5,779 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·David Simmonds

   Black Country Day

   Several Members mentioned the late Queen; as she was fond of saying, “Recollections may vary.” When Andy Street left office, he was particularly proud of the contribution made by his work, especially as somebody who was absolutely rooted in that local area. He was also proud that he had not levied a precept on residents, and I know the Minister may have something to say about the impact of local government funding on households across the west midlands. Of course, the Black Country & Marches institute of technology is also often mentioned. There is a sense that, to sustain the region’s industrial heritage for the future, there is a need to invest in apprenticeships, education and opportunities so that the new jobs being created can go to local people who have the skills those jobs require. We know the world is changing, and people need to be able to adapt to meet those challenges. Of course, the Department took the decision in 2021 to open its first non-London headquarters in Wolverhampton. I have gone through a list of initiatives, investments and positive points, but we all recognise that our country faces significant challenges. As this is a local government debate, we must consider the financial position of local authorities in the Black Country, whose work is important to supporting local heritage. For example, we have heard from City of Wolverhampton Council’s budget consultation that it has faced unprecedented financial challenges since this Government took office. Indeed, it has never previously experienced such serious financial concerns under any party in office.

   Hansard source
2. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·David Simmonds

   Black Country Day

   The hon. Member for Tipton and Wednesbury (Antonia Bance) did say in her introduction that she wanted to be a bit political. It is important that we acknowledge—the Minister may wish to comment on this—that Sandwell council talked about a £19 million budget gap and the scrapping of weekly bin collections, which will have an impact on that subset of residents in the Black Country. That comes against a backdrop in which our economy is challenged and unemployment is rising. Jaguar Land Rover—mentioned by a number of hon. Members—has announced a further 500 redundancies because of the challenges that it faces. We need to ensure that the momentum represented in some of the projects that I referred to, which has led to an improvement in the economic outlook and in the opportunities for people across the Black Country—the kind of economic opportunities that have been seized in the past and given rise to the proud industrial heritage that so many hon. Members have eloquently described—is not lost against the backdrop of a national picture of rising unemployment, increasing poverty and the loss of jobs in some of these key industries. That loss is gaining momentum. I am sure that the Minister will not just say a little about how he is proud of the heritage, but will want to tell us specifically what the Government are doing to address those issues.

   Hansard source
3. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·David Simmonds

   Accident and Emergency Waiting Times

   The Government have spoken passionately about how minor injuries units, such as the one at Mount Vernon hospital in my constituency, help to take the pressure off A&E by diverting less urgent cases for treatment elsewhere. I am grateful to the Secretary of State for his time for a brief discussion about that last week. Will he now respond to the 25,000 local people and my constituency neighbours, including the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), who are joining my campaign to save the minor injuries unit? Will he intervene with the Hillingdon hospitals NHS foundation trust to prevent the unit’s closure?

   Hansard source
4. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·David Simmonds

   Birmingham Bin Strikes

   As the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) alluded to, the House knows that the origins of the dispute in Birmingham are in the 2017 settlement of the equal pay arrangements, which created a £760 million liability for that local authority under the Labour party, and which have been undermined at every turn by the relationship between Labour’s administration in Birmingham and the unions. It is clear that that local authority and its leadership have been dodging scrutiny and accountability at every turn. They refused even to debate the local authority Conservative group’s proposals for a plan to end the strikes and clean up the city. I have a series of questions for the Minister. What guidance will he give his seven-strong commissioner team to bring about an end to the strikes? What public health assessment are the Government carrying out of the impact of more than 21,000 tonnes of uncollected rubbish and a huge increase in the rat population in Birmingham? Will he consider withdrawing the facility time for Unite the union, which is currently refusing to go about the process of bringing an end to the strikes? Will he tell his commissioners—including Tony McArdle, whose appointment has been announced today—that Birmingham’s besieged households must not be held to ransom by the unions for a day longer? Will he tell the House who he thinks has failed the households of Birmingham more? Is it the Labour council, in leaving rats on the streets and 21,000 tonnes of uncollected rubbish in a heatwave, or this Government, who have failed to intervene to bring an end to this blight on residents’ lives?

   Hansard source
5. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·David Reed

   Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment

   It is a great pleasure to close the Sir David Amess Adjournment debate on behalf of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition. Although I did not have the privilege of knowing Sir David personally, I have heard time and again from colleagues across the House about the warmth, generosity and conviction that defined him. He is remembered not only with great affection but with admiration for his tireless commitment to his constituents and the causes that he championed. His ability to weave so many of those causes into these end-of-term debates became something of a parliamentary tradition in itself—and stands as a lasting example of what it means to be a true local champion. That this debate now bears his name feels entirely fitting. It offers Members the same opportunity that he so clearly valued to test ideas, highlight local concerns and give voice to the communities we represent. I have no doubt that Sir David would have listened to today’s contributions with great interest and enthusiasm. While we rightly pay tribute to Sir David and reflect on his remarkable contribution to public life, we must also acknowledge the difficult but necessary questions surrounding the circumstances of his death, as many right hon. and hon. Members have said. Sir David’s widow, Lady Julia, and their daughter, Katie, who are with us today in the Public Gallery, have shown great strength in their efforts to ensure that meaningful lessons are learned. Sir David’s murderer had previously been referred to the Prevent programme. Yet despite that, he went on to commit an abhorrent act of violence. In the years since, other cases, such as those in Reading and Southport, have raised similar concerns, as individuals known to Prevent were able to carry out attacks. Those are not isolated incidents; there is a pattern that warrants serious scrutiny, and the Opposition would like to see a full public inquiry into Prevent, bringing together those cases to understand what went wrong and how the system can be improved. The Prevent programme is an essential part of our national security framework, but it must be effective to command public confidence. Where there are systemic failings, we have a responsibility to address them. As the Government will know, the Amess family do not feel that the recently released Lord Anderson report alone delivers the whole truth, accountability or justice that is needed. It is imperative that a full public inquiry is commissioned, to learn the necessary lessons from the systemic issues that clearly exist. I take this opportunity to ask the Government to commit to a full public inquiry into the failings of the Prevent programme. I now move on to the fantastic contributions we have heard from Members across the House in this final debate before we break up for the summer recess. My hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) did a brilliant job of opening the debate. He mentioned Sir David Amess managing to raise 27 different topics within five minutes. In my hon. Friend’s speech, we had the middle east, the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, schooling, potholes and crime—near to 27, but no cigar this time. The hon. Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist) talked about mining and industry, health and transport. Over the past year, I have seen that she is a fierce campaigner for her constituents, and I join her in thanking the school staff in her constituency. The Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), spoke with conviction about his friend Sir David Amess. He called out the service failings in the Prevent programme and the poor treatment of Sir David’s family. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response and hope to see the Government take action on this matter. I thank the hon. Member for Easington (Grahame Morris) for his kind words about Sir David. He raised the dangerous effects of hepatitis C and the work needed to eradicate it. My right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), my shadow defence team friend, did a fantastic job of opening this debate a year ago, which I enjoyed attending. He paid tribute to his best friend, Sir David. Having watched my right hon. Friend over the past year, I have learned a great deal. He is a tireless campaigner for his area, and it was brilliant to hear him talk about supermarkets and devolution. The hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend (Mary Glindon) talked about Sure Start, green jobs and the importance of the northern industrial powerhouse. My hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) talked about housing management companies. We all face that issue, especially in my constituency of Exmouth and Exeter East, and I look forward to working with him over the coming years to ensure there is proper accountability. The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (David Williams) made the really important point that Sir David Amess showed us that “politics at its best is about service, not spectacle”— I will use that one. The hon. Member talked about him and his team making 200 visits in their first year; it has obviously been a very busy year for them. My right hon. Friend the Member for North East Cambridgeshire (Steve Barclay) talked about the important work he is doing on the renovation of this building. I think we all know that our place of work needs restoration —there are significant fire risks and security risks—and I look forward to that debate happening, so that we can have a national conversation. I am keen to reference as many colleagues as possible, so I will speed up from a canter to a gallop. The hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) shared a story about his late friend, Julian, and Sir David’s true friendship and compassion to Julian. The hon. Member is a strong voice for his constituents. I do not think I have ever heard him talking about being a teacher, but I look forward to that. The hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) talked about one of his predecessors being tragically murdered. He said he has mentioned Eastbourne 200 times this year—the number 200 must be on everyone’s minds at the moment—so I congratulate him on that. The hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) championed local businesses in her area. My hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) talked about the issue of access to cash in his constituency. I am running a similar campaign in my constituency, and I am sure that many other Members who have seen bank closures in their constituencies will be looking for banking hubs. The hon. Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) spoke about local health services. My hon. Friend the Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) spoke powerfully about his dear friend, Sir David Amess, and called for a public inquiry into the Prevent programme. The hon. Member for Reading Central (Matt Rodda) paid tribute to Reading football club and spoke about the redevelopment of a local disused jail. I look forward to visiting once it is up and running—hopefully not because I have been incarcerated. The hon. Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) spoke about upgrading river infrastructure. The hon. Member for Nuneaton (Jodie Gosling) talked about our fantastic Lionesses and local football in her constituency. My hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore), who I have learned a lot from over the last year, talked about children’s mental health services in his constituency. That is another debate that I think we will have to have next year to talk about the links with the mental health crisis. We have had fantastic contributions from the hon. Members for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward), for Harpenden and Berkhamsted (Victoria Collins), for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald), for Lewes (James MacCleary), for Southend West and Leigh (David Burton-Sampson), for Rugby (John Slinger), for Ashford (Sojan Joseph) and for Carlisle (Ms Minns). A really interesting point was raised, again inspired by Sir David Amess, about the fact that we are fleeting custodians of our constituencies. The service that Sir David Amess brought to this House over so many decades is a north star for us all to aim for. I express my condolences to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) on the loss of his father-in-law. I hope that he and his family are doing as well as possible. We also heard many interesting contributions from the hon. Members for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer), for Blackpool South (Chris Webb) and for Erewash (Adam Thompson)—I look forward to seeing videos hopefully emerging in the coming weeks and months of him rocking out in mosh pits. We heard from the hon. Members for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) and for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon), my neighbours in Cornwall, which is the next county along from my constituency. We heard from the hon. Members for Penrith and Solway (Markus Campbell-Savours), for Sunderland Central (Lewis Atkinson) and for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley), who made a fantastic final contribution to the debate. The hon. Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket is a respected surgeon, and it has been really interesting to watch him bring forward health matters and enrich the debate in this Chamber. Before I close, I place on record my sincere thanks to all those who have supported us in this parliamentary year. I thank the House of Commons staff, including the Doorkeepers, the caterers, the Clerks and the event co-ordinators. Their professionalism and quiet dedication behind the scenes allow this place to function with such efficiency and dignity, and I hope that their work is never taken for granted. I am sure that all Members from across the House will join me in showing their appreciation for everything that they do not just today, but every day. Let me offer special congratulations to two members of the Doorkeepers’ team who work in Members’ Lobby, Holly Jackson and Vanessa Chapman, who are soon to be married. I know the whole House will join me in wishing them every happiness as they begin their married life together. I have one final remark: I pay tribute to Paul Kehoe, who is in his 45th year of service to this House. Just like David Amess, that is a true north star for what public service looks like. That leaves me to wish you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and all colleagues from across the House a very restful and happy summer recess. I look forward to seeing everyone again in the autumn.

   Hansard source
6. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·David Davis

   Topical Questions

   T6.   To take the Health Secretary back to his promise to provide regional healthcare, the integrated care board is opening a consultation on the future of the hospital in Goole, after a decade of almost positively running it down. Will he instruct all the health services in the country to make the most of the valuable assets they have, not shut them down or misuse them, and actually deliver a local service for local people?

   Hansard source
7. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Damian Hinds

   Topical Questions

   Does the Secretary of State agree with me about the importance of step-down provision, provided by community hospitals such as Petersfield and Alton, both for patient care and for relieving pressure on acute hospitals, such as Queen Alexandra and Basingstoke?

   Hansard source
8. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Bradley Thomas

   Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery

   While the Minister is right to point out that this refinery produces a small amount of the UK’s refined fuel overall, the site does provide around 50% of the fuel into Warwickshire Oil Storage, a key site at Kingsbury in the west midlands that supplies fuel into the west midlands, which is obviously a very large demand centre. What is the Minister’s assessment of the impact on the supply and demand balance of road fuels in the west midlands as a result of this closure?

   Hansard source
9. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Bob Blackman

   Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment

   I beg to move, That this House has considered matters to be raised before the forthcoming adjournment. I should say, for the benefit of new Members, that this is quite rightly called the Sir David Amess debate, because this was his debate. I remember a poor Minister having to respond to him after a five-minute time limit had been put on speeches but he had still managed to raise 27 topics. It was his absolute dream to have this debate, and somewhere he will be looking on and observing what we all have to say. May he rest in peace. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] We seem to be over halfway through 2025, yet it seems like only yesterday that we came back from the Christmas break. In true British style, the weather cannot decide whether we should have Saharan sunshine or tropical rainfall—all of which makes the tube journey into this place even more of a challenge. It has been a busy few months for Parliament and across my constituency. I have been doing my job hosting residents’ tours and events, speaking in the Chamber, visiting schools and local businesses, piloting a presentation Bill and chairing the Backbench Business Committee and the 1922 committee—and finally, after 17 years, Tottenham Hotspur has won a trophy. I am pleased that Backbench Business debates have become very popular with Members, and it is encouraging that so many have made applications to the Committee. I would like to place on record my thanks to the Committee and the Clerks for all the hard work they have done over these past few months. We now have a waiting list, and if anyone applies for a debate in the Chamber, I am afraid they will have to wait until 2026 before one will be granted, because we have such a long waiting list. I thank the Leader of the House for meeting me on occasion to discuss the work that the Committee does and to ensure that Back Benchers have the opportunity to raise their own topics. In the true tradition of these Adjournment debates, I will raise the subject of making Stanmore station step-free. We seem to actually be making some progress, because Queensbury and Canons Park tube stations on the Jubilee line are now on the shortlist to get lifts. That is great news for my residents and cause for some celebration. However, Stanmore station is still not on the list. Commuters there face the choice of climbing 48 steps to the main entrance hall, 16 steps via the car park or 24 steps at the side to the bus stop, or taking the current so-called step-free route, which is 140 metres long and has a steep ramp that even the great Paralympian Tanni Grey-Thompson could not go up unaided. Transport for London and the mayor consider Stanmore station to be step-free and will not consider any further work, but I have discovered through a 2017 freedom of information request that there is no legal definition of a step-free station. It is up to each individual train operating company—in this case TfL—to determine what it means. Taken in conjunction with the Transport Committee’s excellent report on accessibility issues faced by disabled people in the transport sector, I am now exploring how we can get TfL or the Government to take action. If we can get a proper definition of “step-free” agreed, we can apply pressure on TfL to de-list Stanmore station as step-free so that it meets the requirements to be considered for a new lift or travelator. The world has never been so dangerous, and that is particularly true of London. The news that police station front desks will be closing not just in Harrow but across London is incredibly worrying. This comes at a time when knife and street crime are at an all-time high in the capital, with total crime increasing by 5.6% this year alone. Additionally, there has been a 30% increase in gun crime, a 10% increase in robbery and a whopping 82.5% increase in business robbery. The timing of the decision to cut police stations’ resources is another example of the Mayor of London’s impeccable timing. It is important to me and our residents that the desks remain open, because they provide a vital service, allowing victims to report crime in person and to seek safety.

   Hansard source
10. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Bob Blackman

    Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment

    I will not, because many Members want to get in. The justification for these “tough choices” is the need to address a £260 million funding gap, yet this is not the right area in which to be cutting vital support. For years, Sadiq Khan has told us how much better London would be with a Labour mayor and a Labour Government, but we now have a Labour mayor and a Labour Government, and London is no better as a result. I have created a petition calling on the mayor to keep Harrow police station fully functioning, and I urge everyone in my constituency to visit my website and add their name to this important cause. Tomorrow, Barnet’s strategic planning committee will decide whether to approve the Broadwalk redevelopment, which is a proposal for 3,828 housing units across 25 towers, most of which are above 20 storeys high, with the highest reaching 29 storeys. It would demolish Edgware’s existing bus station, bus garage and car park, with no guaranteed replacement. I reject this development in its entirety until a safe, deliverable transport plan can be guaranteed. The plan currently depends on an underground electric bus garage that the London Fire Brigade has objected to, calling it a very serious safety risk with no existing regulations or precedents. TfL has claimed that the alternative—the diesel fallback—is not viable, is uncosted and is not supported by an engineering plan. If the scheme is approved, Edgware could lose its core transport infrastructure permanently. I have created a petition against these plans, which can also be accessed on my website, and I urge everyone to sign it. We are all very conscious of the escalating situation in the middle east, and my prayers are with all those who have been impacted. The events that have unfolded in the middle east since 7 October 2023 have been unbearable to witness. Israel suffered the worst terror attack in its history at the hands of the Iran-backed terrorists Hamas. Innocent civilians were brutally murdered and hundreds were taken hostage, including babies, children and the elderly. The hostages have been held in appalling conditions, and the accounts given by those released have been distressing and harrowing. Only last week, I welcomed Keith and Aviva Siegel into Parliament to recount their horrific experiences. As a direct consequence of Hamas’ actions on 7 October and their use of civilian infrastructure to undertake terrorist operations, Palestinian civilians face a devastating humanitarian crisis in Gaza. My thoughts are with the families of those still held hostage and every innocent life lost or impacted by the conflict. I firmly support Israel’s right to defend itself against security threats, but we must also ensure that the civilian population of Gaza is protected. It is welcome news that the US has facilitated a ceasefire between Iran and Israel, which must be upheld to secure regional security. The Government and the Foreign Office must clarify their role in relation to that ceasefire. Iran must never be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons, as it is a prolific state sponsor of terrorism with a stated intention of annihilating the world’s only Jewish state. My colleagues and I are clear that the recent actions taken by the United States alongside Israel to degrade Iran’s nuclear weapons programme and military capabilities were indeed necessary. I am concerned that the UK has not given a strong voice on that outcome. The UK faces an increasingly complex and concerning landscape of malign foreign influence. Iranian influence in particular has been persistent and insidious in trying to harm our civic institutions and challenge our democratic resilience. One of its shocking tactics is exploitation of our charity sector, with such charities having become the nerve centre of the Islamic Republic of Iran on British soil, advancing a foreign policy rooted in regional destabilisation and ideological extremism. It was revealed by United Against Nuclear Iran—published in The Times—that Labaik Ya Zahra, a UK-registered charity based in my constituency, went to Iran, met senior commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and signed an agreement with the propaganda arm of the highest military authority of Iran’s regime, the head of which is sanctioned in the UK, pledging to spread the ideals of jihad, martyrdom and resistance in the UK. That is in clear violation of the Government’s foreign influence registration scheme and the National Security Act 2023, as well as violating British sanctions, yet the charity remains open today. Hostile states are increasingly testing the resilience of our democracy. In the light of the recent Intelligence and Security Committee report detailing the IRGC’s direct involvement in such threats, including plots on UK soil and direct interference in the UK public sector, more than 100 parliamentarians have signed a letter co-led by me and the hon. Member for Bristol North East (Damien Egan) to be sent to the Prime Minister today urging the Government finally to proscribe the IRGC in its entirety. It states that should the Government decide not to take that essential step, they must urgently and immediately put forward for adoption alternative legislative measures as recommended by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation Jonathan Hall KC to address the growing danger posed by state-backed threats. It is disappointing that the Tobacco and Vapes Bill has stalled somewhat in the other place, with no set date for its Committee. There is a risk that because the smoke-free generation policy in the Bill has an implementation date in 2027, the Bill is not seen as urgent. That is not the case. While we delay, tobacco companies are marketing heated tobacco products in supermarkets, and children are exposed to them. The marketing is working, and children’s awareness of such products is at an all-time high, with 24% of 11 to 17-year-olds knowing what heated tobacco is, up from 7.1% just three years ago. Will the Minister confirm that the Bill is a priority for the Government and that its Committee will begin before the conference recess in the autumn? The same is true for nicotine pouches. I am sure that many hon. Members will have seen when travelling into London on the tube brightly coloured adverts for these products. Children are seeing them, too, with a record 43% level of awareness among young people. There is currently no age-of-sale limit for those products, so a nine-year-old could legally purchase them. Will the Government put a stop to that madness and urgently schedule a date for peers to begin scrutinising the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which was overwhelmingly passed by this House? This year alone, I have visited 12 schools, and I know that many colleagues will have visited schools in their constituencies. I welcome the Government’s commitment to breakfast clubs for primary schoolchildren, but every primary school in my constituency is unable to provide the space for a breakfast club to take place, so even though they want to implement them, they cannot. I was glad to meet the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), recently to discuss further how we can achieve that. I am pleased that the consultation has finally closed on the regulations for my Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. I hope that that can be spurred on to the next stages so that we finally see those measures enacted, preventing the countless rogue landlords operating in the sector from exploiting vulnerable tenants. It is my understanding that the Deputy Prime Minister is currently in breach of the law, given that she was due to create a supported housing advisory panel by August 2024. We are yet to see that in action, and she could—literally—implement it tomorrow. The situation in Bangladesh is really concerning. With the coup that took place and the new regime, we have seen attacks on minorities in Bangladesh increase. I have raised this in the House several times, yet our Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office does not seem to take proper action to call that out for what it is, which is an attack on minorities. Similarly, we had the horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam and India’s subsequent counter-terrorism action, Operation Sindoor. I remain deeply appalled and saddened by the barbaric attack on the innocent tourists, which claimed the lives of 26 people, including women and children, Hindus, Christians and a Nepali national. My thoughts are with the victims and their loved ones, and I continue to stand in solidarity with them and the people of India. On the response to that, it is good that there is currently a pause and a truce between India and Pakistan; however, that truce is very fragile and there could be a return to war. As someone who has stood with the Kashmiri Pandits and their right to return to the Kashmir valley, and with India’s sovereign right to defend its people and territory, I think it is outrageous that such terrorism, sponsored by Pakistan, continues in Jammu and Kashmir. It is therefore right that we stand in solidarity with India. Last week, we heard that the Home Office would finally be un-pausing claims relating to Syrian nationals, which I am sure we all welcome. I bring that up because my office has several cases that pertain to Syrian nationals in limbo with the Home Office, awaiting updates and decisions, one of which was first brought to my attention nearly two years ago. Clearly, the Government’s Home Office policy changes have created confusion and delay. May we therefore have an update on when Syrian nationals can expect to have their cases processed so that we can close some of them for the benefit of the individuals? While we are on the topic of the Home Office, once again I pay tribute to the wonderful caseworkers at the Home Office MP account management team, who have been fantastic in dealing with the many cases that my office sends through. It is said that a week in politics is a long time. Well, the last three years have been transformational in Conservative-run Harrow. We took over the council when it was just 18 months from declaring bankruptcy, with dwindling reserves and corruption in the highways department—a matter that I have raised in the House before. Yet now, it could hardly be thought to be the same organisation. Everyone asks about the state of roads, pavements and potholes. When we took over the council, we faced allegations of corruption and kickback schemes, but now the administration has committed £14 million a year for the next three years to invest in our ageing infrastructure. Furthermore, Harrow was the first London borough to use new machinery such as the JCB PotholePro, otherwise known as Pothole Pete, which can repair potholes in as little as a few minutes. It has been revolutionary, and even though there is more to be done, and many more roads to be repaired, things are heading in the right direction. Fly-tipping is down 33%, culprits are being fined £1,000 each and the council has launched a wall of shame to deter people and catch culprits. Bin collection rates are heading in the right direction, with fewer missed collections, and for the first time in a generation Harrow has expanded the number of green flag parks, adding to the list Chandos recreation ground in Edgware in my constituency and Hatch End riverside park in the neighbouring constituency. We also began one-hour free parking, the most generous free parking offer in all London boroughs, which has been used millions of times by residents to support our local businesses and high streets. Even though there is a lot more to do, it is clear that Harrow is heading in the right direction as the Conservatives put residents first. I hope that they are returned at the local elections next year to carry on that good work for another four years. We will all shortly go on our summer recess and Members and staff will take a well-deserved break, but at the beginning of August, I will be hosting my annual work experience programme. I will welcome to my constituency 25 work experience students a week for two weeks and I will teach them what it is like to be an MP and how they can get involved in politics. Over the last 15 years, I have welcomed thousands of young people into the programme, with many going on to work in my office or elsewhere on the parliamentary estate. It is a great way to engage with constituents and the younger generation and to inspire them to get involved and learn about the parliamentary processes. I shall conclude my remarks by wishing everyone a lovely summer recess and a well-deserved break. I hope everyone can get some rest and recuperation with their family, enjoying good food and good company with their loved ones. I also wish all the staff of the House a chance to get a break from all of us.

    Hansard source
11. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Bob Blackman

    Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment

    We have had a wonderful debate, to which 38 Back Benchers have contributed, and we have also heard three excellent Front-Bench speeches. If I may say so, the hon. Member for Cardiff North (Anna McMorrin) may be looking forward to the reshuffle that, it is rumoured, may take place over the summer; we may hear more of her in the Chamber, rather than outside it. The House is, of course, rising for the summer recess. Some people think that we are all going off on a long holiday. Far from it: we will all be going back to our constituencies and doing work for our constituents, as is right and proper. We will be giving young people opportunities to serve with us, while we are given opportunities to see more of our constituents. However, I hope that everyone will have a well-earned rest and a proper break. I wish you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and Mr Speaker and the other Deputy Speakers—and, indeed, the entirety of the staff who support us—a very happy recess. I hope we can use the opportunity this summer to do more of the work that needs to be done in this Chamber and beyond to ensure that the House is fit and ready for the visitors who want to come and see the work that we do, but let us have a good recess, let us hope for a brighter future as a result, and let us look forward to coming back in the autumn, refreshed and ready for the political fight.

    Hansard source
12. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Andrew Rosindell

    Humanitarian Situation in Sudan

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship once again, Dr Huq. It is appropriate that, as someone who has always stood up for humanitarian causes, self-determination and the rights of peoples around the world, you are chairing this important debate. I thank the hon. Member for Huddersfield (Harpreet Uppal) for bringing this important debate to Westminster Hall this afternoon, on the last day of term. She has been a principled voice on the issue in Parliament for a very long time; I commend her for it. I also thank the all-party parliamentary group on Sudan and South Sudan—not least Glen Promnitz of its secretariat, who is here today—for keeping parliamentarians briefed and informed on the ongoing situation in the region, especially when so much of the world appears, regrettably, to have fallen silent. They have done an excellent job; I commend them for all their work. I would like to refer to some, although not all, of the comments that have been made this afternoon. I have just said that the world is regrettably silent, but this House has not been silent this afternoon. I have heard some very passionate speeches and comments from all parts of the House. Considering how much is happening in the world today and how many issues we do talk about, we have not spoken as much as we should about Sudan. The nature of the conflict and the dreadful repercussions on the people of Sudan is absolutely horrendous, and we are right to debate it. The hon. Member for Gravesham (Dr Sullivan) spoke about the health risks in the region. The hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) and other colleagues spoke about the importance of the diaspora in the United Kingdom. The hon. Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi) spoke about the use of gender-based violence as a weapon of war; he was right to do so. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), as chairman of the APPG for international freedom of religion or belief, spoke passionately about the issue and gave examples of where we need to highlight it. The hon. Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) talked about the denial of humanitarian aid as a weapon, a point that was taken up by the hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed); I thank both Members for highlighting it. It seems that it is now common practice in conflicts that the withholding of humanitarian aid is being used as a weapon, which is dreadful and appalling. I was particularly struck by the speech of the hon. Member for Edmonton and Winchmore Hill (Kate Osamor), who spoke about war crimes and crimes against humanity, and about how justice is needed in such cases. She paid tribute to the diaspora here in the UK. She said that the Sudanese people are not forgotten and that we must stand with them. I agree. She summed up the mood of the House this afternoon. The right hon. Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds), who did a fine job in her time as Minister, spoke today with knowledge and experience of the topic. It is a shame that she is not still in her place as a Minister, but we thank her for continuing to take an interest in this very important subject. Like other Members today, I wish to express my deep and growing concern for the people of Sudan, a nation in the grip of one of the most harrowing and shamefully overlooked humanitarian crises of our time. The conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces has torn this ancient country apart. According to the United Nations, more than 25 million people—over half of Sudan’s population—are now in need of humanitarian assistance. The World Food Programme warns that 18 million people face acute food insecurity, with 5 million in serious danger and over 750,000 children suffering from severe malnutrition. Hospitals and aid convoys have come under attack, entire communities have been displaced, and reports continue to emerge of ethnic cleansing, gender-based violence and mass killings, particularly in Darfur. In April, as has been mentioned, the United Kingdom co-hosted an international humanitarian conference on Sudan. It announced that £120 million would be spent in humanitarian funding, supplementing the tens of millions provided by the last Government. However, nearly three months later, we must ask—and I hope the Minister will respond—what that money has been used for. Where has the money gone? Has the funding reached frontline organisations and local civil society actors working to deliver urgent assistance? Is it getting over the border at the scale required? Is there deconfliction to ensure that it is distributed to the innocent civilians who require that funding? As the penholder on Sudan at the United Nations, the United Kingdom holds a unique and vital responsibility, but I must ask whether the UK is currently doing enough. Are we using our position at the Security Council to its fullest extent? What will the UK do through the United Nations Security Council in the time ahead to push for action on humanitarian corridors and for independent investigations into war crimes, and to hold the perpetrators to account? More broadly, will the Minister tell us what new measures the Government are taking to compel the warring parties into a much-needed ceasefire? How is the UK supporting Sudanese civilian and political forces to engage in constructive dialogue processes such as the Cairo conference? What is the Minister’s assessment of the current effectiveness of such processes and of the Jeddah process? What action does she propose to take on external factors influencing the war? The House would also welcome clarity on whether the Government are exploring replicating the approach of our American allies to sanctions. The United States recently imposed further targeted sanctions. The previous Government recognised that those measures send a clear message that those who commit appalling acts will be held accountable, which is why we implemented a number of sanctions on those supporting the activities of the Rapid Support Forces and of the Sudanese Armed Forces. I welcome the appointment of the UK special envoy for Sudan, but that cannot be the sum of our response. It cannot be a substitute for a full and proper strategy, which I hope the Minister will outline later in her remarks. We, on this side of the House, call on His Majesty’s Government, first, to provide a full and transparent update on the disbursement and impact of the £120 million pledged in April; secondly, to clarify how the UK is supporting frontline humanitarian agencies and set out its diplomatic engagement with regional actors; thirdly, to push for stronger co-ordinated action at the UN and with our allies, including support for a ceasefire and accountability for atrocities committed; and finally, to clearly set out their position on where they could do more on the possibility of sanctions. Finally, although this Westminster Hall debate is crucial for raising awareness and pressing for much-needed action, the gravity of the situation in Sudan demands the highest level of Government focus. I therefore urge the Foreign Secretary to come to the House at the earliest opportunity—probably not until September now—to make a comprehensive statement outlining the Government’s full and proper plan of action to address this ongoing catastrophe. We need to see a clear, unified strategy that matches the scale and urgency of this crisis. Britain has long played a role in Sudan, with deep historical ties that stretch back centuries. From the days of General Gordon in Khartoum, and our administration of Sudan during the Anglo-Egyptian condominium, Britain has been intrinsically involved in the shaping of Sudan’s modern identity. A successful Sudan, then, is not distant from our national story; it is, in part, a reflection of ourselves. None of this happened in a vacuum; our knowledge of the region, long-standing diplomatic channels and moral voice on the world stage place the United Kingdom in a position to lead. We must honour that tradition in Sudan. The world may not be watching, but Britain must not look away.

    Hansard source
13. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Andrew Rosindell

    Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment

    Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for calling me to speak in this summer Adjournment debate, fittingly named after my dear friend and colleague, the late Sir David Amess. However, it is with regret and sadness that I feel the need to draw to the attention of the House the way in which Sir David’s family has been continuously mistreated. As I have said time and again, including at Prime Minister’s questions, there must be a statutory public inquiry into what happened to David. Last March, the Amess family met the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary at No. 10 Downing Street, supported by their former MP Anna Firth, who continues to do commendable work for the family and their campaign for justice. As many have noted, particularly my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), the family were petitioned to work within Lord Anderson’s process. Again they tried to do the right thing; again they tried to comply with the Government’s approach; and again, as it turns out, that was a grave mistake. The Prime Minister, the Home Secretary and, indeed, Lord Anderson, promised to keep the grieving Amess family front and centre of the process. The family were meant to have a guiding—indeed, a leading—role, but that did not happen. Instead, they were kept to the sidelines, and were not treated as being in a unique position; and the media received information before they did. The treatment of the Amess family has been simply outrageous. The process should have been followed more diligently, and the Amess family should have been treated with significantly greater dignity. Having lost their father and husband, who was a wonderful friend to us all, the Amess family should have been first, not last, in the pecking order. His Majesty’s Government should show some more respect for the memory of our late dear colleague, and as I have said before, there must now be a full public inquiry, not only matching the Government’s words with appropriate action, but ensuring that lessons are learned. From the Government, we must see an urgent effort to establish the full facts, learn the full lessons from the failings of Prevent, and determine what will be done in future to avoid a repeat of such a crime against this House and, indeed, democracy. The hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) referred a few moments ago to the late Member for Eastbourne, Ian Gow, a dear friend of mine who was also murdered. He was murdered by an IRA bomb on 30 July 1990, 35 years ago. Ian was the Parliamentary Private Secretary to Margaret Thatcher, and he first introduced me to Mrs Thatcher in 1982. He was cruelly murdered by the IRA in 1990. In the 35th year since his murder, let us remember him as well. He was a great man and a bulldog of a politician—a great British bulldog. We still miss him today. As Members will know, I am proud of being from the county of Essex, as indeed was Sir David Amess, and if I may, I will take a few moments to say this: Romford is Essex and Havering is Essex, but we have been denied the right to play any part in the discussions about Essex devolution. Essex is our county. It is our historic county. Romford and Havering are geographically tied to the people of Essex, yet we are forced against our wishes to be under the artificial construct called Greater London. I hope that, even at this late stage, the Government will relook at this and give the people of Romford and Havering a chance to have a different form of local government so that we can focus on what is best for our borough of Havering and rekindle the links to our historic county of Essex. I ask all Members to look at the wonderful historic county flags on display in Parliament Square. What a wonderful display it is of the fantastic historic counties of the United Kingdom, in which the Essex flag is the most prominent.

    Hansard source
14. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Andrew Griffith

    UK Internal Market

    Thank you, Dr Huq. It is a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship. I congratulate the right hon. Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson) on securing this last debate before the summer recess on this important topic. The UK’s internal market, forged over centuries through the Acts of Union, is the bedrock of economic prosperity. We are indeed stronger together, and the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 has provided what should be a robust foundation for economic cohesion and non-discrimination. I accept that challenges remain, and we have heard about them today. I thought the example—the illustration —of custard, visual metaphor though that was, was important. I regret the imperfections of the Windsor framework, and this Government with their reset have the potential to use their equities to significantly improve some of those arrangements in the UK internal market, should they so wish. The right hon. Member for East Antrim drew attention to the work done by the excellent Federation of Small Businesses, highlighting the very real problems and concerns.

    Hansard source
15. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Andrew Griffith

    UK Internal Market

    As ever, drawing on his extensive experience in this place, my right hon. Friend makes exactly the right point. We do not have time to revisit all the imperfections of the Brexit deal imposed upon us by a recalcitrant European Union, which turned out to be a very false friend. We should hear from the Minister, and I want to afford him as much time as possible. But my party will of course support anything that removes frictions and reunites the territorial integrity of the whole United Kingdom. We want every small business to benefit from that frictionless relationship with the rest of the United Kingdom. Our Union depends on that single indivisible approach and the sort of practical solutions that we heard about, such as trusted trader schemes and utilising HMRC’s already extensive data collection and reporting framework to improve the operation of our internal market. That should be something that every Member of this House seeks to do. The Government have given up things like British fishing for 12 years; I hope that we continue to see in return some real progress on this issue. I thank all hon. Members, and congratulate the right hon. Member for East Antrim on highlighting the issue. With your permission, Dr Huq, I will give the rest of the available time to the Minister.

    Hansard source
16. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Andrew Bowie

    Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery

    (Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero if he will make a statement on the closure of the Prax Lindsey oil refinery.

    Hansard source
17. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Andrew Bowie

    Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery

    When the Prax Lindsey refinery closes its doors in October, there will be only four oil refineries remaining in the United Kingdom, following the news about Grangemouth a few months ago. This is the second oil refinery to close in the United Kingdom in only six months, prompting serious questions about our energy security and resilience. In Immingham, people are waking up today to the reality that redundancies are now inevitable. It is estimated that about 625 jobs will be lost. For the community in Lincolnshire, that is seismic. As the Minister said, we are aware of the long-standing financial issues with Prax Group, and I reiterate my support for the Government’s investigation into its directors. What progress has been made on that investigation? When does he expect the report to be made? We cannot escape the fundamental crisis facing our manufacturing sector. As Jim Ratcliffe has said, the sector is “facing extinction” because of “enormously high energy prices and crippling carbon tax bills.” The Minister’s Department knows that to be true and has exempted some industry from paying the net zero levies, recusing specific businesses from paying the extortionate green subsidy costs. That is a ridiculous situation that sees subsidies being paid by the Government to businesses to exempt them from the charges being imposed by that very same Government—we are truly through the looking glass. The Department is wilfully talking down the oil and gas industry with hostile language and an impossible fiscal regime while overseeing the deindustrialisation of the United Kingdom through the perpetuated high cost of industrial energy. This is not simply managed decline; it is accelerated decline driven by ideology and steered from Whitehall. Will the Minister tell us what work is being done to ensure the future of the four remaining oil refineries in the United Kingdom? What, if any, assessment has been made of the UK’s resilience, given the steep reduction in our refining capacity over the past six months? What, if any, assessment has been made of the increased reliance on imports that will be necessary as a result of the reduction in British refining capacity? Will he please change course and start speaking up for our oil industry—upstream and downstream—which sees from the current Government a disregard for it, its workers and the communities that rely most on it?

    Hansard source
18. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Wendy Morton

    Asylum Hotels: Migrant Criminal Activity

    One year on, it is quite clear that the Labour Government have not got a grip on illegal migration and criminality. There is no plan and no cap, and it would appear today that there is not even an answer or any knowledge as to whether any gangs have been smashed. When will the Minister put in place an effective deterrent that protects not just our borders, but our citizens?

    Hansard source
19. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Independent Water Commission

    Before I call the Secretary of State to make his statement, I place on the record the fact that Mr Speaker and the Deputy Speakers were disappointed to see extensive coverage in the media this morning of Ministers’ responses to the Independent Water Commission, before the House has had the opportunity to consider the matter. It would be nice to think that the normal courtesies will be resumed.

    Hansard source
20. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Independent Water Commission

    Order. It is apparent that a very considerable number of Back-Bench Members wish to participate in this statement. There are two further statements to follow before we come to the main business of the day, which is also very important, so I urge colleagues on both sides of the House to ask brief questions and not make statements.

    Hansard source
21. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Independent Water Commission

    That concludes the statement. I thank the Secretary of State and the shadow Secretary of State for their presence throughout a lengthy session.

    Hansard source
22. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Middle East

    Order. Once again, a very large number of hon. Members wish to take part in this discussion. The intention is to try to accommodate everybody, but that will mean Members exercising a degree of self-restraint that was not entirely evident during the previous statement. I leave it to you, but if you want everybody to be called, then please, we need questions, not statements. If I may say so, Foreign Secretary, we also need relatively brief answers.

    Hansard source
23. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Middle East

    The hon. Gentleman clearly did not listen to a word that I said, but I am sure that the Foreign Secretary did.

    Hansard source
24. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Topical Questions

    When the Secretary of State talks of such a large reduction in the number of anticipated future primary school pupils, does she attribute any part of that to a wish by certain communities to develop a parallel education system, rather than engaging in full integration with this country?

    Hansard source
25. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Asylum Hotels: Migrant Criminal Activity

    The Minister says that an asylum seeker convicted of an offence will not be granted asylum. Does she have some special method of sending them back to a country to which we cannot send anyone back if they have broken into our country illegally? Otherwise, what does her sanction amount to?

    Hansard source
26. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Middle East

    The Foreign Secretary states that he believes in a two-state solution—as I have done since at least the 1973 Yom Kippur war—but that Hamas must not be a part of it. Does he agree that the best chance there ever was for the two-state solution was when Israel withdrew in 2005 from the Gaza strip? Hamas was elected in January 2006 and has been in power there ever since and is still managing to hang on. Does he accept that if ever the Government did recognise a Palestinian state, it would have to be the west bank without the Gaza strip, given the internecine slaughter between Hamas on the one hand and the Palestine Liberation Organisation on the other that followed the last withdrawal?

    Hansard source
27. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Infected Blood Inquiry: Additional Report

    It was in 2015 that I first raised the case of my constituent, Lesley Hughes, who was infected with contaminated blood in 1970 and discovered the reason for four decades of ill health in only about 2010, so it is great that this progress has been made. Very large sums of money will be paid in compensation, so can the Minister outline what provision there will be for the recipients to receive financial advice to make sure that they are not taken advantage of by unscrupulous people—for example, people trying to tell them how to make a claim that they can make directly?

    Hansard source
28. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Victory over Japan: 80th Anniversary

    May I say how important it is that both Front Benchers have emphasised the atrocities that were committed against prisoners of war? Just as we remember the Nuremberg trials, we remember the Tokyo trials, at which many war criminals were convicted and subsequently executed. Is it not a measure of the importance of unconditional surrender that that at least removed the aura of divinity from the Emperor so that the fanaticism of religion was excised from Japanese society?

    Hansard source
29. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Julian Lewis

    Extending the Ukraine Permission Extension Scheme

    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making this debate possible. Can he explain to the House the attitude of the Ukrainian Government? Is it the case that most of the people here are dependants—women and children? Given that it was originally thought that Ukraine would be quickly overrun and the circumstances are very different, is it also the case that the Ukrainian Government now want to see more of their citizens coming back to defend the homeland?

    Hansard source
30. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir John Whittingdale

    Topical Questions

    T10. Essex has seen a huge increase in the number of requests for education, health and care needs assessments, and is failing to meet the target, in part due to the difficulty of recruiting educational psychologists. Rather than trying to bury the problem by scrapping education, health and care plans, can the Minister say what the Government are doing to meet that need?

    Hansard source
31. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir John Whittingdale

    Middle East

    The deaths of those trying to access aid in Gaza are truly shocking. The Foreign Secretary will be aware that the number of civilians killed is being disputed by Israel and there are suggestions of disinformation. Does he agree that one way in which we could establish what is actually happening is if international media organisations, like the BBC and Reuters, were allowed full access to Gaza?

    Hansard source
32. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown

    Independent Water Commission

    I warmly welcome the Secretary of State’s announcement that he is going to merge all four water regulators into one. However, I offer a slight note of caution: it is no good moving the deckchairs around the deck unless the situation has been improved. When will he produce the White Paper and what teeth will he give this single new super-regulator?

    Hansard source
33. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Edward Leigh

    Asylum Hotels: Migrant Criminal Activity

    This is a real national crisis, and there is such an outcry and such outrage in the country that there is a real danger that people will take the law into their own hands, which we all deprecate. We have to solve this, and the only way to do so is to have a reasonable and proper deterrent. We must arrest the people who land on our shores, detain them and send them back to where they came from. The Human Rights Act 1998 was never intended to cover illegal immigrants of this sort. We have to do this for all our sakes; otherwise, people will wrongly take the law into their own hands.

    Hansard source
34. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Edward Leigh

    Middle East

    Of course we all condemn the evil Hamas, but is not Prime Minister Netanyahu the biggest recruiting sergeant for Hamas? For every fighter he kills, he is radicalising the whole world against the state of Israel because of this appalling humanitarian solution. I agree with everything the Foreign Secretary says, but are words enough? I wonder whether he will oblige the House and allow a free vote, which I bet would pass by an enormous majority, on a motion for further action against the extreme right-wing actions of Prime Minister Netanyahu, sanctions, and recognition of the state of Palestine.

    Hansard source
35. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Saqib Bhatti

    Victory over Japan: 80th Anniversary

    I thank the Minister for her speech, and for all the events that she announced: we will, of course, support the Government’s agenda in celebrating VJ Day. It is a privilege to respond to the Minister on behalf of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition. The 80th anniversary of the end of the second world war is undoubtedly a cause for huge celebration. In May, the whole nation came together to celebrate the end of the war in Europe on VE Day. It was a special day with celebrations across the country, including many in my constituency. When we watched the national celebrations on television as a family, my two young boys took a particular liking to the Red Arrows flying over Buckingham Palace. I hope that in time they will begin to understand properly why we celebrate that important day and what it means, for it symbolises the victory of good over evil after nearly six years of unimaginable suffering, when a whole nation—young and old, male and female, rich and poor—came together to fight Nazi Germany, defeat fascism and liberate Europe, 80 years ago. As the nation, 80 years ago, danced into the night celebrating the end of fighting close to home, thousands of British and Commonwealth soldiers were locked in a struggle against imperial Japan. It took until 15 August, after the United States had dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, for the fighting to end in the far east. The campaign that began in 1941, starting with a surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, was vast: fighting took place from Hawaii to the north-east borders of India, and from Papua New Guinea in the south to Manchuria in northern China on the border of the Soviet Union. By 1945, across Asia and the Pacific, 365,000 British and 1.5 million Commonwealth troops were deployed, including the largest volunteer army in history, the pre-partition Indian Army of 2.5 million soldiers. Despite the scope of that campaign, those brave soldiers, who frequently fought in horrific conditions against a formidable enemy, are often known as the forgotten Army to acknowledge the lack of reporting of the campaign in the mainstream media at the time; yet stories of heroic actions remain. Just last night, as I discussed the campaign in the far east with my parents, my mum told me about one of her uncles who had been a prisoner of war in that conflict in the far east. Then there are my two Westminster staff members who told me proudly about their great-grandfather and their great-uncle, both of whom earned the Burma Star. Field Marshal Slim’s 14th Army was thought to be the most diverse in the world. More than 40 languages were spoken by troops, who were united in one ambition—to stand up and defend civilisation from barbarism and tyranny. Many people associate the fall of France in 1940 as Britain’s low point in the war, but the crushing surrender of Malaya and Singapore were at least as devastating: 9,000 British, pre-partition Indian and Commonwealth troops were lost, and about 130,000 were taken as prisoners of war. The famous films “The Bridge on the River Kwai” and the more recent “The Railway Man” show the brutal conditions faced by those taken prisoner, and serve as a stark reminder of the reason we had to stand up and defeat imperial Japan.

    Hansard source
36. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Saqib Bhatti

    Victory over Japan: 80th Anniversary

    My right hon. Friend said that so eloquently, and he is clearly a very learned individual. I could not agree with him more. Although we are all regularly reminded of the heroic invasion of Normandy, a 2013 poll of the British public by the National Army Museum in Chelsea ranks the battles of Kohima and Imphal as Britain’s greatest ever battles. As we commemorate the 80th anniversary of VJ Day, I hope we will reflect on some of the lessons of the second world war. I am proud to remind the House that soldiers from all over the Commonwealth—from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, India, South Africa and many other countries—fought alongside British troops.

    Hansard source
37. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Saqib Bhatti

    Victory over Japan: 80th Anniversary

    It is always a great privilege to be intervened on by the hon. Gentleman, and I could not agree with him more. I thank him for his intervention. In the far east in particular, there were troops from all different faiths: Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Jews, Buddhists and many others all fought as one to defeat Japan. I have learned that my wife’s grandfather received the Indian Distinguished Service Medal as part of the 7th Battalion of the 16th Punjab Regiment. While moving through the Burmese coastline, he was suddenly surrounded by Japanese soldiers. My wife’s grandfather was Lance Corporal Samundar Khan. His platoon was ordered to attack uphill so that the lead platoon could retreat. Carrying a Bren gun, Lance Corporal Khan led his men up the steep slope as heavy Japanese grenades rained down on them. With the gun at his hip, and despite being seriously wounded in the chest, he led the charge and drove the Japanese from the top. Khan, who was 18 and who lied about his age so that he could enlist to fight and to defend our nation, was wounded three times in two months. Khan’s story of bravery and heroism, though special, was not unique. To all those who fought against tyranny and defended democracy so that we can stand here today in the mother of all Parliaments, I say thank you. As we look at the increased instability in the world, we should remember those brave soldiers who fought for our liberty and our freedom, and for the principles and freedoms that were underpinned in the Atlantic charter: freedom of speech and expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want and freedom from fear. They all matter today, as they did then. Those principles set a new world order. Although there are those who seek to divide us and who try to prey on our differences, we must draw inspiration from the heroes who sacrificed everything and who gave their lives for a better world. They rejected populism, they rejected tyranny, and they rejected the politics of hate. Those who fought and died in the second world war truly were our greatest generation. I urge the Minister, on top of everything else the Government are doing, to encourage her colleagues in the Department for Education to ensure that the stories and lessons from the war, including the struggle against Japan, are never forgotten. I also ask that the Government build on the deep-rooted relationships with our allies who stood with us, so that we can stand up to those who would divide us today. As we reflect on the war’s conclusion, I look forward to colleagues’ contributions. We must remind ourselves that our right to be here and to represent our constituents is possible only because of the brave men and women from across the world who laid down their lives for this country. Once again, I say thank you.

    Hansard source
38. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Robbie Moore

    Independent Water Commission

    I am grateful to the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement. I shall be responding on behalf of the shadow Secretary of State while she meets farmers at the Royal Welsh Show. Let me begin by recognising the scale and seriousness of the work undertaken by Sir Jon Cunliffe and his team. The review contains 460 pages and 88 recommendations, and represents one of the most detailed examinations of the water sector since privatisation. Indeed, there is much in it that we cautiously welcome, including the merger of the regulators. As we examine the recommendations in more detail, we stand ready to support serious reform if it is done properly. However, I am afraid that what we have seen and heard from the Secretary of State over the past year has not matched the seriousness of Sir Jon Cunliffe’s work, nor has it gone anywhere near the root-and-branch radical reform that he sold to voters before the election. I therefore seek clarity from him on the following points. First, over the weekend the Secretary of State announced that Labour would cut sewage spills by 50% by 2030, but what he did not mention was the fact that plans submitted under the last Conservative Government were already set to cut sewage spills by even more than that amount. The Times reported yesterday that the Secretary of State’s new pledge would actually see an additional 20,000 discharges of sewage in our rivers, compared with existing plans. Can the Secretary of State explain why, after 88 recommendations and a year-long review of the sector, he has watered down sewage reduction targets rather than massively ramping them up? Secondly, the Secretary of State took to the airwaves at the weekend telling the public that we needed to go back to the “purity” of our waters that we all remember, but the uncomfortable truth for which Labour still refuses to take responsibility is that when it left office in 2010, just 7% of storm overflows were monitored. Let me repeat that: under Blair and Brown, 93% of sewage discharges were happening with no oversight and no accountability whatsoever. The only reason we can talk tough today is the fact that the last Government pushed monitoring to 100% in 2023. May I therefore ask the Secretary of State to clarify his statement? Thirdly, the Secretary of State told the public that he had secured £104 billion of investment from the water sector to fund these reductions, but what he did not mention was that £93 billion of that investment plan had already been submitted by water companies in October 2023, nine months before he was even in office. I would know that because I was the Minister at the time, and I have here the letter showing that he had nothing to do with it. Will he comment on that? Fourthly, the Secretary of State champions the 81 criminal investigations of water companies that have taken place since the election and his ban on water company bosses’ bonuses, but what he does not explain is that these criminal investigations are a direct result of the Conservatives’ policy of quadrupling the number of water company inspections, and that it was our party that launched the ban on bosses’ bonuses. This is all available for the public to see and to fact-check for themselves, as it is a matter of public record. What all this shows is that, for all their bluster and promises of radical change, the Government have made almost no new progress on the issue over the past year. They have sat on their hands for more than a year waiting for the review. It is no wonder that the campaigners whom the Secretary of State so shamelessly used for votes in the run-up to the last general election are now, today, calling for his resignation. We on this side of the House stand ready to work with the Government on serious reform. We will support any action that genuinely holds water companies to account, delivers cleaner waters and protects the public from paying the price of corporate failure. However, we will not stand by while the Secretary of State rewrites history, waters down ambition, and backtracks on the promises that he made to the public.

    Hansard source
39. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Priti Patel

    Middle East

    I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. The violence, loss of life and conflicts that continue in the middle east shock us all. Events in the middle east have a direct impact on our national interests and on people living on our own country, from concerns about family members in the region to demonstrations on our streets, and from the threats from Iran to the rise of antisemitism. We on the Opposition side of the House are clear that we want to see an end to the conflict in Gaza. We want to see the return of the hostages. The humanitarian support, which is so desperately needed, must get in. There must be an end to the terror inflicted by Hamas and Iran. However, the reality of peace and a sustainable end to the conflict in Gaza seems to be drifting further away. What is Britain’s role when it comes to workable outcomes and practical solutions to advance an end to this conflict, and what diplomatic action is being taken with regional allies and the United States? Where is Britain’s voice and action when it comes to putting new pressure on Hamas to agree to the most recent US proposals to secure a ceasefire, and release the hostages who have been in cruel captivity for more than 650 days? As for the statement that the Foreign Secretary signed earlier today, can he explain what an “unconditional and permanent” ceasefire means for Hamas and the Palestinian Authority? Last week, I met Keith and Aviva Siegel, and heard about their harrowing experience of being held in brutal captivity by Hamas. I pay tribute to them for their incredible bravery and resilience, and for their dedication to securing the freedom of the remaining hostages, from Gali and Ziv Berman to Matan Angrest and Omri Miran, and all those being held in barbaric captivity. They must be returned to their loved ones. The hostages are being denied humanitarian access by Hamas. What are the Government doing about that, and when was the Foreign Secretary’s last intervention on the issue? The situation relating to aid for Gaza has deteriorated beyond all rational comprehension. The daily reports of casualties seeking aid are appalling, and we utterly condemn these attacks. But our words and political statements of condemnation are not saving lives, so what practical solutions, proposals and options have the Foreign Secretary and the British Government discussed with Israel in respect of aid supplies into Gaza? What dialogue is there to find agreement on the opening of access for that aid that goes beyond the current dangerous approach? I remind the House that the last Conservative Government, through Lord Cameron, secured new aid routes and better aid access to save lives. Surely the desperate urgency of the situation, which we all see, calls for such options to be considered once again. I reiterate our long-standing position that settlements are not helpful to achieving long-term peace. Israel should not take steps that could make a two-state solution more difficult, and must use its legal system to clamp down on settler violence. We want a two-state solution that guarantees security and stability for both Israelis and Palestinians, and I am sure the Foreign Secretary agrees that it should come only at a time that is conducive to peace and cannot be the start of a peace process—certainly not while Israeli hostages are still in captivity in Gaza. Does he agree that there needs to be a clear plan and international measures to see the exit of Hamas from Gaza? As for Syria, the barbaric violence that we have witnessed in recent days cannot continue. All groups and minorities in Syria must be protected. The Foreign Secretary mentioned his recent discussions with the transitional Syrian leadership. Did he convey to those in charge that they have a responsibility to end the armed conflict in their country and guarantee the protection of all minority groups in Syria, before the international community removes sanctions and normalises diplomatic relationships? What assurances has he received from the transitional Government, and have those commitments been met in any way with measurable action? Will he update the House on whether any of the £64.5 million dedicated to Syria that was announced by the Government earlier this month will be used to deal with the aftermath of these latest clashes, and on how it will be spent? Does he deem sufficient action to have been taken by the interim Government on the destruction of chemical weapons? Does he believe that the Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham Government are capable of securing Syria’s borders, and does he intend to change the proscribed status of HTS? What is his assessment of the effect of the sanctions that have already been lifted? Have they had any unintended side effects? Syria’s future still hangs in the balance, and we need to be wholly evidence-led in our approach. The Foreign Secretary did not mention Iran, but we understand from reports that Iran, Britain, France and Germany are due to hold nuclear talks in Istanbul on Friday. What is the purpose of those talks, is he co-ordinating actions with the United States, and what is the content of the deal that he wants to see?

    Hansard source
40. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Nick Timothy

    Asylum Hotels: Migrant Criminal Activity

    I have been fobbed off with ridiculous non-answers to my written questions on this subject and an insulting letter from the Immigration Minister, the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), so I do not want to be promised yet another evasive letter that ignores the question. Will the Minister tell me what the legal reasons are that the Immigration Minister cited as justification for the Government and Serco refusing to tell MPs and local people when they move migrants into our constituencies and where?

    Hansard source