5,731 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Blake Stephenson

   Immigration Reforms

   I congratulate the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) on securing this important debate. Immigration is one of the defining issues of contemporary politics. Polls regularly show that it is one of the most important issues for the public. Much like my right hon. Friend the Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes), I am told by my constituents that they are fed up with a system that seems to work for absolutely nobody. I send surveys to villages on a monthly basis, and regularly more than 80% of those who return the surveys tell me that this issue is important to them and we need to fix the immigration system. The Government’s attempts to reform the system are welcome. I encourage them to be ambitious. This is not about chasing Reform, as has been suggested by Members today; it is about focusing on an issue that matters deeply, certainly to my constituents. Earlier this month, I published a short report, “Backdoors to Britain”, which sets out 30 recommendations for strengthening our legal migration system. It comes after months of work and hundreds of written questions to the Home Office—I must apologise for pestering Home Office Ministers with them—which uncovered some alarming truths. Nearly 17,000 micro-companies with five or fewer employees are eligible to sponsor visas, but there seems to be no data on how many people they have sponsored. There is a clear commercial incentive for our universities to undercut our legal migration system in exercising their power to conduct their own English language testing at the start of study. Completion of a degree, regardless of what it is in or where the individual has come from, itself acts as proof of English language competency for future applications to the Home Office. Thousands of visa holders come through hard-to-enforce routes with minimal financial requirements. Two examples that I focused on in the report are religious and charity visa routes. We are operating a system where it is easier for someone to bring their non-British spouse to the UK if they are an immigrant than if they are a British citizen. I do not think that is fair to hard-working British citizens who want to bring their non-British spouse to the UK.

   Hansard source
2. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Blake Stephenson

   Immigration Reforms

   I could not agree more. That is clearly a back door to Britain, and we need to close it. Our public sector is dependent on a huge number of worker visas, while we debate—even today, in the Chamber —record youth unemployment. As my right hon. Friend said earlier, we need to get those young people into work rather than relying on importing labour. Perhaps more worrying are the huge gaps in fairly basic compliance data that I uncovered through my questions to the Home Office. Responses to many of my questions indicate that there is a lack of robust data in the Home Office, or that data might be available but producing an answer is simply too expensive. In either case, without robust and easily accessible data in the Home Office, I and my constituents are concerned that our legal migration system is effectively unenforceable. Britain’s immigration system is not working for the British people. It is time that changed. As we continue to shape a new immigration system over the coming months and years, I hope the Minister will consider the recommendations in my report, which I have shared with Members and might well be in his inbox. I am more than happy to meet him to go through the recommendations if that would be of any use to the Government. My constituents want this Government—any Government, in fact—to end the loopholes, close the back doors to Britain and build an immigration system that works for British citizens.

   Hansard source
3. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Blake Stephenson

   Immigration Reforms

   I thought I would intervene to give the hon. Gentleman a little more time. Is he arguing for an amnesty here in the UK? What does he think British citizens would think of such an amnesty? Does he believe that that would be fair or unfair?

   Hansard source
4. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Blake Stephenson

   Topical Questions

   First, I thank Ministers for inviting me to a meeting yesterday on unduly lenient sentences. My constituent, Tracey Hanson, and other campaigners like her continue to raise powerful points on the need for victims to have parity with offenders on rights and support. Will the Minister assure the House that the Government intend to achieve that parity during this Parliament?

   Hansard source
5. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Ben Obese-Jecty

   Draft Armed Forces Commissioner (Family Definition, and Consequential and Transitional Provision etc.) Regulations 2026

   The Opposition support these regulations. This is a straightforward piece of legislation, but we have some points that we would like the Minister to clarify. When will the new Armed Forces Commissioner will be appointed? In January 2025 the hon. Member for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard), then Armed Forces Minister, stated: “Our intention to have the operation up and running in 2026 remains in place.”—[Official Report, 21 January 2025; Vol. 760, c. 930.] Could the Minister confirm that that position remains extant? If it does, could she indicate the timeframe within which the Government expect the Armed Forces Commissioner to be appointed? In the interim, once this legislation comes into effect on 1 April, how will the responsibilities of the Service Complaints Ombudsman be discharged? Will the current ombudsman remain in place until the Armed Forces Commissioner is appointed or will this role, and those responsibilities due to be transferred to the Armed Forces Commissioner, be gapped? The statutory instrument states in paragraph 3(3): “For the purposes of this Regulation, references to A’s spouse or civil partner includes— a person whose relationship with A is akin to a relationship between spouses or civil partners; a former spouse or civil partner of A; a person whose relationship with A was formerly akin to a relationship between spouses or civil partners.” Could the Minister clarify that long-term relationships are covered in the same way? From the way she described it, it sounds as though they are, but I want to clarify that point. Could she also clarify the definition of “akin to a relationship between spouses or civil partners”? It would be helpful to know that there is a clear understanding of how this legislation defines a relationship and therefore who is or is not covered by the legislation. I reiterate that we support this SI, but those are some minor points of clarification that we believe need to be addressed.

   Hansard source
6. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Ben Obese-Jecty

   Foreign National Prisoners: Sentences

   I want to look at the flip side of this issue—specifically, what happens to those detained overseas who return to the UK? The Government are preparing to resume deportations of Syrian foreign national offenders, while the Syrian Democratic Forces have called on countries to repatriate their own citizens. In recent months, several ISIS-linked individuals have been returned to this country from the al-Roj camp. Will the Minister confirm whether these ISIS-linked individuals will return to custody in the UK, given their direct links to a proscribed terrorist organisation, or are those individuals now free in the UK, having faced no consequences for their terrorist affiliations?

   Hansard source
7. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Ben Obese-Jecty

   Middle East

   The morning after the drone attack on RAF Akrotiri, the Foreign Secretary said in the media round that the drone had struck the runway at RAF Akrotiri. I clarified that with the Ministry of Defence, which went on to confirm that it in fact struck the hangar. The hangar in question was widely reported in the media as containing the U-2 spy planes of detachment one of the US air force’s 9th operations group, which is tasked with flying intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions over the middle east. To that extent, given that the Foreign Secretary stated that Cyprus is not being used in those US operations, could she clarify unequivocally whether Operation Olive Harvest is being used by the US to fly reconnaissance over the middle east in defensive support of these US operations? If she is sure that it is not, could she confirm what conversations she has had with the US that made her come to that assessment?

   Hansard source
8. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Ben Obese-Jecty

   Youth Unemployment

   I was lucky enough to get my first job when I was 16—washing up in a kitchen as well as working in a warehouse—which taught me some really good life skills about what it is like to be employed and the responsibilities that come with that. From speaking to businesses in my constituency, I know that those opportunities simply do not exist for young people at the moment. Being paid a bung to hire young people will not help, because the problem is the huge impact of business rates, national insurance contributions and the minimum wage on their ability to retain the staff they have. They are having to lay off those staff because they simply cannot afford to keep them on. Knowing full well that I will clip this and put it on social media, what will the Secretary of State say to businesses in my constituency to show them that he is listening to those concerns and will address them, rather than putting on a sticking plaster, as this package surely does?

   Hansard source
9. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Andrew Bowie

   Draft Contracts for Difference (Sustainable Industry Rewards and Contract Budget Notice Amendments) Regulations 2026

   It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. The primary purpose of the statutory instrument appears to be twofold: to extend the scheme to onshore wind and to put ringfenced spending on a statutory footing for nascent technologies such as floating offshore wind. We also see some technical adjustments in the extension of the sunset clause and the altering of timeframes, alongside amendments to the Electricity Market Reform (General) Regulations 2014 to uphold financial minimum standards as a prerequisite for the release of payment. The clean industry bonus scheme was introduced by the current Government in 2024 to promote investment in domestic supply chains, although it of course follows the excellent work of the previous Government to reduce our reliance on foreign supply chains. However, there is irony here on multiple accounts. First, it was only following immense pressure from the Conservative party official Opposition—and from the other place—that the Government were persuaded to amend their flagship legislation introducing Great British Energy, in order to prevent investment in supply chains with proven links to slave labour. I am immensely pleased that the Government U-turned on that, as taxpayers’ money absolutely ought not to be spent on importing solar panels from China manufactured in horrendous conditions in regions where slave labour is proven to be commonplace. We should be promoting domestic supply chains, building domestic capacity and seeing investment to benefit British workers and British communities. Nowhere is that more evident than in the north-east of Scotland, home to a world-leading energy industry and supply chain. The irony there is the Labour Government’s reckless disregard for our home-grown supply chains in the north-east of Scotland. They are the very same offshore logistics specialists, subsea cabling manufacturers and workforce that the Government claim to need more of, yet the Government have shown them nothing but disdain since getting into office. At a time of maximum geopolitical uncertainty, our domestic oil and gas sector deserves support. If the Government wish to support domestic energy supply chains, I suggest that the Minister starts there. The statutory instrument broadens the scope for allocation to technologies other than offshore wind, facilitating the inclusion of onshore wind in allocation round 9. If the Government were as interested in securing domestic supply chains they would have been much better doubling down on nuclear, which has the most secure supply chain of any power generation technology. Yet the Government cancelled the third large-scale nuclear power plant that we signed off at Wylfa. After all the effort it took to get Hinkley and Sizewell’s development consent order across the line, we find ourselves with no pipeline for large-scale nuclear projects in this country. We should be under no illusion that this scheme represents yet another subsidy for wind developers, on top of the subsidies that the Secretary of State already handed to them through the renewables obligation scheme—which we have committed to scrapping in its entirety—and on top of the subsidies that they received through their CfDs. This instrument also puts on a statutory footing the protected allocation of funding for certain technologies, such as floating offshore wind. The Department’s explanatory memorandum explains that that is “to safeguard some investment in a newer technology with higher costs in its exploratory phase and to support investment in the supply chain”. Although I do not wish to stand in the way of the statutory instrument today, I reiterate the fundamental irony in the Government’s attempt to invest in domestic supply chains while accelerating the decline of industry across the country, particularly in the North sea, and refusing to double down on large-scale nuclear, all while the Secretary of State signs secret deals with China.

   Hansard source
10. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Alex Burghart

    Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Bill

    Hon. Members will be delighted to hear that I will speak only briefly, because the Opposition do not intend to oppose the legislation. My contribution is already substantially longer than that made by my predecessor, Teddy Taylor, in 1975, when the legislation originally came to the House, who said only 14 words before sitting down. Although the Conservatives do not oppose the measure, I have a few questions based on issues raised by my hon. Friends. The next Conservative Government intend to reduce the size of Government and, in due course, reduce the number of Ministers that the Government require. On principle, we think that Ministers ought to be paid. However, referring back to the point raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Hertsmere (Sir Oliver Dowden), the former Deputy Prime Minister, it would be good to have a Dispatch Box commitment that there will be no more unpaid Ministers under this Government. I understand that the Bill has not been drafted in that way and that the Government intend to bring forward amendments only in Committee, but such a commitment would reassure the House that this is not just going to be an ever-increasing problem, and that unpaid Ministers will be added to paid Ministers, and so on. It would be helpful if the Minister set out for the House the Government’s intention for the additional Secretary of State salary. That will command some interest, both inside and outside this place. It is pretty obvious that the Government have something in mind and it would be useful to air that at this stage. As I have said, we believe that those who serve as Ministers ought to be paid. It is not really right that Prime Ministers should ask people to be a Minister of the Crown without offering them a salary, and I think our constituents would feel the same way. While our approach would be slightly different, we will not oppose the legislation today.

    Hansard source
11. 17 Mar 2026·Parliament·Alex Burghart

    Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Bill

    I have just a few short remarks. First, it would be helpful if the Minister set out how the Government have come to the totals that they have come to: why one, four and nine in total? Why not fewer, and why not more? Secondly, I did not quite get the Dispatch Box commitment I was looking for that this would mark an end to unpaid ministerial posts in this Government. [Interruption.] There is a little bit of a debate on the Government Front Bench about whether that commitment was made, but if the Paymaster General would be crystal clear, we can all go home happy.

    Hansard source
12. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Wendy Morton

    Topical Questions

    I have just returned from visiting Ukraine last week. It is clear to me that Ukraine still needs help with procurement of missiles, interceptors and sanctions on the shadow fleet, but the role of the US also remains critical. Does the Secretary of State think that it really helps persuade the US to stay strong on Ukraine, when, as a close ally, the UK U-turns over the use of our air bases to attack Iran?

    Hansard source
13. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    I am sorely tempted to say that if somebody else would like to take the Chair, I will come down and do an hour on this myself, but happily for colleagues, I am not allowed to.

    Hansard source
14. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    As the hon. Lady said, there are occasions when quality makes up for quantity, and the House has behaved in an exemplary manner this afternoon. Thank you for your courtesy. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered e-petition 737660 relating to automatic by-elections following Member defections.

    Hansard source
15. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Oliver Dowden

    Strait of Hormuz

    For centuries, the United Kingdom has been willing to commit its naval resources to defend free movement on the seas. Does the Minister agree that now is another such occasion when we should do so, and that if we fail to do so, we will pay the price here in higher oil prices and overseas in terms of the perception of the United Kingdom being willing to stand up for the interests of its friends and allies in the Gulf? Furthermore, can he assure the House that this will be considered by the Government as a totally separate question from the United Kingdom’s participation in Operation Epic Fury?

    Hansard source
16. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Defence: UK Allies

    May I build on the excellent supplementary question asked by the hon. Member for Glasgow South (Gordon McKee) about Ukraine and counter-drone warfare? Thanks to the support given by this Government and the previous Government to Ukraine, it has become a world leader in inventing and deploying cheap responses to cheap drones. As a result, there is now an opportunity for it to assist our allies that are under threat from drone attacks in the middle east and in particular in the Persian gulf. Will the Government do everything they can to facilitate that, and thus show that Ukraine does indeed have some cards to play?

    Hansard source
17. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Topical Questions

    T3. Successive Governments have refused compensation to the nuclear test veterans, but now the Sunday Mirror’s investigative journalist Susie Boniface has revealed documents showing that, in fact, levels of radiation were known to be much higher than the court was led to believe in a case in 2016. Will Ministers address this matter with the seriousness it deserves, while veterans are still suffering and the widows of veterans still lack any recognition or compensation?

    Hansard source
18. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Strait of Hormuz

    Some things never change in naval warfare, and one of the things that never change is the unsuitability of surface vessels for forcing a way through narrow, contested straits. Over 100 years ago, the French and the British learned that when, between them, they lost three battleships in an afternoon to a single German submarine in the Dardanelles. Will the Minister therefore advise President Trump that while we would like to help him reopen the strait of Hormuz, the way to do it is not with a billion-pound warship escorting vulnerable tankers, but with counter-drone technology of the sort that Ukraine can help him to supply, providing he has the decency to ask President Zelensky for some help?

    Hansard source
19. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address

    It is not much good blaming the process when it is as plain as a pikestaff that the Government knew that Peter Mandelson’s appointment was, to put it mildly, extremely dodgy. If there were any conversations held, over the telephone or face to face, or any private emails sent from people’s personal email addresses, will they be made available to this House?

    Hansard source
20. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Iain Duncan Smith

    Ukraine Air Defence: UK Support

    In the last few weeks, the Prime Minister has been very clear about what he considers our role to be, under international law, if we believe that allies are being attacked. Does he see Ukraine as having exactly the same status as an ally? Does he believe that we are, of necessity, directly involved, given that it is under attack?

    Hansard source
21. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Iain Duncan Smith

    Strait of Hormuz

    Surely the problem we have is that the Government, having decided not to be involved in this, and then literally a day later deciding that they would be involved by granting America the use of our bases, have brought us into a war. Like it or not, that is where we are. I do not understand what “the wider war” means, when we are in the war; that is what is happening with the strait of Hormuz right now. The Government are playing with words in a sort of tautological tap dance because they have no idea what they should be doing, as they did not want to be here in the first place, but they are. The Minister should be honest: we are in the war. The question for him really is: what are we going to do about the strait of Hormuz, and what assets will we put there?

    Hansard source
22. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown

    Heating Oil Support

    Although I thank the Minister for the limited amount of support that he has announced today, may I represent to him two of the most vulnerable groups in this regard: the very old and the very young? I ask him to consider them. I have elderly constituents who hardly dare turn on their heating because they do not know whether they can afford it. Will he consider including those groups in the regulations, and if not, will he give local authorities greater discretion to pay out hardship payments in the scheme?

    Hansard source
23. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Gavin Williamson

    GP Contract

    In this country, we have an immense wealth of talented young people who would love to train to be doctors, but over many decades we have not recruited enough. I appreciate that this is not just an issue for the Department of Health and that it spans the Department for Education and the Treasury, but what more could be done to increase the number of doctor placements so that we can train more and rely less on recruiting doctors from overseas who often come from countries much poorer than our own?

    Hansard source
24. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Desmond Swayne

    Strait of Hormuz

    What is the Minister’s latest assessment of the threat of transnational oppression carried out by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps?

    Hansard source
25. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Desmond Swayne

    Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address

    Did the Prime Minister’s chief of staff communicate with Mandelson via a private email address?

    Hansard source
26. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Bernard Jenkin

    Strait of Hormuz

    Do the Government not realise that this nation is already at war? Iran is firing on sovereign British territory, and Russia has already proclaimed that it is at war with the United Kingdom. Is it not time to put the whole Government on to a war footing, because otherwise we will carry on running behind the curve as we have over this recent matter of the strait of Hormuz?

    Hansard source
27. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Sir Bernard Jenkin

    Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address

    My hon. Friend the Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart) referred to very specific documents—meeting notes and decision notes—that have not been disclosed. May I point out that the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister himself must not mislead the House? So, do these documents actually exist? Are there decision notes and meeting notes that have been withheld, or do they not exist?

    Hansard source
28. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Simon Hoare

    Heating Oil Support

    On behalf of the low-income families of North Dorset, I very much welcome the Minister’s statement, but what help can he give to those who are not classified as low income but who are, in the old parlance, just about managing? Surely a VAT holiday for all customers would be of benefit right across the piece. May I urge the Minister to consider that for those families? There will also be a number of rural buildings—doctor surgeries, community halls, parish halls, village halls—that use heating oil, and for which the costs will be very high. They operate on very limited budgets and give a lot of support to elderly and vulnerable people in our communities. Will the funds available also be open to them?

    Hansard source
29. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    All political parties undertake a vast amount of data collection on their voter base. A good proportion of that data illustrates that the vast majority of people will cast their vote based on the political party rather than the individual. The individual carries less weight in someone’s mind when they cast their vote. Therefore, does the hon. Member agree that triggering a by-election on the basis of a defection is crucial to ensure that voters are represented by someone who reflects how the vast majority cast their vote at the ballot box?

    Hansard source
30. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I thank the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for introducing the debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee. It is unfortunate that although we have a 3-hour allocation to discuss this important topic, other Members of this House that have not felt it worthy of coming along to do so, despite having changed party in this parliamentary Session or in the previous one. It would have been interesting to have gained their views. I thank the over 129,000 individuals who signed the petition, illustrating that they care deeply and are passionate about a subject that is ultimately about trust. I have been fortunate enough to represent Keighley and Ilkley for more than six years now, facing an election twice in that time in two very different political environments. In 2019, I was elected in a Conservative landslide, and more recently in 2024, I was elected during a time when national results were very much going the other way. Keighley and Ilkley is—or should be—a classic bellwether seat, and up until the last election, there had never been both a Labour Government nationally and a Conservative MP locally since the creation of the seat in 1885. In fact, ahead of the 2024 general election, 12 major polling companies predicted a Labour landslide in Keighley and Ilkley. Electoral Calculus gave me a 97% chance of losing my seat. I do not make these points merely to blow my own trumpet; the point I am making is that politics is ultimately about trust. When we are elected by our constituents, they are putting their trust in us. They are trusting us not only to be a strong advocate for the area that we represent, but to stand by our manifesto pledges, both at a local level and those of the political party we represent. We stand by the values and commitments of the party we represent. The vast majority of us in this House are supported by volunteers who share our values, often hold party membership and support our policies, which have implications for all our constituencies. Owing to the Representation of the People Act 1969, at every voting booth across the country our electors are greeted not only by our own names but by our party names and party logos. They put their cross in the box against a name and a party that they wish to represent them. A proportion of people out there will, of course, vote for the individual who they feel is most committed to representing them, but they are also casting their vote for a political party. As has been demonstrated by all political parties, through the data that they collect, a proportion of the electorate cast their vote based on the national political party, rather than the individual who has been chosen to stand in that local area. It therefore comes down to the point that was made in the opening remarks from the hon. Member for South Cotswolds: this petition invites us to debate the difference between the individual and the party. I do feel that when an individual is standing for a political party, if that individual then chooses to defect, cross the Floor of the House and join another political party, it is only right that a by-election is triggered. That would give the electorate the absolute reassurance that they can cast their vote according to political party. Likewise, if they want to reassert their trust in the individual regardless of the political party they are now associated with, that should happen in a by-election.

    Hansard source
31. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    That is my point. While a lot of us, as advocates of constituency areas, do our best day in, day out, advocating on behalf of our constituents and campaigning on the local issues that matter to give us the biggest advantage possible by building up our authenticity on those issues, a good proportion of the electorate vote based on the political party with which the candidates are associated. In 2019, a good proportion of the electorate could not stand the possibility of a Labour Government and voted to get Brexit done, which we advocated for. I know from conversations on the doorstep that there was an element of the electorate who had never voted Conservative before, but who decided to vote for us in 2019 based on the national offering. That builds into my point that, whenever an individual defects—as happened recently north of the border, with the defection of a Conservative Member of the Scottish Parliament to the Liberal Democrats—a by-election should be triggered. It will be interesting to see what the Liberal Democrat policy is on that. Trust is at stake, because too often disillusionment builds up among the wider electorate, and defections exaggerate that.

    Hansard source
32. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    I absolutely take the view that a defection at the local constituency level should trigger a by-election, which will ultimately restore the voters’ ability to decide who they want to represent them, whether that is the individual who has changed political party or someone else. When there is a change in the leader of any political party, it is up to the MPs of that party to determine whether that individual represents the party in the role of its leader. That applies to all political parties. The reason is that when an individual goes to vote at the ballot box, they are predominantly voting for two things: the individual who represents them at a local level, and the political party. The name of the leader of that party is not on the ballot paper; the name of the party is. I believe that there is a difference, regardless of who is in charge politically at a national level, between a change of leader and a change in the direct relationship between the constituent and the individual who represents them while standing on behalf of a political party. As I say, the name of the leader of the political party is not on the ballot paper, so I think there is a difference.

    Hansard source
33. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    I thank the hon. Member for that point, but my point is that when a general election takes place, the individual voter casts their vote for an individual associated with a political party, which has a mandate—if it gets into power—based on a manifesto. The party leader’s name is not on the ballot paper. It is the manifesto that is associated with that political party. I do feel there is a difference. I am strongly of the view that if an individual Member of Parliament associated with a political party decides to change course and stand for a different political party —crosses the Floor of the House—an automatic by-election should be triggered, which ultimately gives their constituents the right to choose. That is slightly different from the debate about political leadership, because a party leader’s name is not on the ballot paper; the name of the party is.

    Hansard source
34. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    I thank my hon. Friend for his point, which I think aligns with my own point: it is the make-up of the political party that gains the confidence of the House, and therefore its leader is appointed Prime Minister, should they get a mandate to be so, based on the numbers. Where I do not feel that a by-election should be triggered aligns with the points made by the hon. Member for South Cotswolds. If a Member of Parliament is unfortunate enough to lose the Whip and therefore sits in the House as an independent, I do not feel that that should necessarily trigger a by-election, because it might be subject to circumstances outside that Member’s control—political difference associated with a particular policy and therefore voting the other way. The Whips may use that as a mechanism for removing the party Whip, but I do not think that that should trigger a by-election in those circumstances. I want to be clear on that. To summarise, politics is about trust, and at a time when the relationship between politicians and the electorate is, unfortunately, becoming increasingly fractious, it is vital that our democratic system holds us to account for the promises on which we as individuals associated with a political party were elected, the platform on which we chose to stand for election, and ultimately the manifesto commitments that we stood by.

    Hansard source
35. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    Before the hon. Member gets on to how we should change the whole system, I am keen to understand the Liberal Democrats’ view on the petition specifically. Should a defection trigger a by-election?

    Hansard source
36. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    I hope that I am not going to lose the Whip by taking a slightly different view from what seems to be my party’s position. Why would an individual not stand as an independent, if he or she had the confidence of getting elected? Surely there is a huge advantage in standing under the brand of a political party, because that inevitably brings a good element of the voter base to that individual. Will my hon. Friend expand on the difference between standing as an independent and standing as a member of a political party?

    Hansard source
37. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Member Defections: Automatic By-elections

    I am always amazed when a Minister says at the Dispatch Box, “I have listened very carefully to the contributions,” yet they are reading from a speech that was written before they turned up to the debate. Let me ask the Minister this. A proportion of people will vote for the individual based not only on their name, but on their association with a political party. If they change their political allegiance during the Parliament, how does the Minister think that is fair to the wider electoral base?

    Hansard source
38. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Rebecca Smith

    GP Contract

    The new contract has stated that GPs must offer on-the-day appointments for urgent requests—which they already do—and unlimited access during opening hours up to 6.30 pm, with no definition of “urgent”. Katrina, a constituent who messaged me today, said, “This will mean that those with complex needs, like me, will wait longer for appointments.” What reassurance can the Secretary of State offer constituents such as Katrina that this new system will work for everyone, not just those self-diagnosing their sick note as urgent?

    Hansard source
39. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Priti Patel

    Strait of Hormuz

    (Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs if she will make a statement on the steps she is taking to secure the reopening of the strait of Hormuz.

    Hansard source
40. 16 Mar 2026·Parliament·Priti Patel

    Strait of Hormuz

    This is a moment for Britain to stand tall and work intensively with our allies. With the despotic Iranian regime continuing to attack international shipping in the strait of Hormuz, urgent action is required to reopen safe shipping routes, protect lives and support trade and economic stability. We all feel the economic cost of Iran’s actions. This morning, the Prime Minister told the press, not the House: “We are working with all our allies…to bring together a viable collective plan that can restore freedom of navigation in the region as quickly as possible.” I recognise that this is not straightforward, but where is that plan? What measures are being considered? The British public need to know what the Government are doing to protect our economic and national security. There are currently no destroyers in the middle east. They can operate at a very long range and can take down projectiles, and they can also provide cover for minehunter vessels. When will the Government send one? Under this Government, there are no minehunters at our naval base in Bahrain—a base designed to host a fleet of minehunters. Are the Government working urgently to bring minehunters back to Bahrain to strengthen capacity and capabilities at that base and in the region? Are the Government working with our allies to assess the viability of striking targets that threaten international shipping, just as happened against the Houthi targets in Yemen? What action is being taken to protect critics of the Iranian regime and journalists from acts of transnational repression by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps? Will the Government lead a diplomatic effort to ensure that Russia does not profit from this crisis? Will the Minister reaffirm that Britain will continue going further in its actions on Russia and oil refineries fuelling the war? With our friends in the Gulf being so brazenly under attack from Iran, what assurances did the Foreign Secretary give them during her visit about Britain’s presence in the region and actions to protect our bases? Did she make any progress on increasing the number of British nationals who can return home, bearing in mind the disruption to flights that has taken place today? This is a hugely consequential moment for the world. Britain cannot stand by and sit on the fence.

    Hansard source