is an urgency to this. The case for road and rail investment is just as strong. DP World’s modal shift programme has increased proportion of containers leaving Southampton by rail from 21% to more than 30% in just three years. That is 200,000 lorry journeys off the roads, saving 45,000 tonnes of carbon. Again, we just need the scale to continue. I will close with three specific asks for the Minister. I am grateful for his engagement with me and the sector recently. First, can we bring forward the grid supply point upgrade at Southampton? A 2036 timeline is not compatible with our 2030 shore power obligations or our sector’s decarbonisation ambitions. Secondly, can we commit to ringfencing the maritime emissions trading scheme revenues for port and maritime decarbonisation infrastructure? Finally, can we get Great British Railways and National Highways to treat freight pass and port connectivity as first-order planning priorities? Let us match our ambition with urgency and a plan.

    Hansard source
  15. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response

    I see that the House has been waiting for me. I am starting to prepare myself for a quieter life, and it was nice to have the opportunity to start that this morning. On 11 March and 1 June, the Government published two tranches of documents. Since the motion has passed, we have been in the House to discuss this matter on 11 occasions, including most recently on 3 June. The Government therefore consider themselves to have discharged their duties to this House in relation to the motion. The exception is the material withheld at the request of the Metropolitan police; we will publish that, once we have been informed that doing so is no longer prejudicial to the Met’s criminal investigation.

    Hansard source
  16. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response

    With permission, Mr Speaker, may I refer to my 11 previous statements that answered that question?

    Hansard source
  17. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response

    It is not necessarily for me to give advice to the hon. Gentleman, but I would not always believe the reporting in the Daily Mail. On which documents the Metropolitan police have requested, as I have said repeatedly from the Dispatch Box, I have been advised not to detail or itemise those requests, but instead to refer to the categories of documentation requested, and I have spoken to that point on a number of occasions at the Dispatch Box. The House has asked questions previously about whether we could list the documents, and we have been advised that that would make the work of the Metropolitan police harder as they bring together their case, in terms of criminal consequences. As the hon. Gentleman knows—and he probably agrees with this—the Government do not want to do anything to jeopardise the Metropolitan police’s criminal investigation, and we continue to hold that position.

    Hansard source
  18. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response

    All the documentation that the Government hold has been published in the first two tranches, except for the documentation that the Metropolitan police have asked for, which we have given to them as part of their investigation. The only remaining documentation that will be published in future is therefore the documents that the Metropolitan police hold.

    Hansard source
  19. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    I begin by thanking my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister for the dedicated work that he has undertaken since becoming leader of the Labour party. Following the crushing defeat that we experienced in 2019, he led our party to a landslide historic victory in 2024. Since coming into office, he has taken the right decisions to get our country back on track after 14 years of Conservative failure. NHS waiting lists have fallen by 400,000—the largest fall in 17 years. We have put an extra 3,000 neighbourhood police officers back on the beat, and we will lift 450,000 children out of poverty. I am proud to have served the Prime Minister as his Chief Secretary, and I know that my team and colleagues have been proud to serve him as well, and we wish his successor well.

    Hansard source
  20. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    I wonder where the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) is? [Interruption.] Not in Clacton, I am told, Mr Speaker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell) for his question, and his continued support for the Government’s efforts to improve ethics and integrity in public life. The House knows that trust in politics is important, and that we have more work to do. That is why we have important rules about conflicts of interest, and why we must declare those conflicts of interest on the record, and then not lobby on behalf of donors or others who have sought to put money into our campaigns or other personal interests. The leader of Reform UK has said, “it’s literally none of your business” in answer to questions about the £5 million crypto-donation. I am afraid that it is in the interests of the public, and he needs to answer questions about it. If he is acting on behalf of donors and asking questions in return for money, there should be consequences.

    Hansard source
  21. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind comments. He says that this might be our last time together at the Dispatch Box; I do not know where he is planning on going, but I hope to be back here in due course. He asks a very pertinent question. I know that any Prime Minister takes their responsibilities to the House seriously, and I am sure that the next Prime Minister will be at the Dispatch Box at the earliest opportunity.

    Hansard source
  22. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    I understand the premise of the hon. Gentleman’s question, and I am sure the new Prime Minister will agree with the sentiment. We are waiting for confirmation of the timetable for the Labour party’s election of a new leader. The sitting dates of this House have already been confirmed, but I know the new Prime Minister will want to come to the Dispatch Box at the earliest opportunity.

    Hansard source
  23. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    I thank the hon. Lady for taking the opportunity to pursue further Liberal Democrat policies; she is quite right to do so. She will know of the constitutional principles that mean we cannot bind our successors. I am sure that whoever is in the relevant ministerial role will happily answer that question in due course.

    Hansard source
  24. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    My hon. Friend is right. The Barnett formula plays an important role in ensuring fairness in public spending across all the nations of the United Kingdom. She is right to point out that we have given a record-breaking level of money to the Scottish Government, but it is the responsibility of the Scottish Government to spend that money effectively. People in her constituency and across Scotland have seen that the SNP has failed to spend that money wisely, and we should continue to hold it to account.

    Hansard source
  25. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    I could probably refer to quite a list of appointments under the previous Administration that did not meet that test. I reassure the hon. Gentleman that public appointments are made in line with independent panels, with proper evidence and citations. We continue to make reforms to the system to ensure that the brightest and best across the country help us to lead in the public sphere without being related to political conflicts, as he suggests.

    Hansard source
  26. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    I thank the hon. Member for his question. Of course, the House notes the conclusion of the criminal investigation and the judgment that was laid down in this case of embezzlement by SNP officials. That should never happen in public life, and it definitely should not happen when people are making donations to what they think are good causes—it is clearly wrongdoing, and should never be allowed to take place. A number of tests need to be met to establish an inquiry of the nature that the hon. Member refers to, and I would be happy for us to look at those conditions and write to him with the answer.

    Hansard source
  27. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    My experience of coups is that they do not come with a memo in advance, so the hon. Member should not feel sorry for not having had one. I can assure him that those investigations are under way; I cannot yet give him a time for when they will conclude, but I note that parallel investigations are happening in the European Parliament. When updates are available, my successor will come to the House with that information.

    Hansard source
  28. ParliamentLabourDarren Jones

    Topical Questions

    We have established a Cabinet Sub-Committee called the Middle East Response Committee, chaired by the Prime Minister, which has met weekly. I, as Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister, have chaired senior ministerial groups underpinning that work to ensure we have a clear understanding of the impact of the conflict in the middle east on the UK domestic economy in relation to supply chains, the security of critical goods and the economic impact. That work is informing Government decisions to protect British citizens and the UK economy as best we can from that conflict.Official Report, 9 July 2026; Vol. 789, c. 7WC. (Correction).

    Hansard source
  29. ParliamentLabourDanny Beales

    Business of the House

    The Met police play a vital role in keeping those who work in, live in and visit London safe, including us here in this Chamber. The Labour Government and our Mayor have stepped up and increased funding, but at the same time, the unique challenges that the Met faces— policing protests, complex crimes and terrorism—have all increased, meaning that, despite the uplift, there remains a gap in funding. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on future funding for the Met, and in particular the opportunity to bridge the funding gap by enabling the force to retain a proportion of the value of the cryptocurrency it recently seized as part of Op Manor—estimated to be worth between £3 billion and £9 billion—so that we can invest in the equipment, police stations and police officers that we desperately need?

    Hansard source
  30. ParliamentLabourDanny Beales

    Draft Conversion Practices Bill

    Today has been a long time coming. I thank the Minister for her hard, relentless and committed work in delivering this comprehensive and inclusive draft Bill. We were promised it in 2018, and it has been in four King’s and Queen’s Speeches. The LGBT community will rightly welcome today’s statement, but it is unfortunate that the official Opposition have not. As an LGBT person myself, that is a reminder of how much fear there is in the community now about the change of discourse in this country in relation to LGBT rights. That has been fuelled by the far-right and by international Christian and other organisations in America funding organisations here in the UK. We have seen the official Opposition potentially abandon their support for this Bill, and we have seen the unofficial opposition in Reform champion hatred and push against equality for LGBT people. I and others in the community are afraid. That is why today is important, because the Government are making a clear and definitive statement about conversion practices. Does the Minister agree that conversion practices are abuse, plain and simple? Will she assure me that, as this is a draft Bill, there will be time to discuss the issue, mentioned previously in Committee, of the definition of medical professionals? That must be tightly defined so that we can ensure there is no back-door get-out for those who would seek to continue these abusive practices.

    Hansard source
  31. ParliamentLabourDaniel Francis

    Houses in Multiple Occupation

    I thank my hon. Friend for securing the debate. We have an article 4 direction in the London borough of Bexley—I am one of the borough’s MPs. However, under the Charities Act 2011, charities running temporary accommodation for people suffering from drug or alcohol abuse, or a mental disorder, and registered providers do not need that permission. In my caseload, I see landlords joining with charities to put people in that accommodation who are not in those categories. In that way, they circumvent the restrictions in place. Does she agree that we need to ask the Government to look at how, following an article 4 direction, some landlords use that restriction to further circumvent regulations?

    Hansard source
  32. ParliamentLabourDame Nia Griffith

    Steel Trade Measure

    Although I certainly welcome the protection of our steel industry, I remain concerned about some tariffs and quotas affecting some products. I am pleased to hear the Minister reiterate what the Industry Minister said on Wednesday: that, alongside measures to protect our industry, our Government are absolutely committed to increasing the range of products that we make in the UK. To that end, will the Minister meet me to discuss a proposal from a constituent of mine in Llanelli to open a manufacturing facility to produce steel bands, which currently have to be imported from the EU, so we can bring that production back to the UK?

    Hansard source
  33. ParliamentLabourDame Nia Griffith

    Draft Conversion Practices Bill

    I warmly congratulate the Minister on publishing this draft Bill, and I very much welcome the fully trans-inclusive ban on abhorrent conversion practices. Although the Bill will enable the punishment of those who carry out those abusive practices, its real value will be as a deterrent to stop anybody being subject to such practices in the first place. What plans does the Minister have to develop a real understanding of the Bill, particularly among communities where such practices are currently prevalent?

    Hansard source
  34. ParliamentLabourDame Chi Onwurah

    Civil Service Pension Scheme

    My constituent’s father, who worked all his life in public service, died tragically a year ago. Capita is withholding from his family the provision that he thought would make them secure. Another constituent was having his pension paid until Capita took over, and now he is receiving nothing. It is a tragic shambles, but the problem is not rocket science; it is the IT system. If Capita cannot make this work in the time that it has already had, it should surely not be given the chance to do it any longer, and perhaps its other Government contracts should be reconsidered.

    Hansard source
  35. ParliamentLabourDame Chi Onwurah

    Topical Questions

    The Trump Administration’s decision to deny access to Anthropic’s most powerful AI models to all foreigners—including the British state—has emphasised concerns over technology sovereignty. Will the Minister ensure that as part of the UK-EU summit, our leading technology sector works closely with European Union allies to ensure that we have greater competition and resilience in our technology stack?

    Hansard source
  36. ParliamentLabourDame Angela Eagle

    Natural Disasters: Community Resilience

    Through our resilience action plan, we are driving a whole-of-society approach to resilience, which seeks to integrate the voluntary, community and faith sectors into planning and strengthening the resilience of our critical national infrastructure. The Government are also committed to raising public awareness, with practical advice through gov.uk/prepare.

    Hansard source
  37. ParliamentLabourDame Angela Eagle

    Natural Disasters: Community Resilience

    I recognise that the hon. Gentleman’s constituents have concerns, as do the constituents of other Cornish Members of Parliament who have talked to me. Hundreds were left without telecom services for days after Storm Goretti, which is clearly unacceptable. It is important that we work with telecoms operators and power suppliers to strengthen comms resilience across Cornwall. I will take a close look at that.

    Hansard source
  38. ParliamentLabourDame Angela Eagle

    Natural Disasters: Community Resilience

    The overnight news of the earthquake in Venezuela, which has caused a lot of damage, is very concerning. I know that my colleagues in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office stand ready, as do we, to help with any recovery that the people of Venezuela may need, particularly in terms of rescue at this stage.

    Hansard source
  39. ParliamentLabourDame Angela Eagle

    National Resilience

    We are delivering our resilience action plan to strengthen national resilience, and we are building a system in which Government, business and society work together to anticipate and mitigate the risks facing our country.

    Hansard source
  40. ParliamentLabourDame Angela Eagle

    National Resilience

    The national risk register includes the effects of climate change. Although the Government are working internationally on mitigation, it is also important that adaptation takes centre stage when the kinds of investment decisions my hon. Friend mentions are made. I assure her that the Government are across that.

    Hansard source