Energy Markets
What about China?
Showing every spoken contribution, including 5,731 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
What about China?
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement, which I read and listened to very closely. Is it fair to summarise the Secretary of State’s statement by saying that he is not going to do anything differently as a result of the conflict in Iran? I listened to and read the statement very closely, and it does not appear to me that we are going to change anything. It was more of a series of things that we are doing already.
T2. Thousands of former public sector workers are facing delays to their pension payments. Both MyCSP and Capita have catastrophically failed as the administrators of these pension funds, but the real failure is the Cabinet Office’s inability to negotiate contracts that include financial sanctions, in order to drive up performance. What will the Minister do to sort this out?
Given the progress made by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority, will the Paymaster General update the House? Over £140 million has been spent by the inquiry. Has he had any conversations with Sir Brian Langstaff on when will be the right time to close down that inquiry, and whether he has wider lessons about the way that public inquiries function?
Recently I have been meeting firefighters in Wilton, and last night I met Andy Cole, the chief fire officer for Wiltshire and Dorset. Eight of our 50 fire stations in those two counties face closure, despite them making £15 million of annual savings since 2016. At the core of the issue, it seems, are the assumptions about growth in the council tax base, which is much higher in the Treasury’s mind than it is in reality. Will the Leader of the House fix up a meeting for me with the Minister for Building Safety, Fire and Democracy, so that I can support her to push back on the Treasury to ensure that we get the right assumptions and avoid the closure of these fire stations, particularly in Wilton?
Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?
I will, if I may, start by adding my very warm thanks to, and recognition of, our magnificent Clerk, Tom Goldsmith. Mr Speaker has already been indelicate enough to mention Tom’s extraordinary skill at the jazz piano, but as someone who eats very much at the opposite end of the jazz food chain, may I just say that our loss of him as a Clerk will be more than made up for by his forthcoming history of British jazz? I hope the House will join me in welcoming that, because it will not write itself. Let me start by recognising, on behalf of the whole House, all those men and women from our country and our allies who are engaged in the conflict in and around Iran. We thank them for their bravery and their service. Let us not also forget that our great ally, Ukraine, is fighting for her life in the face of an attempted and unprovoked Russian war of conquest. NATO and this country must not allow themselves to be distracted now from giving Ukraine all the support that we can. As we approach International Women’s Day this Saturday, I note that this week marks the anniversary of Nancy Astor taking her seat in 1919 as the first woman Member of Parliament—a milestone in the long journey towards wider political representation in this House. This was a week in which three current or former members of the Labour party were arrested on charges of spying for China. The Chancellor of the Exchequer gave a spring statement that explicitly reserved any policy substance for her forthcoming Mais lecture, not for Parliament, and badly misrepresented the economic position that this country is in. We would never know from what she said that we have the highest unemployment in this country since the pandemic and that youth unemployment is in a state of crisis. Meanwhile, the Chancellor failed to mention, let alone publish, the defence investment plan, which her Department, the Treasury, has held up for nine months. The House will note the irony that a Government who have never been willing to acknowledge the economic cost of the pandemic and the energy spike resulting from the war in Ukraine will now have to explain the economic effects of rapidly rising oil and gas prices due to the present conflict in the Gulf. We can only hope against hope that recent events will cause the Energy Secretary—a man with the worst judgment in politics, whom the Prime Minister wanted to sack in the last reshuffle but was too weak to do so—to rethink his dangerously inadequate energy policy and refusal to develop North sea oil and gas. Perhaps we will hear a U-turn in his statement later today. Unlike the Energy Secretary, the Leader of the House is a serious man, and I want to ask him a serious question. The Government’s official story, set out by the Prime Minister at the Dispatch Box yesterday, is that they have been preparing for a US attack for several weeks. These preparations include pre-locating missile and other weapons systems in the middle east, though not sending a Type 45 frigate, which remains in dock at Portsmouth and will not depart for more than a week after the start of the conflict. It is little wonder that our allies have been so critical of the UK response. The Prime Minister has also offered us a pre-prepared line on the legal position, which is that the present Government regard defensive operations as legal, but that it is against international law for the UK, and so presumably in his judgment for the United States and Israel, to take pre-emptive action to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, when it is the avowed policy of that state to use those weapons to destroy another sovereign state—Israel. This is, of course, the second time in a year that the US and Israel have acted against Iran, so all these issues have already been widely discussed across Government. Yet it is now reported with some authority, across the newspapers, that the Prime Minister was actually minded to support the US attack on Friday evening but was forced to back down by a group of Ministers including the Home Secretary, the Foreign Secretary and, yes, the Energy Secretary. It is hard to see how these things could all be true, and they raise a host of questions. If the Government have been preparing for an attack by the US and Israel for weeks, how can it be true that their policy was still undecided on Friday night? If the Prime Minister’s view was that he was minded to support the attack, where does that leave the legal position? Legal experts, including the noble Lord Pannick, have criticised the Government’s position as not legally “rational”—that is a quote—but my concern is more basic: whether the Government are making the legal position up as they go along, just as the Blair Government did with the Iraq war in 2003. Finally, it now looks like the Cabinet has taken a decision with which the Prime Minister fundamentally does not agree. How can he exercise leadership under such circumstances? I do not expect the Leader of the House to comment on Cabinet discussions in any detail, of course, but I am sure that the whole House will be grateful for any explanation he can give.
How much?
How much will that cost?
It’s a pleasure to serve ’neath your chair’ship today, And I hope you’ll forgive if today—just today— I do not speak In the usual way. For today—yes, today!—is World Book Day, they say. A day made for books and bright words at their play. I thank my Honourable Friend with a cheer and a grin, The Member for Dulwich and West Norwood—who let the debate on reading begin! And today—yes, today!—on this most Bookish of days, I won’t stick to the script in much-loved Erskine May. No dry phrases today in the proper array— I’ll try it instead in a Seussian way! So today—yes, today!—we can happily spend Time on good stories from beginning to end. With a flip and a flourish, a swish and a sway, For books are the best thing to brighten the day! Here comes a test for my rhyming wordplay For a brief jot in time while I quickly relay The wisdom and pearls of Honourable Friends here today I’ve made up on the spot in the Seussian way. If it’s “Reading for fun and going all in”, Grab that book off the shelf—take your mind off for a spin. Each little child with a token and smile Turns books into grammar, spelling and maths improved style. From Strangford, we heard about Andy McNab His strong love for reading shows in his gift of the gab We thank all the libraries that open their doors Not just to the building but lands on strange shores. Like Isle of Wight West where Dickens and Tennyson called home But not, to my knowledge, did Jerome K Jerome. From Bracknell we heard about Fox Hill primary’s new library, Something we want in every secondary and primary. Glasgow West told of how Heidi inspired As well as how books during conflict required Too many speeches—I can’t do them all But all of them wonderful in Westminster Hall. I’m not quite yet done with my Dr-Seuss speech There’s more—yes, some more—’fore the exits you reach. For I haven’t yet shared my own greatest tale Of two little boys from near Sunningdale. A hop and a skip to the next village along Are two little boys who love books, deep and strong. The older loves space, rockets and sky The littler one dinosaurs who roar as they fly. By accident or luck did it happen? It did not! For many things quickly take the top spot! Grown-ups are tired and they work all day through So easy it is to forget what is true. But the truth is that after another long day, The thing I love most when I’m tired is say, “Sit on my lap, boys. Rest your sleepy heads down,” For a tale before bed will melt any frown. It needn’t be complex or long as a Tolkien, A Tolstoy or Dickens, James Joyce, and be hulking; Few words here and there—what a difference they make To children’s vocabularies and the brain cells they shake. For Maths chaps like me who like numbers, not words Books we still need for fractions like thirds Whether green eggs and ham or bears from Peru, Scientists can still marvel at brave Cindy Lou Who. If kids 10 to 16 read for fun, not by force They’ll get better jobs in the future workforce. It has much more effect than if Mum or Dad went to uni, So pick up that book and make your OWN dreams come true-ni! When the Blue team were boss back in two thousand and twelve Just 58% of six-year-olds reached the standards we delved By the time we had gone and up to the now, The figure has soared to 80% Wow—oh wow—wow! Primary aged bookworms in England are best, Now the best of the best—oh, yes—in the West. Of Europe at least, and on this I don’t jest! The best little readers of the rest in the West! The Blue team are glad that the Red team agreed In their Curriculum Review our reforms they still need For phonics are king when it comes to learning How to decode the letters and for stories yearning. In the Lorax, Seuss taught us to love trees a lot and said: “Unless someone likes you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.” So now comes the time for my ask of the Reds. Don’t worry or wobble—there’s nothing to dread. For many of them are already decided. With parents they agree and with their views they’ve sided. For now is the time to ban phones from school proper. Guidance alone means schools still come a cropper. Despite their best efforts, it’s hard to stop-per. So come on now Red team—stop delaying and do! And while we’re at it, ban social media for under-16s too. There’s votes just next week; it isn’t too late To do the right thing ’stead of making us wait. I thank Honourable Friends for their patience and time. I’ve enjoyed all the speeches, although none others rhymed. But isn’t that the wonder of novels and stories It matter not whether Lib Dem, Labour or Tories— There’s one thing on which we can all agree On World Book Day we can be one and not three!
T3. Although we will rightly want to refrain from discussing too many details of a live espionage case, it seems, from media reporting, that the case goes beyond foreign state interference into local corruption. Will the Government today agree to publish a list of all meetings held between Bute Energy and the Government, both here in Westminster and in Wales?
I thank the Secretary of State for advanced sight of his statement. Events in the middle east this past week have shown why it is so vital that the Government do all they can to ensure that UK businesses and households have a secure, reliable supply of dispatchable energy—a supply we can rely on. Affordable energy is vital, but just as important is security of supply. There was nothing new in the Secretary of State’s statement—no actions, just notes of some meetings—but there were and are actions that he can take, and he could take them now for both supplies and for bills. No matter how much the green lobby or the Secretary of State wish that the UK could end its reliance on oil and gas overnight, we cannot. Some 40% of the UK’s energy comes from gas, which is the UK’s single biggest energy source, and 24 million UK homes, and half a million businesses, are connected to the gas grid. Currently, 43% of gas used in the UK is produced in our North sea basin, which is a vital energy source. Every molecule of gas produced by the UK in the North sea is piped on to our shores and into our grid. The oil produced comes onshore either here or in Europe to be refined. It does not, and cannot, get caught in the strait of Hormuz or elsewhere. It is a secure supply of oil for the UK. Our North sea oil and gas sector has been, is, and should remain vital for our national security and be a national security resource for many years, yet it is a resource that the Government, and this Secretary of State, are actively trying to shut down. The GMB Scotland secretary has called his plans “delusional”, and mean that we are facing “the most destructive industrial calamity in our nation’s history—a disaster risking untold jobs, communities, even higher bills, and our energy security”. The North sea oil and gas industry and its workforce must be protected. The Secretary of State knows that that workforce, and those supply chains will, if still here, deliver the roll-out of technologies such as wind and nuclear in the future. The Secretary of State must overturn his ban on new oil and gas licences—will he? He must immediately give confidence to the industry that it has a future in the North sea by finally granting Jackdaw and Rosebank. What is taking so long? To kick-start investment, stem the accelerating fall in production, and secure the skilled workforce and supply chains, he must, with the Treasury, end the energy profits levy now. Nuclear is the UK’s route to energy security. Nuclear works in the winter, can run 24/7, and latest prices worldwide show that it can also be much cheaper. As the Secretary of State knows, our existing plants are nearing end of life, and the Government are stalling on actions to replace or renew new gigawatt-scale sites. They have ruled out large-scale nuclear at Wylfa, and dropped the previous Conservative Government’s 24 GW target. In light of current events, does the Secretary of State accept that not granting a new gigawatt-scale plant at Wylfa—arguably the best site in the country for a large-scale plant—was a huge missed opportunity? We are still waiting for the Government to accept recommendations in the Fingleton review, which will make nuclear cheaper and easier to build. When will the Secretary of State do so, and will he do so in full? I will touch briefly on the luddite approach to energy from the Scottish National party in Scotland. SNP Members try to talk a good game and sound as if they support energy workers, energy generation and energy investment, but that is an illusion. They have a ban on new nuclear, and still a presumption against new oil and gas. They are happy to coat the countryside with pylons, turbines and batteries, but they have no plan whatsoever for when the wind does not blow. Last year the Secretary of State signed a secret energy deal with China. He does not like it to be called a secret, but what other word can there be when he refused to publish details month after month, and only published them after sustained pressure from my right hon. Friend the shadow Secretary of State? It is no surprise that he wanted to keep it a secret. It is agreeing to co-operate with China—a known threat—on batteries, cables, inverters, and turbines, effectively giving a nation that is known to have interfered in numerous sovereign states, and that has placed kill switches in energy infrastructure that it has exported, access to our energy grid. That is at best foolish, and at worst reckless. Whatever we call it, it is another threat to our energy security. Businesses are struggling with sky-high energy prices, and households are bracing themselves for energy bills that may rise significantly this year. The Conservatives’ clean power plan would reduce bills by 20%. The Secretary of State could take action today, so will he adopt our cheap power plan?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. What an inspiring tour we have had of museums up and down the nation. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing the debate and inspiring speeches about so many opportunities. She mentioned everything from Zeppelins to Gurkhas. I do not think anyone was expecting an argument over who owned Dracula—certainly something for us to get our teeth into. [Interruption.] I apologise. More importantly, I thank the hon. Member for giving me the opportunity to promote and champion the museums in my constituency. The Museum of Farnham, Haslemere Educational Museum and the Rural Life Living Museum in Tilford are not only recognised throughout Surrey and Hampshire but attract visitors from far and wide. People are drawn by the rich local history that they preserve and the way that they celebrate and bring to life the heritage of our local market towns. Museums are deeply valued by the public. Some 89% of UK adults believe that museums are important to our national culture—I do not really understand what the other 11% are thinking, but never mind—and three quarters agree that having a local museum adds real value to their area. Indeed, 54% of people say that they would feel “disappointed” if their local museum were to close and 41% say that they would feel “genuinely sad” at such a loss. Over the past 25 years, under Governments of all colours, about 138 independent non-profit museums and 152 private museums closed, while 418 independent non-profit museums and a further 209 museums opened. That tells us two things: the sector faces real pressures, but it also shows remarkable resilience, and there is such enthusiasm for local museums and heritage. Each museum is different. Some are run by charities, others by local authorities, universities, the armed forces or Government-sponsored bodies. The sector supports about 33,000 jobs and has more than 93,000 volunteers. Yet, increasingly, museums are forced to diversify their activities and income simply to stay afloat as costs continue to rise. The challenges facing museums are clear at the Rural Life Living Museum in my constituency. It began as a private collection in 1968 and has grown into a significant open-air museum in Tilford, with about 40,000 objects and 20 historical buildings that bring 19th and 20th-century rural Britain vividly to life. My family and I thoroughly enjoy visiting the museum, in particular with its open-air, hands-on approach and the volunteers who quite literally inhabit that history. They immerse visitors through working demonstrations at the forge, in the woodyard and along the narrow-gauge railway. The museum operates entirely on ticket sales and donations, but with costs rising faster than income, its future is far from certain. Sadly, that story is being repeated in museums across the country, as we have heard from several hon. Members today. We see similar pressures in Farnham, where the Museum of Farnham sits at the heart of a vibrant and creative community and celebrates the town’s long artistic and craft heritage, recognised in 2020 when Farnham was designated a world craft city. The Haslemere Educational Museum benefits from the expertise of individuals such as Richard Sabin, a trustee of the museum but also the principal curator of mammals at the Natural History Museum in London. The museum in Haslemere specialises in human history, natural history and geology, and provides invaluable educational opportunities for local schools through key stages 1 to 4. Some of my fondest childhood memories involve being taken to the Haslemere museum by my parents to see Arthur the Siberian bear and the 2,500-year-old mummy, with its toes visible through the bandages—I encourage the hon. Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) to bring her children to see another mummy. For a small boy, that was extraordinary. The museum was founded in 1888, but this year marks 100 years on the High Street site. It launches a centenary appeal this evening—I appeal to the Minister, because I am sure any donation that the Government were to give would be welcome. More nationally, local museums play a vital role in our communities and in education. Under the Conservative Government, following publication of the culture White Paper, the Mendoza review was launched. In the public consultation that followed, 85% of the more than 1,200 respondents agreed that museums and galleries are primary places for education. The review led directly to the establishment of the museums estate and development fund, which distributed about £100 million in grants to support essential repair and renovation work. The levelling-up fund, shared prosperity fund and towns fund also provided much needed investment in museums and, during the extraordinary challenge of covid-19, the £1.57 billion culture recovery fund safeguarded the UK’s heritage, with £296 million specifically supporting museums, heritage sites and historical places. I am proud of that record—the practical support, serious investment and clear commitment to protecting our cultural heritage that the previous Government showed. Unfortunately, by contrast, Labour’s first tranche of funding, announced in summer 2024, disproportionately benefited national museums. Those institutions are already protected by grant in aid and are largely insulated from the financial pressures facing local authorities. Meanwhile, the smaller museums that form the backbone of local cultural life are left to struggle. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Dr Mullan) stated, many of our local museums are charity-run or heavily reliant on local funding. They often occupy historical buildings that are expensive to maintain, difficult to modernise and in urgent need of repair. In Farnham, for example, the repair bill for a relatively modest museum building has already reached £2 million. When council budgets are squeezed, culture is often the first thing to be cut. At the same time, many charity-run museums face falling donations, fewer volunteers and rising operating costs, including higher employment costs and increased national insurance contributions introduced by this Government. In short, the pressures are growing, but the support is not. The result is that smaller museums are left exposed. Too many lack the staff, time or specialist expertise needed to navigate complex funding systems, co-ordinate bids or build partnerships with larger national institutions. When public money is spent, it must be spent wisely. Last year in Wales, the National Museum Cardiff reportedly faced a £4.5 million deficit, yet at the same time taxpayers’ money was spent on exhibitions such as “The Dynamic”, which explored radical newspaper culture, alongside displays of Extinction Rebellion posters. It is entirely reasonable to ask whether institutions facing serious financial pressures should prioritise political activism over the core mission of preserving and presenting the nation’s history and heritage. Museums should bring communities together around shared culture and shared history. That must remain the central purpose, especially when budgets are tight and buildings are in need of repair.
I thank the hon. Lady for her intervention. It is rare that we agree on anything, so she will be slightly disappointed now. There is a distinct difference between looking back at movements and discourse that happened in the past and what that museum was doing: promoting a political cause of the moment. I want to ask the Minister three questions. First, have the Government considered ringfencing local authority funding for cultural purposes in order to safeguard local museums? Secondly, what practical support is available to smaller museums to help them to navigate funding applications, manage financial risk and collaborate more effectively with national institutions? Finally, how do the Government intend to encourage private and corporate philanthropy beyond the major cities—for example, through place-based giving incentives, as suggested in the Hodge review? Our museums are not just custodians of the past, but living educational and cultural resources at the heart of our communities. They deserve practical support to ensure they can continue to thrive, educate and inspire future generations.
I think I made the point very clearly to the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft), but I will repeat it now. My concern is not about museums representing accurately what happened in the past—that is obvious. What I am against is museums using taxpayers’ money to push a current political cause. Extinction Rebellion is not a historical organisation. It is active now, and museums should not be pushing its agenda.
It is taxpayers’ money.
19. What recent progress he has made on implementing the humble Address of 4 February 2026.
Can the Minister confirm whether the head of the Government’s propriety and ethics team was appointed without an external recruitment process or written ministerial sign-off, in an apparent breach of its own rules? If so, is this further proof of a lack of transparency and accountability, and of a failure to uphold the propriety and ethics at the heart of this Government?
A few moments ago, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster indicated to me that the appointment of the head of the propriety and ethics team was done by an external recruitment process. Will he tell me how many other people were interviewed?
2. What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the delivery of the civil service pension scheme.
I thank the Minister for her answer because, like many hon. Members on both sides of the House, I have been getting correspondence from former civil servants whose payments have been excessively delayed since Capita took over. I note what the Minister says about the Secretary of State meeting the chief executive of Capita, but would she commit to a full review of the service that Capita has provided so far? Will she also commit to making either a verbal or a written statement to the House about the actions being taken to make this service work better?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) on securing this debate, which I think may become a battle royale of whose constituency has the best museums. I will begin with Bexhill and Battle, which has a remarkable number of both local museums and national heritage sites. Let me take you on a tour of what we have to offer, Ms Lewell. Bexhill Museum, founded in 1914, has been educating and inspiring the community for well over a century. It remains a traditional local museum run largely by volunteers, yet it continues to thrive and evolve. It is currently completing the final stages of a comprehensive refurbishment made possible through a £390,000 grant from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport via Arts Council England in 2023. The museum holds an extraordinary and eclectic collection across four galleries, ranging from dinosaur footprints and Viking swords to a model of the town with a railway inherited from the Izzard family. It also has a restored 1895 fire engine, soon go on display. Around 1,500 schoolchildren visit each year, with a further 2,000 benefiting from loan boxes of artefacts and replicas used in the classroom. It even has a replica of the Bayeux tapestry. That takes me a few short miles away to the historic town of Battle, most famously known as the site of the battle of Hastings in 1066, where we have the Battle Museum of Local History. Housed in the historic Almonry building, this volunteer-run museum complements the internationally significant Battle abbey, which is one of the most visited heritage sites in the country. The town’s identity is naturally shaped by the events of 1066, but the museum rightly takes a broader approach, bringing together the collections and historical knowledge of the town while engaging the public in researching and understanding the area’s wider story. Its displays explore topics ranging from the development of public health and medicine to the experiences of local residents during the second world war. It does not stop there—we have museums in each and every corner of the constituency. In the west, we have Pevensey Courthouse Museum and Gaol. Current curator, Robert Slater, told me about the role that ultra-small local museums like that one play. They keep history alive not only through the stories of kings and battles, but through the ordinary lives of local people. Visitors to the courthouse can see coroner’s records and records of those who fell foul of the law—facing anything from fines to public whipping—and stories of smuggling along the Sussex coast. What makes these museums truly special is the extraordinary commitment of local volunteers and trustees. Despite being run by volunteers, the Courthouse Museum welcomed nearly 5,500 visitors last year alone. On the other side of the constituency is the Bright Foundation, founded by the Oscar-winning costume designer John Bright. Over the past 50 years, he has collaborated with and made costumes for a wide range of designers for productions ranging from “Pirates of the Caribbean” to “Downton Abbey”. His generosity underpins the Bright Foundation, which includes the Barn Theatre and Museum. This remarkable local charity, based in Westfield, gives children and young people opportunities to engage with arts and creativity. It includes John Bright’s toy museum, with a collection of more than 400 puppets, 400 dolls’ houses, and even a trainset that was featured in the 1997 film “The Borrowers”. With his support, the foundation engages more than 4,500 people a year, 44% of whom are in receipt of free school meals or have special educational needs. However, the contribution of that museum, and others, is sometimes overlooked when budgets are being drawn up and limited resources are available. For example, for every £1 of revenue that Bexhill Museum receives from the Government, it has to generate £8 of its own through the work of the volunteers in the shop and so on. I have a few questions for the Minister. To build on the excellent point from the hon. Member for Thurrock about small pots of money, we need transparency on what local government actually spends in this respect. We also need to understand, at a time of local government reorganisation, how museums can sometimes fall between the cracks among the various responsibilities. The Government need to understand that museums are not just receivers of funding but parts of local government infrastructure that contribute to the economy and to jobs. I will finish by thanking all the volunteers across all the museums in Bexhill and Battle who make such a fantastic contribution to our culture and heritage.
The right hon. Member helpfully reminds me that I forgot to mention that Bexhill is also putting itself forward for town of culture. I am happy to bribe him any time.
Members of Parliament and the public are also perfectly within their rights to say that they think they are a bad idea. It is a free speech issue, as much as anything. If a museum wants to put on an exhibition and then introduce all sorts of other political elements, the museum’s members and politicians—all of us—are perfectly free to say that we think it is a bad idea and a bad use of time. What is wrong with that?
Can we have a debate in Government time on defensive military operations in the middle east?
Does the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster share my profound disappointment that once again the Scottish National party is seeking to frame the Scottish elections as being about a divisive independence referendum, rather than about devolved powers, on which its record is so woeful?
As the MP for Gretna Green, the wedding capital of Europe, I particularly welcome next week’s debate on modernising marriage laws. I encourage all colleagues to take part in that. The last few days have marked the 25th anniversary of the 2001 foot and mouth disease outbreak. That had devastating effects in my constituency: virtually every hoofed animal was slaughtered. As a Member of the Scottish Parliament at the time, I remember how the smoke lay over the Annan valley as animal carcases were burned on open pyres. The local economy took a long time to recover from that incident. Will the Leader of the House bring forward a debate to reflect properly on those events, praise the resilience of the communities involved, which have bounced back, and ensure that lessons have been learned?
In the light of the arrest of three individuals yesterday for Chinese espionage, can the Minister confirm that security vetting for all special advisers is up to date?
I call Rachael Maskell, who will speak for about 15 minutes.
Order. If Members confine their remarks to five or six minutes, we will get everybody in, but I do not intend to introduce a formal time limit yet.
That brings us to the Front-Bench contributions. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the business. I also thank you, Mr Speaker and the Deputy Speakers, for enabling yesterday’s estimates day debates to go smoothly given the circumstances. I note that the Leader of the House has not announced the business for Thursday 19 March. If we are given that date, there will be a debate on progress in tackling climate change, followed by a debate on online harms. Both are well-subscribed. In Westminster Hall next week, on Tuesday, there will be a debate on the import and sale of fur and fur-related products. On Thursday 12 March, there will be a debate on modernising marriage regulations, followed by a debate on Government support for carnivals. On Tuesday 17 March, there will be a debate on productivity and economic growth in the east midlands. On Thursday 19, there will be a debate on accessibility of banking services, and we await confirmation from the Liaison Committee on whether it will take up its option. On Tuesday 24 March, there will be a debate on sudden unexplained death in childhood. On Thursday 26th, there will be a debate on outcomes for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and craniocervical instability. As the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) mentioned, this week is Holi. My strong advice to anyone attending a Holi event is to wear old clothes because they will get covered in different types of paint and will probably have to be thrown away, rather than cleaning them afterwards. On Tuesday, we had the annual celebration of Holi on the old Harrow civic centre car park site. This event has been run for many years. It is a joyful occasion, and more than a thousand people attended. However, thugs from the Central mosque left the mosque and then decided to disrupt proceedings by pulling over the speakers and disconnecting the audio system. They were then chased away by stewards. That was bad enough. They then came back with 20 more thugs and attempted to attack the people celebrating. This is in Harrow where we have excellent community relations, and I hope this will not happen anywhere else or again. But the sad reality is community tensions are rising because of various different things across the world, and it is our responsibility as politicians to cool things down. Can we therefore have a statement next week on what will be done to cool community tensions and ensure that people can celebrate in peace and harmony, as they should be able to?
8. What guidance his Department issues on civil service sponsorship of visas.
Hundreds of public sector bodies, including a number of Departments and arm’s length bodies, are registered to sponsored visas, as the Minister will know. Does she agree that the public sector should lead from the front and sponsor visas by exception only in the cases of hiring truly world-class talent? Can she confirm whether all Departments and arm’s length bodies are complying with the guidance issued by the Cabinet Office?
I thank the Minister for his statement. I have a constituent who has a 16-year-old daughter in Dubai seeking repatriation to the UK. May I put on the record my thanks to the officials for all the work they are doing? I have heard the Minister today say that the advice now is not to travel by land from Dubai to Oman, but my constituent, as of this morning, is very concerned for the safety of her daughter, who has been told to travel the 400 km to Oman to catch a repatriation flight without consular assistance. It sounds like the advice may have changed recently. Please can the Minister look into this, particularly to ensure that UK minors who are trapped in the region are provided with the right consular support, so that they can transit safely to Oman to catch those repatriation flights?
The National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell commenced his role on 2 December 2024, and his appointment was announced on 8 November 2024. I appreciate that the Minister will not have this information to hand, but I would be grateful if he could write to me and confirm when the National Security Adviser was granted security clearance for that role.
On his visit to Washington in February last year, the Prime Minister and Peter Mandelson had an undisclosed meeting with US data company Palantir. Palantir at the time was a client of Global Counsel, the company in which Peter Mandelson retained a commanding share. Later that year, Palantir received a direct award for £240 million from this Government. Given the apparent conflict of interests, will the Minister agree to publish full details of that meeting in February last year, and explain why it was not disclosed at the time?
I never had an undisclosed meeting with Palantir, with a person—[Interruption.] I never had an undisclosed meeting with Palantir, with a man who was advising that company. This is something entirely different, as the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister knows full well. There was an undisclosed meeting between the Prime Minister and that company in February last year. That should not have happened. This looks, to all intents and purposes, like a conflict of interests. Will the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister agree to publish that information? He says it is within the scope of the Humble Address, but the Humble Address was about the appointment of Lord Mandelson. This is not about the appointment of Lord Mandelson; this is about a meeting that the Prime Minister and Mandelson had in February 2025. Will the Minister please publish the details of that meeting, and ensure that the new Cabinet Secretary looks into what happened at that meeting, and everything between that meeting and the direct award?
Yesterday, in the light of the new China spy case, I asked the Security Minister to place China on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme. He told us that FIRS is “a relatively new tool”, and that the Government “are seeking to ensure that we can derive the maximum operational capability from it.”—[Official Report, 4 March 2026; Vol. 781, c. 817.] That is wonderful Whitehall language, but will he please tell us what it means?
Well, it is not very clear, because FIRS is three years old. This morning, I spoke to my right hon. Friend the Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat), who established FIRS. When he was establishing it, MI5 told him that it was essential for understanding the operation of the Chinese state in the UK. The enhanced tier would impose mandatory registration and transparency requirements on individuals and organisations in the UK working with Chinese entities. I think most people in this House would now agree that that is entirely necessary. It is there to help our security services protect our country. Please will the Security Minister give us a date by which he will come back to this House to tell us definitively whether he will put China on the enhanced tier, and to set out his explanation?