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

12,942 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jayne Kirkham

   Prison Safety

   I thank my hon. Friend for securing this important debate. I, too, went to HMP Wandsworth not very long ago. There was an incident on the wing: something happened and the prison officers had to shut all the doors and run. That was a horrible example of what they deal with every day. The violence is there: it is real, and I have seen it. The prison had just set up a neurodivergent wing. I spoke to some of the prisoners, and the wing seemed to have made a real difference to them. We have been talking about rehabilitation; they had access to therapists and they were out of their cells doing things. That model seemed to work well. Does my hon. Friend agree that that could be looked at and rolled out on a wider scale, given how many prisoners—particularly male prisoners—have autistic traits?

   Hansard source
2. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jas Athwal

   Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

   It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) for securing this incredibly important debate. I pay tribute to the South Park Users Group in Ilford South. Come rain or shine, they dedicate their time to keep our parks and streets clean through regular community litter picks. I also put on record my appreciation for the River Roding Trust, whose members collectively cleaned up 200 bags of rubbish from the River Roding, picking up the slack when Thames Water and the Environment Agency should have acted. I commend them for their dedication to ensuring that the residents of Ilford South live in a cleaner and safer environment. Fly-tipping is a scourge that repeatedly comes up in conversations with residents. Recently, I visited a local school where children as young as 10 interrogated me about the fly-tipping that blights our area. The fly-tippers may think that they are invisible and that they can dump their waste and get away with it, but fly-tipping is one of the most visible crimes in our communities. When people see it on their way to work, on the school run or while walking their dog, it drains local pride, chips away at social trust and sends a message that our streets, parks and rivers do not matter.

   Hansard source
3. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jas Athwal

   Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

   I absolutely agree. I have been saying for the last 10 years that that should be done. The Government finally acting is a real positive; we are going in the right direction. Fly-tipping blights our area, but when the council removes it quickly, people feel it is okay to dump rubbish on our streets because someone will pick it up. We cannot win either way; it becomes a vicious cycle. The more that people see the local area as a dumping ground, the more some feel enabled to fly-tip, meaning that the problem spirals unless it is fully tackled. I know from working with my local council that decisive steps are being taken to tackle this blight on our communities. For instance, it maintains free bulky waste collection, removing a lame excuse for fly-tipping. It is cheaper to pick up from people’s doorsteps in a controlled manner than from the streets once the waste has been dumped. Redbridge council has implemented not only that policy, but the wall of shame, which is an approach that has been adopted by other councils: naming and shaming to expose the waste cowboys who impose their mess on us. That sends a clear message that such behaviour is unacceptable in Ilford South and that those who fly-tip on our streets will be held accountable. I welcome the decisive actions the Government have already taken to support local authorities battling fly-tipping, from expanding council powers to crushing the vehicles of serial fly-tippers and making offenders clean up the very streets and parks they have ruined. We need to go further to target the very worst offenders. The council needs to be able to set larger maximum fines to generally deter serial fly-tippers and to demonstrate that although fly-tipping may seem inconsequential to them, it is one of the worst forms of antisocial behaviour. With tough enforcement, councils could use extra revenue to fund detection—

   Hansard source
4. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

   Puberty Blockers

   I know what a sensitive, emotive and difficult issue this is. As I said in the House yesterday, I have myself struggled with the profound challenges this subject raises. We all, as adults, owe a duty of care to every child and young person in this country. That is a responsibility I bear, both as a citizen and as Health Secretary, with the utmost seriousness and sincerity. It is why, in all my deliberations on this matter, my consideration is to protect the safety and wellbeing of children and young people. Children’s healthcare must always be evidence-led, safe and effective. The way to ensure that is to follow expert clinical advice, which is what the Government are doing. Dr Hilary Cass, the clinician who I think has more respect in this space than any other, has spoken about the importance of this trial in recent days. I remind the shadow Minister that it was her party that commissioned the Cass review and accepted its findings, which included the Pathways trial. I have been clear to the House that this is a challenging area. I accept and welcome the scrutiny of Members, but I encourage us to keep in mind Dr Cass’s request to consider the issues sensitively and cautiously. She says: “Polarisation and stifling of debate do nothing to help the young people caught in the middle of a stormy social discourse, and in the long run will also hamper the research that is essential to finding the best way of supporting them to thrive.” I do not think that there is any question that a few years ago, children’s safety and wellbeing was not being protected when it came to gender incongruence. From around 2009, the number of children and young people being referred for NHS support around their gender identity increased rapidly. Stories subsequently emerged of young people struggling after undergoing radical and permanent transition surgery at an early age, of children rushed into taking medication without adequate therapy beforehand, and of clinicians disregarding conditions such as neurodiversity and mental health issues. As such, there was rightly deep concern about the vulnerability of these children and young people, the care and treatments they were receiving, and the surge in referrals. And so, in 2020, NHS England commissioned the leading paediatrician, Dr Hilary Cass, to carry out a review into NHS gender identity services for under-18s. What Dr Cass uncovered was shocking and scandalous, and she made a series of recommendations for how children can be better protected and supported. It was, in my mind, unquestionably wrong for children and young people to be routinely prescribed puberty blockers for gender dysphoria without any clear evidence on their benefits or risks. The situation then was out of control and so I fully supported the indefinite ban introduced by my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), which followed the temporary ban brought in by the previous Government. In considering what to do next, Dr Cass identified that treatment for gender incongruence was “an area of remarkably weak evidence”. She found that even clinicians working in the field were divided on the best way to support, treat and care for young people suffering from gender dysphoria. Where there is strong divergence of medical opinion on treatment, the two possible responses are either to continue with uncertainty—and with that, conflicting opinions and advice—or to undertake a trial. It is only by doing that that we can ensure that children with gender-related distress get the same access to and standards of care as everyone in the NHS.

   Hansard source
5. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

   Puberty Blockers

   The hon. Gentleman’s question allows me to address that matter directly. The data-linkage study will not provide clear evidence of the risks and benefits of puberty-suppressing hormones, which is needed to guide future clinical practice for this cohort. The type of information that would be available in a linkage study is much more limited than the detailed information that the research team will collect about the relative benefits and harms of puberty-suppressing hormones when accessed alongside a holistic model of care.

   Hansard source
6. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

   Puberty Blockers

   I have responsibility for NHS England as Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, and I am setting out the protocol agreed in relation to this trial, as it is a subject that is arousing a lot of questions in the Chamber, which is fair. [Interruption.] I will come back to that point, if the hon. Member for Gordon and Buchan (Harriet Cross) allows me to make a little progress.

   Hansard source
7. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

   Puberty Blockers

   I will make a little progress, and then I will be open to more interventions. We need to be clear about who we are talking about. As Dr Cass said, the vast majority of children and young people who question their gender will resolve it without needing any support other than their friends and family. For many young people, questioning their identity, on many different fronts, is a normal part of growing up, and we should simply let them be. A small number of those young people, however, need greater support because of the level and longevity of discomfort that they feel, and that can often involve counselling or therapy. For a very small number of young people, it is possible—and I emphasise the word possible—that medical treatment would help improve their quality of life and mental health and reduce their gender-related distress. That is why Dr Cass recommended a trial to study the effects of puberty-suppressing hormones on young people’s physical, social and emotional wellbeing, and to establish how best to support children and young people suffering gender incongruence.

   Hansard source
8. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

   Puberty Blockers

   The hon. Gentleman raises an important question around how the clinical trial is designed. In this case, the young people involved in the trial, of whom there will be around 226, will be split into two groups; one half will have the puberty blockers from the start, the other half will receive them after a year. My understanding of this matter, having interrogated the detail carefully, is that a placebo would not be appropriate for this trial because the subject will be able to know the impacts of having the puberty blockers; they will be aware of whether they are having the medication. What is important, however, and what I hope will set this Pathways trial in a wider context, is all the other work that is being done to study the incidence of gender incongruence and the responses to that among young people, which will go beyond the trial we are talking about to look at children and young people questioning their gender through talking to them, understanding their mental health and their approach to that. All that will happen alongside this trial, which is one part of a much wider study to understand how best to support young people who are facing these gender-related issues.

   Hansard source
9. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

   Puberty Blockers

   I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the tone he took in asking an important question, which I am pleased to be able to respond to. The bar for getting on to this trial is set extremely high, with strict eligibility criteria: parental consent, alongside the young person themselves consenting or assenting; a diagnosis of gender incongruence for at least two years; and consent from both the NHS care team and a national multidisciplinary team, including a wide range of disciplines, to understand all aspects of a young person’s health, context and situation. The level of approvals and scrutiny that young people will have to go through to participate in the trial will, therefore, set the bar extremely high.

   Hansard source
10. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

    Puberty Blockers

    I will give way one more time, and then I will make some progress.

    Hansard source
11. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

    Puberty Blockers

    If a child is looked after under a care order, the local authority has parental responsibility, so it would need to be part of the consent process as the corporate parent. I turn to the points raised by the right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) about young people becoming involved in the trial and the checks that are in place to enable that to happen. As I set out earlier, as the trial involves children, it comes with a responsibility to interrogate and understand its design. As Health Secretary, I have sought the most detailed assurances possible from my clinical advisers as to how children taking part in the trial will be protected. There are a number of important safeguards. As I have said, children can participate only with the consent of a parent or guardian, and the child themselves must consent or assent. They can participate only if they have had a diagnosis of gender incongruence for at least two years, have received psychosocial support through the NHS and are of stable physical and mental health. They can participate only if they are not subject to any safeguarding concerns and if they and their parents demonstrate sufficient understanding of the nature of the treatment, including its possible advantages and disadvantages. They can participate only if the treatment has been deemed clinically appropriate by both the NHS care team and the national multidisciplinary team and if they are already accessing NHS gender services. On eligibility, the bar is extremely high. The number of young people who would expect to qualify for the trial will be low and the safeguards to ensure their safety and wellbeing will be rigorous. I have sought and had an assurance that, once they are involved in the trial, participants may be withdrawn at any point. We are not proceeding with the previous, now decommissioned, model of care overseen by the Conservatives when they were in government. We are proceeding cautiously, with rigorous safeguards in pursuit of the evidence, as Dr Cass recommended. Last Thursday, the independent MHRA approved an updated protocol that significantly strengthened the objective criteria for withdrawing children from the trial, which is a change that I welcome. Signs of greater risk to participants will now trigger increased monitoring, clinical review or their automatic withdrawal from the trial. All participants will be monitored before, at the start of, every three months during, and after the trial. Before and during the trial, information will be collected about mental health, quality of life, self-harm and suicidality, body image, cognition, puberty stage, physical health and side effects. I have been determined to ensure that the oversight of this trial is as rigorous and robust as it possibly can be, so I have requested monthly updates on its progress. That will include my being notified of any emerging risks. This trial is rightly one of the most scrutinised UK clinical trials of recent times. We should expect nothing less when we are talking about the health and wellbeing of some of the most vulnerable children in our country. Yet, as Dr Cass has made clear, we have to build the evidence base to show whether the treatments are safe and whether they produce the positive outcomes that young people and clinicians want from them. The Opposition’s motion would prevent us from following expert clinical advice, when proceeding with the trial is the most appropriate way forward. I say that not because I am suggesting that we should feel instinctively comfortable in doing so but because I have arrived at that conclusion after considering the clinical evidence and receiving robust assurances on the safeguards that are in place.

    Hansard source
12. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Murray

    Puberty Blockers

    The MHRA has introduced additional safeguards. As a result of its dialogue with the trial sponsors, the amended protocol published last week increases the level of safeguards. That means that if the regular monitoring, which will happen at least every three months—it can be more regular during the trial—shows any sign of increased risk of harm, that will lead to increased monitoring, clinical review and, when considered against objective criteria, automatic withdrawal from the trial. It is a question of monitoring this trial, possibly more closely than any trial before—the level of scrutiny is very great indeed—to ensure that at the first sign of any increased risk of harm, action will be taken. That is the assurance that I have sought in interrogating this matter carefully in recent days, and that is the basis on which I am talking to the right hon. Gentleman and others in the House today. We must come to a fair and settled conclusion on this matter to move forward as a country, and I believe that we should follow clinical advice and establish the clinical evidence gathered in a highly scrutinised trial with all the safeguards in place that I have described. Only that approach will give us the confidence about where we settle on this matter in the future. On that basis, the Government oppose this motion.

    Hansard source
13. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Asser

    Puberty Blockers

    I know the constituent my hon. Friend has spoken about. My hon. Friend also makes a valuable point about the need to speak with people who have lived a life, given that these things have been done in ignorance. Her point about parents is key. I have a constituent who is trans whose parents have engaged with me and explained the difficulties of learning to deal with and manage the situation. Their voices, alongside those of clinicians, are really important in understanding the issues. Does my hon. Friend agree?

    Hansard source
14. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Prison Safety

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) for securing this debate and for bringing attention to this very important subject, which she has raised on numerous occasions in the Chamber and elsewhere. She has spoken to Lord Timpson, the Minister for Prisons, and to me about the issue and has been a champion for inmates and staff at HMP Lowdham Grange, as well as for families. I also want to thank my hon. Friend’s staff, on the record, because it is not just Members of Parliament who deal with these very difficult, complex and draining issues. I know that staff in her constituency and parliamentary office have very difficult conversations and that they go above and beyond to help her constituents, and sometimes people who are not her constituents. It is right that I place on the record my thanks, not just for bringing the matter to my attention and that of the Government, but—[Interruption.]

    Hansard source
15. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Prison Safety

    As I was saying before we were interrupted by votes, I want to put on record my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest, her team, and her neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling (Michael Payne), who has raised this issue with me. As my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest intimated in her opening speech, on the back of her representations I visited HMP Lowdham Grange in April. I had an important meeting with the governor and her leadership team where I raised many of the concerns raised by my hon. Friend and was reassured to a large degree. I felt that the leadership team there understood the issues and were working at pace to attempt to address them. However, I also want to place on record that I challenged the team about the work that needs to be done. We have seen in the report published yesterday that although there have been improvements, there is absolutely no doubt that there is a long way to go. I hope that the governor and the leadership team at HMP Lowdham Grange would agree with that. There is more work to do there and elsewhere. Poor safety in our prisons fundamentally reflects a system under strain. In the summer of 2024, this Government inherited a prison system that was in crisis—in utter collapse—and very soon to run out of places completely. Too many prisons are still struggling at or near capacity, with an increased risk of violence hampering their efforts to turn offenders’ lives around, as we have heard. I will go on to address some of the particular issues, but we have taken fundamental action to reduce the risk linked to capacity challenges. Ultimately, we can only do all the good work on reoffending, education and rehabilitation if we have a functioning prison system. That is why we are delivering 14,000 new prison places—the biggest expansion of the estate since the Victorian era. We are investing £4.7 billion in that prison-building programme over the next four years, and we introduced landmark sentencing reforms in the Sentencing Act 2026, which received Royal Assent earlier this year, to finally put the prison system on a sustainable footing for the future. That Act was not easy. Difficult decisions have been made, but that legislation means that we can reassure the British public, for the first time in essentially a generation, that there will always be prison spaces for offenders when we need them. However, there is much more to be done on rehabilitation, education and mental health support. I accept that absolutely.

    Hansard source
16. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Prison Safety

    Absolutely, and I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I am a massive champion of Andy’s Man Club up and down the country, but especially in south Yorkshire. It does really important work with ex-offenders and indeed more generally. We have continued as a Government to fund the Samaritans’ Listener scheme, which trains prisoners to support other prisoners who are in crisis. It is a brilliant initiative and I urge any parliamentarian to engage with it in their area. I want to touch on what we are doing to try to protect our prison staff, because numerous Members raised that issue. We have invested £15 million in protective equipment, including up to 10,000 units of protective body armour. As I think my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest set out in her opening speech, that is a transformative approach to protecting our prison officers compared with what the previous Government were able to do. Half those units are allocated to the long-term high-security estate, including at HMP Lowdham Grange. So, as we roll out body armour across the LTHSE, HMP Lowdham Grange will benefit. That is why all staff in the adult male estate now have access to body-worn video cameras, batons, rigid-bar handcuffs and synthetic pepper spray as part of their standard equipment. It is why we have introduced PAVA spray in the Youth Custody Service. Very difficult decisions and considerations about the use of such equipment have to be made, but they are the right decisions to ensure that we protect prison officers, both in the youth estate and in the adult estate. That is why we have trained and equipped up to 500 additional officers in the use of Tasers and why we are already installing up to 50 ligature-resistant cells, in order to prevent self-harm, and have confirmed funding for the installation of more. Because safety and security are innately intertwined, the Deputy Prime Minister has announced an extra £35 million this year to improve security at 17 of our most at-risk prisons, on top of the £40 million that we have already invested in this area. In addition, up to 13,000 new heavy-duty steel window grilles will be in place by next spring. The picture is getting better—we have stabilised the prison system and we are investing in security measures—but there is a lot more work to be done. The rate of assaults on staff has decreased under this Government by 4.5%. I accept that that is a modest figure, but it is moving in the right direction. The rate of self-harm among prisoners has also decreased, by 8%, but I absolutely accept that it is far too high. As the Minister who shares responsibility for this area with my noble Friend in the other place, I get regular updates about serious incidents in prisons. They are far too frequent and far too serious, and much more has to be done.

    Hansard source
17. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Prison Safety

    Absolutely. The NHS works in our prisons up and down the country every day, and it does incredible work. We have bolstered the approach to people identified as being at risk of suicide and self-harm. There is a comprehensive package of support for what is called “individualised case management process”. It sounds technical, but it is very important, because it means that for the first time we are treating prisoners, and looking at their needs and their history, in a much more tailored and individualised way. As I mentioned earlier in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher), we continue to fund the Samaritans’ Listener scheme, which is really important, but much more needs to be done, so I accept the hon. Member’s point. I want to touch on security and drugs. Hon. Members will be aware that one of the biggest drivers of serious violence and instability in prisons is the influx of contraband, particularly drugs. In prisons up and down the country, essentially of all categories, the No. 1 issue keeping the governor up at night is security and drugs. We inherited a prison system that was awash with a shocking amount of drugs. They compromise not only the safety of hard-working staff and the prisoners themselves, but make it far harder for staff to do the important work that turns prisoners’ lives around. That is why we are tackling drugs on every front. We have invested in drug-detecting dogs; we have machines to detect drugs impregnated into paper and fabric; and we now have X-ray body scanners across the whole adult male estate. Certainly, drones continue to be a significant challenge. We are investing in state-of-the-art technology; indeed, my colleague Lord Timpson was in Ukraine recently to look at the technology that it is using as part of the war effort, and what we can learn in terms of investing to secure our high-security estate. My hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest raised valid specific concerns about safety at HMP Lowdham Grange. She will know that the prison was brought under public management following serious issues with safety and security under the previous private provider. During my visit in April, I was encouraged by the progress being made. I have seen a much stronger approach to managing individuals at risk of self-harm or suicide, and we have supported HMP Lowdham Grange with additional investment in safety resources, better staff training and closer working with healthcare partners. Through the long-term high-security estate taskforce, further action is being taken to tackle weapons and drugs in our prisons, and those measures are beginning to have an impact. His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons conducted an independent review of progress in May and published its findings yesterday, as I said. It confirmed that the prison has made progress and has a clear path to improve safety and security. I reassure my hon. Friends the Members for Sherwood Forest and for Gedling, and others, that I remain fully committed, together with my colleague Lord Timpson, to improving safety at HMP Lowdham Grange and making sure that it receives sustained attention and action from the Government. The governor has also assured me personally that she and her team will continue to work with my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest and other local MPs, and that my hon. Friend will shortly be invited back into the prison to see the progress and ask any questions that she has. I again place on record my thanks to my hon. Friend for securing this important debate, for her continued advocacy on behalf of her constituents, and for the opportunity to respond. The challenges facing our prison system are significant and we do not underestimate or shy away from them. The Government are investing, modernising and taking action to make our prisons safer for staff and prisoners alike and, above all, better able to deliver rehabilitation, which cuts crime, reduces reoffending and protects the British public. That is the progress we are making, and the work we will continue to drive forward. Question put and agreed to.

    Hansard source
18. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Grahame Morris

    Prison Safety

    I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate. I agree with her analysis so far. The key point is that we must take some steps and have some initiatives to reduce prison violence. I am sure the Minister is aware that in the last Session I introduced a private Member’s Bill, the Prisons (Violence) Bill, to place a duty on all prison management to minimise violence against prisoners and staff. One way we could do that is with key performance indicators, with specific targets for reducing assaults. Prison governors would then have an incentive to take action, to reduce the number of assaults and to halt the loss of experienced prison staff. It is worthy of further consideration. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is a potential solution?

    Hansard source
19. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Grahame Morris

    Prison Safety

    My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. On the protection of prison officers, is it not correct that the last coalition Government got rid of almost 25% of prison officers? Every year I ask a question about how many prison officers have left the service, and each year the number increases. We have collectively lost 100,000 years of jailcraft through experienced prison officers leaving the service. This is a key issue that needs to be addressed if we are to tackle violence against prisoners and staff.

    Hansard source
20. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Graham Stringer

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    Any hon. Members who wish to take off their jackets have permission to do so. I call Melanie Onn to move the motion.

    Hansard source
21. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Graham Stringer

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    Order. I remind hon. Members that if they want to participate in the debate, they should bob at the end of every speech. I will call the Front-Bench spokespeople at 10.30 am. Doing the simple arithmetic, that means there will be a time limit of four minutes on speeches.

    Hansard source
22. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Graham Stringer

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    Order. Your time is up. Before calling the Front-Bench spokespeople, I remind hon. Members that although there are often good reasons for being late to a debate, it is a courtesy to both the Chair and other hon. Members participating in the debate to put in a note explaining those reasons. I call Sarah Dyke.

    Hansard source
23. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Graham Stringer

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    Order. I ask the Minister to leave a couple of minutes for the proposer of the debate to wind up.

    Hansard source
24. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Graeme Downie

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    It is always a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton), who is both gracious with his time and entertaining to listen to. I thank him for that. I begin by thanking all armed forces personnel who are protecting our country at the moment. Importantly, this debate is taking place in Armed Forces Week; I give credit to the Opposition—this once at least—for bringing forward this debate today, though I am not sure that we have quite reached the level of consensus across the House that we might hope for on defence.

    Hansard source
25. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Graeme Downie

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    I was slightly concerned that I was going to have to disagree with the right hon. Gentleman at this early stage, but I absolutely agree with him. Any politician who wraps themselves in a flag, without there being any substance to their reason for doing so, is not worthy of leading any constituency or party—and certainly not any country. As I have mentioned previously in the House, I grew up in Berlin from 1987 to 1990, and I was there when the Berlin wall came down. That gives me an unusual insight for someone of my age. I grew up hearing Russian artillery one mile away, and seeing Russian helicopters testing and firing. I was there when Rudolf Hess died, and I saw the various security measures in place. That makes me unusual among people who are my age or younger, most of whom have not seen what a cold war threat is. Most have been used to a safe world, and have not seen the necessity of increased defence spending, unless they have a member of the armed forces in their family, or have served in the armed forces themselves. The majority of people in this country who are my age or younger do not know what a threat from Russia, or indeed any other country, looks like. I have said before that I believe that the UK is already in a conflict with Russia. Not only that, but we are a frontline nation and should always consider ourselves as such, whether we are talking about our RAF jets taking off from Lossiemouth or Coningsby to defend our airspace, or our Royal Navy ships and Royal Air Force aircraft in the High North protecting our subsea cables from Russian threats. This country is in conflict with Russia, and Russia considers itself to be in conflict with us. We must always respond accordingly. The attacks extend into cyber-space. Every day we see thousands of attacks, whether on private businesses or on our defence and energy infrastructure. The threats are there. We also see misinformation peddled online that seeks to undermine our democracy. This country is in conflict with Russia. In order to respond effectively to that, the public need to understand the direct implications for them. They must recognise that a cyber-attack on Jaguar Land Rover has consequences for our economy. A cyber-attack on Marks & Spencer has consequences for people’s ability to buy a jumper, and for the staff working there as well, but these attacks also have a direct impact on our economy and society every single day. It is always slightly daunting to be in the Chamber for debates like these—there are Members present who have served in the military, and who know far more than I do—but I believe that there is a conversation that we must have across this House. We must, wherever possible, draw lines between the threats that we face, and the detailed military programmes that we talk about, and what they mean for the day-to-day lives of people in this country. Otherwise, those people will not grant any Government the licence to increase defence spending and capability in the way that Members from across this House want.

    Hansard source
26. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Graeme Downie

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    That is not something I want to be drawn on in the Chamber. I have not seen the news report, and I believe that the answer to that question would have to come from the Government. As well as making sure that we are speaking to the public about the things that matter to them, we must broaden out the conversation. When we talk about national security and defence readiness, we are not only referring to Ministry of Defence budgets; we should also be talking about what it means for energy security, food security and everything else that makes our country safe—from economic security to delivering the skills and apprenticeships that we need for the future. We must engage the public on why this subject matters to them. If we say that we must spend more on protecting our North sea or national grid infrastructure, we must also say that if we do not, it will put up household energy bills by even more and cause blackouts—those are the consequences. When it comes to, say, energy infrastructure, we must always be clear that some things cost money. If we want a more energy-secure, resilient nation, people will be asked to pay more, in one way or another. That is the nature of defending our nation properly and effectively. I am very proud of the steps that this Government have taken to prepare our armed forces for the future, having been left a hollowed-out armed forces when they took over. The Conservatives have talked about parties across the House not spending on defence since the end of the cold war, and to a point I agree with what they are saying, but the threats were there in 2014 and beyond, and there was no mass drive from any party in government to increase in defence spending. The warning signs were there already. It is this Government who have had to pick up the mantle, move forward and make the kind of changes that we need. We have awarded 1,400 major defence contracts since July 2024. In Scotland, we have a £10 billion frigate deal with Norway that will secure jobs on the Clyde. We have been pressing for the £8 billion Typhoon deal with Turkey, and for the upgrading of Typhoon jets. We must look after our people as well, so I am very proud that this Government are updating recruitment policies, and making sure that we have better recruitment and retention. As the Minister mentioned, recruitment is up and pay is increasing. We are turning around the decade of decline under the Conservatives; there has been a cumulative pay award of 10.5% since July 2024—the largest on record—and new recruits are receiving a pay boost of 35%.

    Hansard source
27. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Graeme Downie

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    The hon. Gentleman always picks out the issues that really matter to our people. The Ministry of Defence’s Op Courage does exactly the kind of work that he is talking about. I am sure that Members from across the House see correspondence on that in their constituency mailbag all the time. We must make sure that we are properly protecting our veterans. Not only is it important because of our responsibility to them, but it is how we ensure that we have effective recruitment and retention in the future. We must be a nation that looks after our serving soldiers. I have mentioned that I believe we are already in a conflict with Russia. I praise the focus of, and work done by, the previous Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend the Member for Rawmarsh and Conisbrough (John Healey), on the joint expeditionary force in the High North. We are a frontline nation, and our frontline is in the North sea—the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap. We need to tackle the threats we face there. We have a partnership with Norway on the Type 26 frigates; that is exactly the type of capability that we must focus on, as well as focusing on the other work done with joint expeditionary force nations. I want to ensure that the debate about defence in the House, and about budgets, does not become focused solely on a number. We must not think that just because we have hit a particular number by a particular date, our country is safe. It is not. The country is safe when we have the right capabilities in each domain to fight against the threats that we face, be it in the air, on land, at sea, in cyber-space or in any other domain. In our discussions, we must focus on capability. If we have the correct capabilities to defend our nation, we will have spent the amount of money we should spend to defend our nation. I believe that amount is higher than what we are spending at the moment, but the discussion must stay on capability, and should not be about spending money for its own sake. The Government are doing a good job on defence procurement, and on turning issues over to ensure that is not the case, but I urge hon. Members from across the House to please keep that point in mind when we discuss defence spending. When it comes to defence spending, I hope that we will continue to focus on consensus, where possible, and protecting our nation. I end by again thanking those serving in the armed forces, and all those veterans who served in the past.

    Hansard source
28. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Gordon McKee

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    I feel honoured to intervene on the hon. Gentleman; it is often the other way around. Fly-tipping is a big issue in my constituency, as it is in his. There is frequent fly-tipping around the cemetery in Carmunnock, for example. Does he agree that part of the problem with tackling this is a lack of proper funding for local government? In Glasgow, for example, the Scottish Government have not properly funded Glasgow city council. Does he agree that tackling this requires resourcing for local government?

    Hansard source
29. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Gordon McKee

    Role of Big Tech in Society

    I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on securing this very important debate. He is making an interesting speech. When we talk about big tech, we are primarily talking about companies based outside the UK—particularly in the United States. Does he agree that this argument is really about sovereignty and about how more of this technology can be developed and owned in the UK or across Europe?

    Hansard source
30. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Gareth Thomas

    UK-EU Economic Co-operation

    Given what my right hon. Friend has rightly said about the disastrous deal negotiated by the Conservatives once we left the EU, when the next UK-EU summit does eventually happen, will it not be time— after we have successfully concluded discussions on the priorities of the UK-EU reset—to discuss the opportunity, costs and benefits for more key parts of our economy of rejoining the single market?

    Hansard source
31. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Euan Stainbank

    Cost of Living: Falkirk

    3. What steps she has taken to help support people with the cost of living in Falkirk.

    Hansard source
32. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Euan Stainbank

    Cost of Living: Falkirk

    The cut to VAT for family days out this summer starts along with the summer holidays later this week. This is a Labour Government acting to bring down the cost for families visiting Falkirk’s fantastic tourism, leisure and hospitality attractions. Many families are anxiously looking at the other side of the summer, with energy bills rising as a direct consequence of the illegal Iran war. Does the Chancellor agree that any forthcoming targeted energy bill support must similarly extend to working families?

    Hansard source
33. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Euan Stainbank

    Topical Questions

    T4. The loss of Grangemouth’s refinery was a loss to Scotland’s economy. The Chancellor rightly consulted on including refined products in the carbon border adjustment mechanism to level the playing field for domestic refining—a level playing field the Tories did not pursue before the closure of Grangemouth was announced in 2023. Will the Chancellor meet me and other colleagues to discuss the merits of accelerating the inclusion of refined products in the CBAM?

    Hansard source
34. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Simon Opher

    Puberty Blockers

    Speaking as a member of the political class and the medical class, may I ask the hon. Lady whether she would accept that it is better for politicians to accept advice from medical experts around medical issues?

    Hansard source
35. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Scott Arthur

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    Of course, this is not a debate about whether or not we increase defence spending; it is a debate about how much we increase it by. The hon. Gentleman has talked about our standing with our allies, which is incredibly important. What did our allies think when his Government were cutting defence? Can he tell us?

    Hansard source
36. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Scott Arthur

    Puberty Blockers

    The hon. Lady knows that she is one of my favourite Tories—I think I have said that before. She has quoted Baroness Cass many times. Of course, Baroness Cass thinks this trial should go ahead, because the benefits outweigh the costs. Why is Baroness Cass wrong and the hon. Lady right?

    Hansard source
37. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Scott Arthur

    Puberty Blockers

    By giving way a second time, the hon. Lady shows why she is my favourite Tory. Does Baroness Cass not say that she has met young people who have been self-medicating with testosterone, which is irreversible? That is one of the problems that we are trying to address through this trial. It is about protecting young people so that they are not going down their own medical pathway, but are listening to medical advice and are well supported in a coherent framework.

    Hansard source
38. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Scott Arthur

    Puberty Blockers

    This has been an interesting debate so far and I am grateful to follow the hon. Member for Canterbury (Rosie Duffield), who has worked so much in this area. We should all acknowledge that this is not an easy issue. The reason why I wanted to speak in the debate is that back when I was trying to get elected in 2024, I met the mother of a young trans woman. She told me about how her daughter really started to come to terms with who she was when she was entering puberty, but that led her to stop eating because she did not want to go into puberty. Her condition got so bad that she had to be taken to hospital, and she almost died. We should not view this as a lifestyle choice, and we should not think that doing nothing comes with no consequences. I know that not all cases are the same, but the reality is that doing nothing is not the answer. We do have to answer these questions. I welcome the news this week that the Pathways trial is set to go ahead. Since the Government announced an indefinite pause on the prescription of puberty blockers last year, both young people and clinicians have been stuck in limbo. This uncertainty has helped no one—not the young people who are desperate for medical support, nor the researchers who need to gather data to fully understand the effects of these drugs. However, it is right that this renewed permission for a trial is based on clinical judgment, not political discourse. We should be led by science, not politics, where the health of our young people is concerned. King’s College London and the MHRA have worked extensively to propose a safe and ethical trial, increasing safeguards since March and continuing dialogue with the Health Research Authority. I understand the concerns around the trial, and I think we all should. We all want to ensure the safety of the children involved, but it is time we find a way forward that balances the safety of the young people involved and the opportunity to enhance the care that we provide for children struggling with their gender identity. Far too often, that care is lacking. Many Conservative Members have consistently called for the full implementation of the Cass review. Baroness Cass was quoted multiple times by the shadow Minister in her introduction to this debate, yet the Conservatives have called this debate to oppose the trial, despite it being one of Baroness Cass’s recommendations. Why are the Conservatives not willing to listen to Baroness Cass on that single issue? In her original review in 2024, Baroness Cass made it clear that research into puberty blockers was necessary. Just this week, she has said that the trial to examine the risks and benefits of puberty blockers will reduce harm, not cause it. In fact, she goes further and tells us that the debate around the risks of puberty blockers has been exaggerated—we have seen some of that today, if we are all honest. She is absolutely right on this point.

    Hansard source
39. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Scott Arthur

    Puberty Blockers

    Exactly. Baroness Cass is a respected expert in this field, and she made recommendations that were broadly accepted. We should be using science as a basis for decision making, not rejecting her findings purely on the basis of politics. Let me go back to what I said at the start: doing nothing will lead to our young people being harmed. That is an incredibly important point. We cannot rely on debates in this place to decide how and when puberty blockers should be used. Rather, we should be relying on thorough scientific research, carried out in proper trial conditions and led by medical experts. We heard earlier the Health Secretary explaining some of the detail around protections for our young people. Baroness Cass is also clear that more children will be harmed by preventing the trial than by allowing one to go ahead. That is an incredibly important point. Preventing a trial drives desperate children to look online or internationally for unregulated hormones or hormone suppressants. That leads young people to unsafe puberty blockers or to start taking hormones such as testosterone at a much earlier stage, which are irreversible once they start to take hold. We can prevent that by providing the properly regulated use of puberty blockers in the UK via this trial. The trial will provide understanding and allow clinicians to effectively guide Government on our next step. It is the right and necessary thing to do for the Government, clinicians and young people. We need to take better care of our young people, and we need to do that via a clinical trial. Let me say again that doing nothing might seem like the easy thing to do, but it will come with consequences. I really hope that we hear more from Opposition Members about what they think the consequences of doing nothing will be for the health and wellbeing of our young people, because we have not heard that.

    Hansard source
40. 23 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Scott Arthur

    Puberty Blockers

    I will, because I know the hon. Gentleman is keen to speak.

    Hansard source