Showing every spoken contribution, including 5,750 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

1. 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
2. 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
3. 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
4. 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
5. 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
6. 22 Jul 2025·Parliament·Andrew Griffith

   UK Internal Market

   You’re stuck with me.

   Hansard source
7. 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
8. 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
9. 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
10. 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
11. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Independent Water Commission

    I call the shadow Minister.

    Hansard source
12. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Independent Water Commission

    I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

    Hansard source
13. 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
14. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Independent Water Commission

    I call the ever-patient Peter Swallow.

    Hansard source
15. 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
16. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Middle East

    I call the shadow Secretary of State.

    Hansard source
17. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Middle East

    I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

    Hansard source
18. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Middle East

    I call the Liberal Democrat spokesman.

    Hansard source
19. 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
20. 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
21. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Middle East

    I call the Father of the House.

    Hansard source
22. 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
23. 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
24. 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
25. 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
26. 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
27. 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
28. 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
29. 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
30. 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
31. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Sir Gavin Williamson

    Asylum Hotels: Migrant Criminal Activity

    Over the past year, how many gangs have actually been smashed?

    Hansard source
32. 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
33. 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
34. 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
35. 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
36. 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
37. 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
38. 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
39. 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
40. 21 Jul 2025·Parliament·Neil O'Brien

    Teacher Recruitment

    The Secretary of State just said that the Government were turning around declines in teacher numbers. Under the last Government the number of teachers went up by 27,000; under this Government it is down by 400. That is the opposite of the truth. One thing that drives people out of teaching is poor discipline, yet the Government have abolished behaviour hubs, despite the evidence that they were working. The Government said they would put in place new behaviour ambassadors, who were supposed to be in place on 4 July, but the contract has now lapsed and the position is vacant. Why the delay on this vital issue?

    Hansard source