PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Engagements - 3 June 2026 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

May I also pay tribute to Lord Haselhurst? I know he will be deeply missed, particularly on the Benches opposite.

The findings of the recent Springhill inquest into the tragic deaths, in July 1972, of Father Noel Fitzpatrick, Patrick Butler, Margaret Gargan, David McCafferty and John Dougal are sobering. While the circumstances in which the events occurred were undoubtedly challenging, it is the duty of the state to hold itself to the highest standard. The Government accept and deeply regret these findings, and recognise their gravity. On behalf of the Government, I apologise unreservedly to the families for what happened and for the grief and trauma they have endured since the tragic deaths of their loved ones.

I also place on record our deepest condolences to the family of Lance Corporal James Freeman, who died in a tragic accident on Sunday. I am also aware of a Royal Navy helicopter crash this morning in Devon. This will be a deeply worrying time for the families, and more information will be set out as soon as possible.

Henry Nowak’s family have shown extraordinary dignity after their son’s life was stolen in appalling circumstances. He was clearly a kind, thoughtful and much-loved young man. There are serious questions to answer, including how accusations of racism informed police thinking, and we are supporting the Independent Office for Police Conduct to get to the bottom of what happened. But no matter the pain we feel, there is no justification for more violence and disorder. The attacks directed towards police officers in Southampton last night were disgraceful and completely unacceptable. This is a time for serious work, not rage. Let me be clear: we will ensure that anyone found engaging in disorder meets the full force of the law, as we have done before.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

I echo the sympathies expressed by the Prime Minister for the families recently bereaved, particularly the family of Henry Nowak.

Corruption appears to be endemic in donations to British political parties. We have had years of Conservative cronyism. We have had allegations of embezzlement in Scotland. We have had undisclosed donations from crypto billionaires and foreign oligarchs. We have even had freebies dished out to some of the hon. Members sitting on the Labour Benches. The Government have already cracked down on some specific sources of donations that favour their political opponents, such as crypto and foreign money. Will the Prime Minister now commit to restoring the faith of the British public in the integrity of our British democracy by putting a cap on all political donations?

I thank the hon. Member for her question. We will do whatever is necessary to protect our democracy from foreign influence and from dirty money. That is why we commissioned the Rycroft review, capped overseas donations and introduced a moratorium on crypto donations, and we are taking further action, as set out in the King’s Speech. But the £5 million question still remains: why is the leader of Reform dodging questions about his donations, and why did he keep it secret in the first place?

I commend my hon. Friend’s campaign to address the Croydon bottleneck. The last Government cancelled work to address this; we will carefully consider the case for upgrades, including step-free access at Norwood. I am proud that her constituents are travelling on rail services that are now back in public ownership, and benefiting from the first freeze in rail fares for 30 years—a Labour Government transforming our railways and building a fairer Britain.

We now come to the Leader of the Opposition.

I echo the Prime Minister’s words on Lance Corporal James Freeman and about the Royal Navy helicopter crash in Devon. I also send my deepest condolences to the family and friends of Henry Nowak. The circumstances around Henry’s wrongful arrest and tragic murder must be a wake-up call to the entire country and our institutions that every life matters, and it is the responsibility of everyone in this House to bring people together, not divide them.

Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Sir Alan Haselhurst—Lord Haselhurst—who died on Monday. Sir Alan served Parliament for over 50 years, eight of them in the Lords and 40 years as my predecessor as MP for Saffron Walden, while from 1970 to 1974 he was the Member of Parliament for Middleton and Prestwich. He was respected on all sides of this House, and was elected multiple times as your predecessor as Deputy Speaker, before he concluded in the other place.

Apart from serving his constituents, Sir Alan’s greatest passion in Parliament and perhaps in life was cricket, as you said, Mr Speaker. He was chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on cricket, a role which he encouraged me to take up and which I graciously declined, telling him I knew absolutely nothing about cricket. However, I think colleagues should know that Sir Alan’s intense lobbying is the reason that Sky Sports can be found on the parliamentary TV network. There is so much to say, but just to let everyone know, he was a good and kind man and he will be very much missed. My thoughts are with his wife Angela, his children Mark, David and Emma, and his grandchildren.

May I ask the Prime Minister by how much the welfare bill has risen since he came to office?

May I first thank the Leader of the Opposition for her approach and tone in relation to the tragic Henry Nowak case?

On welfare, as she knows, we inherited from the Conservative party a broken system, which we are now improving: delivering a youth guarantee; rolling out 300,000 work experience placements; and commissioning Alan Milburn’s review into youth unemployment. They are the steps we are taking. As she will know, the number on welfare went up hugely on the Conservatives’ watch, as did the cost under the shadow Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Central Devon (Sir Mel Stride).

The Prime Minister does not seem to know the answer, so let me tell him: benefits alone have risen by £20 billion since he came to office. The Prime Minister has promised welfare reforms—we heard him say it just now—so why was there no welfare reform Bill in the King’s Speech?

Welfare reform is balancing universal credit so that it no longer pushes people away from work. That is what we are doing; the Opposition voted against it. Welfare reform is introducing a right to try, to incentivise people to take up opportunities. That is what we are doing; they voted against it. Welfare reform is providing record funding on apprenticeships. That is what we are doing; apprenticeship starts fell by 40% on their watch. The right hon. Lady talks about the welfare bill. It soared by £88 billion on their watch. Nearly 3 million people were written off. Face-to-face assessments collapsed because of the contracts they agreed. And who signed off those contracts? The shadow Chancellor.

We need to bring down the benefits bill. The Prime Minister complains about the shadow Chancellor. The bill went up because of the pandemic and even then Labour Members were asking us to spend more. It is not the shadow Chancellor who is the problem; it is the actual Chancellor. She is not even in her place. The reason there is no welfare Bill is the Prime Minister has given up, and he has given up because Labour Members have given up on him. On Sunday, the Welfare Secretary was asked 12 times on national radio if he would make cuts to the benefits bill and 12 times he could not answer. So I will ask the Prime Minister: is he going to cut the benefits bill?

All our welfare reform measures, and all our measures to get young people into work, are to reduce the cost and numbers of people who are unemployed. That is why we have introduced the youth guarantee so that young people can have help into work. If, after 18 months, they have not got a job, they can then be given a job for six months supported, which we know is the best way to ensure they succeed. That is the change we are making, but the Conservatives introduced the system that is broken. We are reforming it. Did they vote to reform it with us? No, they voted to keep the broken system.

The Prime Minister keeps saying he is bringing in welfare reforms. None of those things is going to cut the bill. Even his own Timms review explicitly says—this is their review; this is in the terms of reference—that this is not about generating proposals for further savings. The Prime Minister had a chance to cut benefits. Last year, I remember the Government were planning to cut benefits and on the Floor of the House they U-turned. What did he do when he had a chance? He caved. He caved to all the MPs behind him who do not want benefits brought down. That is why they are sitting silently behind him. Does the Prime Minister agree with his Welfare Secretary that that was the moment he lost his authority?

I am proud of what we are delivering on this side of the House. The fastest growing economy in the G7—they said it could not be done. Despite the war in the middle east, the OECD forecasts that UK growth is up and inflation is down. Net migration, which reached nearly a million under the Conservatives—the Leader of the Opposition was the cheerleader—is down by a staggering 82%. The asylum backlog is down by 46%. We are delivering the fastest reduction in waiting times in the history of the NHS. That is on top of free school meals, free breakfast clubs and free childcare—and, of course, we are lifting half a million children out of poverty. I am very proud of the work of this Labour Government.

He says he is proud of what they are delivering—I am glad to see that the Prime Minister still has his sense of humour, given we all know that he is losing his job soon. He has no authority, and we know why: his MPs will not let him do anything. The Welfare Secretary said in private what the Government will not dare say in public. He said:

“Every meeting I have is: ‘Who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others?’”

Last week, Tony Blair said:

“If the Conservative Party repeats its offer of working together on welfare, Labour should accept”.

Today I am repeating that offer to the Prime Minister. Is he ready yet?

They introduced a system that is broken, they put the bill through the roof, and now they want to give us advice on welfare—no thanks! The question should always be not what benefits people are entitled to, but what help we can give people to change their lives. That is what the Work and Pensions Secretary was arguing, and he is right about that. It is a Labour Government that are helping people into work. Leader of the Opposition asks what we have done: more rights for renters, stopping unfair rent hikes, and giving 11 million people greater security and a place to call home; and more rights for workers, including bereavement leave on day one—ask anyone who has lost someone, and they will say just how important it is to have bereavement leave. We have lifted half a million children out of poverty. We often say in this House that every child should go as far as their talent or ability will take them. That does not happen if they are growing up in poverty. The Conservatives have fought us at every turn. I am proud of what we are delivering. There is much more to do.

The truth is that unemployment has risen every single month since they came into office. Mr Speaker, you can listen to their cheers get weaker and thinner with every passing moment. The fact is, despite his huge majority, the Prime Minister does not have the votes to reform welfare. There is a solution—a Conservative solution—[Interruption.] Labour Members are all jeering now, but I do not know why they are supporting the Prime Minister; he is more than happy to release their text messages while all of his have disappeared. Disappearing messages from a disappearing PM. There is a Conservative solution: benefits bill down, taxes down, growth up. Everyone in this House knows that the Prime Minister is just a caretaker keeping the seat warm for the Mayor of Manchester. But it does not matter who is in charge; Labour MPs will keep asking who they can tax to pay more benefits—it is in their DNA. The truth is that the problem is not this passive Prime Minister; the problem is the Labour party.

Forgive me if I do not take too much notice of the Leader of the Opposition. For 14 years they broke our welfare system, lost control of our borders, presided over the biggest fall in living standards on record, and broke the economy, prisons and the NHS—I could go on and on. No wonder she and the Conservatives are totally irrelevant. This Labour Government are delivering change. The biggest upgrade in workers’ rights in a generation—delivered. The Renters’ Rights Act 2026—delivered. Record funding for our NHS—delivered. The fastest growing economy in the G7—delivered. Lifting half a million children out of poverty—delivered. We are going to fight even harder for working people and a stronger and fairer Britain.

I know how difficult it is for residents who are not in their homes. I can reassure my hon. Friend and his constituents that the MRA is carrying out daily investigations to get answers as swiftly as possible, and we are working with the council to provide support for residents. I can confirm that the Energy Minister is in touch with MSPs and will ensure that both my hon. Friend and his constituents are kept updated on the next steps.

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

I join the right hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to the 17 people who lost their lives in the heatwave, many of whom, as he said, were young—each of them tragic. We send our condolences to their families.

On the case of Henry Nowak, I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the approach he has taken. It is important in a case like this, which is so tragic—anybody who has seen the footage will have been deeply moved by it—that we reflect on our leadership roles here as political leaders. It is our duty to bring people together at a time like this, not to seek to divide them. It is particularly our duty to listen to what the devastated family are asking of us as political leaders. I thank all those who have acted in that way, because I think that is the right way to respond.

The right hon. Gentleman rather spoiled what was quite a good gag. I am surprised he has not done more to welcome the savings we are delivering for family fun days out this summer; I really thought he would have been delighted at the cheaper tickets for soft play.

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this really important case. My thoughts are with Henry’s family, as are the thoughts of the whole House and the whole country, I am sure. I have watched the bodycam footage, as others will have done, and I found it really hard. It was harrowing. As a dad of a 17-year-old boy, I felt sick. I can only imagine how devastated his family are. It is extremely moving.

Henry’s life has been stolen. His family have responded with incredible and immense dignity and bravery. There clearly are lessons that need to be learned and serious questions that need to be addressed, not least the question of how accusations of racism informed decision making in such cases.

Henry’s father said this:

“We do not want his death to be used to create further division, hatred or tension.”

They are the words of a grieving father who has lost his son. I think those words have resonated with people across the country. We must not allow this tragedy to be hijacked by anyone who seeks to divide us.

Following the horrendous circumstances of Henry Nowak’s death, I urge the Prime Minister to consider this: it is now clear to growing millions in this country that we are living under two-tier policing. The instructions that are given to police officers from police bosses are clear and written down in ink: “You must treat different ethnic groups in different ways.”

Apart from the upset and the anger at the circumstances of Henry’s death, the anger that was seen spilling out in Southampton last night is in danger of getting considerably worse if the public lose trust that they will be treated fairly by the police. Will the Prime Minister take some action, end this divisive practice of two-tier policing, and make sure that all British citizens are treated the same?

I do not believe that there is two-tier policing in this country. I am really shocked that the hon. Gentleman pretends to have respect for Henry’s family and then acts in this way. [Interruption.] They are a grieving family—

Order. Mr Brash, this is a very important question, and I want to hear the Prime Minister’s answer. If you want to carry on, go outside please.

The grieving family have asked us not to respond in the way that the leader of Reform has responded. They have lost their son in the most appalling circumstances, and they make a simple plea of us as human beings to please not exploit that. We all need to reflect on the words of Henry’s father.

My response—and the response of others, to be fair—has been focused on the lessons to be learned so that we can deliver justice. The hon. Gentleman’s response has been to appeal for rage. That is his response to a father who has lost his son and asked for that not to happen. Exploiting this tragedy to create grievance and division would be wrong in any circumstances, but to do it when the family are expressly saying, “Please don’t,” is unforgivable. It shows exactly who he is.

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this case and express my sincere condolences to Holly’s family. I cannot begin to imagine the intense distress that they have experienced. My hon. Friend will know that the ambassador to France has raised Holly’s case with the French prosecutor general, and I know that the Minister for Europe, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), has set out further steps that can be taken and is ready to support the family. In the light of his question, I will reflect on whether anything more can be done.

I thank the right hon. Member for her question. As I hope she knows, I did have a call with the First Minister of Wales just two weeks ago, and made it clear that I and this Government will work constructively with the First Minister and the Government in Wales, because that is the right thing to do to deliver for Wales.

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. The Reform leader wants everyone to forget that he called for our NHS to be replaced with an insurance-based system—he might want to jot it down to jog his memory. Then he said that if people can pay, they should pay for NHS treatment. We can help him by jolting his memory here. You cannot trust Reform with our NHS—the only way to protect it is to vote Labour.

I thank the hon. Member for the question. I recognise the challenges that she identifies. That is why we are permanently lowering business rates for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses. Every pub will get 15% off its new business rates bill, and bills will be frozen in real terms for a further two years. In relation to VAT, she will see that we are offering support by cutting VAT on children’s meals in restaurants—particularly over the summer period—with those savings set out two weeks ago by the Chancellor.

Any death from suicide is a tragedy, as everybody across this House will know. We are bringing together students, bereaved families, universities and the NHS to strengthen the mental health support provided to students. We have also appointed a student support champion to drive improvement across our universities. The relevant Minister will be happy to discuss that and other matters with my hon. Friend.

We put record investment into the NHS to clear up the mess that the hon. Gentleman and others left behind. Since he brings up elections, I have studied the Reform candidate for Makerfield: a self-professed sexist who said women who get an abortion do it for “vanity purposes”, who encouraged people not to get the covid vaccine and who said Russia was “within its rights” to invade Crimea. Reform has nothing to offer but grievance and division yet again.

I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s comments on Henry Nowak and the calls for calm over division.

The rugby league family lost a giant last week. John Kear, the former England, Wales and challenge cup-winning coach died suddenly on Sunday afternoon on his journey north after commentating on the challenge cup final at Wembley the previous day. After playing for Castleford, his local team, he moved to teaching and coaching for a total of 700 matches with nine clubs, and his career included famous underdog challenge cup wins with Sheffield Eagles in 1998 and Hull FC in 2005. John loved, and in turn was loved by, his sport. Will the Prime Minister join me in paying tribute to John and sending condolences to his wife Dawn and his family and friends?

I pay tribute to John. We were all deeply sad to hear of his passing. He was a remarkable athlete and coach, and an energetic and enthusiastic champion of his sport. He will be missed by supporters across the country and my thoughts—all our thoughts—are with his wife Dawn, his family and his friends at this sad time.

We absolutely recognise the harm and huge impact that pelvic mesh has had on so many lives. The hon. Lady will be aware that the Minister for Public Health has been a dedicated campaigner on this very issue. I want to see a full response to the recommendations published as quickly as possible, and I will make sure that the Minister keeps her updated on its progress.

The 10-year bus pipeline published by the Department for Transport shows that demand for zero emission buses will double by the end of the decade. In Scotland, however, jobs are being lost in our bus manufacturing sector because overseas manufacturers are winning a greater number of orders and now constitute the majority of new registration buses on our roads, despite an investigation into the cyber-security of Chinese buses. Will the Prime Minister designate bus manufacturing as a sector critical to our national security?

My hon. Friend is right to champion the brilliant, talented workforce building buses in Scotland. Our pipeline will give UK manufacturers the certainty and stability they need to plan ahead and be completely effective, and I can reassure him that we are working closely with the industry to provide the necessary response and support.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, and we are united in our belief that we must fight the poison of antisemitism wherever it is found. We are investing more to keep Jewish communities safe, with more police patrols and greater security at schools and synagogues; investing £7 million to tackle antisemitism within our universities; and bringing in proscription-like powers to clamp down on malign state activity. We will set out further steps in coming days, and I will make sure the hon. Gentleman is fully informed of the steps we are taking.

Less than 48 hours ago the family of Henry Nowak stood on the steps of Southampton Crown court and gave a courageous and dignified statement in which they said:

“We want to use Henry’s heartbreaking story to make change for the better. We do not want his death to be used to create further division, hatred or tension. We want his story to make our streets safer for everyone.”

Does the Prime Minister agree with me and my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Test (Satvir Kaur), that the violence we saw whipped up on the streets of Southampton last night, the criminal damage to innocent people’s homes, and the injuries to 11 police officers are the total opposite of what Henry’s own family clearly and powerfully called for?

I thank my hon. Friend for his question and for the discussion that we had this morning about the impact in Southampton. I also thank him for the work he has done along with his fellow MP, and, if I may say so, my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft), who has been dealing with Henry’s family for some time. The attacks directed towards police officers last night were disgraceful and completely unacceptable. There is no justification for further disorder.

I recall that the hon. Gentleman has raised this matter with me previously at Prime Minister’s questions. As he knows, the reorganisation of services is a matter for local integrated care boards who take decisions based on the evidence and engagement with patients. Across the country, patients are benefiting from the £450 million investment that we have provided to expand urgent and emergency care capacity. That improvement is because of the investment we have put in, but this is a matter for his local board.

Despite the efforts of dedicated teachers in Scarborough and Whitby, only 36% of pupils achieve grade 5 and above in both English and maths GCSEs. Does the Prime Minister agree that Mission Coastal has the potential to deliver the same transformational impact for young people in deprived coastal communities as the London Challenge achieved, and that it is the kind of bold and targeted intervention that only a Labour Government can deliver?

I thank my hon. Friend for her work on championing such an important issue. Mission Coastal will help break the link between background and success, giving the most disadvantaged children mentoring, career support and enrichment opportunities, because we believe that no matter where they grow up, every child deserves the same opportunities to succeed.

We inherited a housing crisis, with people unable to have the security of their own home or even get on to the housing ladder. We are determined to change that. We have invested £39 billion to deliver more social and affordable homes, prioritising brownfield land. We must build more communities with strong infrastructure, but the hon. Lady’s party consistently votes against the planning reforms that will allow those homes to be built.

Yesterday, the Health Secretary confirmed that all eligible black men would be invited to the Transform trial. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on prostate cancer, I welcome this vital step towards screening for this terrible disease, for which black men have a doubled risk for both diagnosis and death. This is something that Reform has responded to with nothing but divisive weasel words and rage-baiting. Does the Prime Minister agree that our NHS was founded by Labour to be there for everyone equally, and that when there is a proven higher risk, targeting support is equality?

I thank my hon. Friend for his work as chair of the prostate cancer APPG. This programme is England’s first targeted cancer screening programme. We are also funding a major expansion of research and treatment, backed by £20 million, to help men at the highest risk. We are determined to improve cancer care, and more cancer patients are now being diagnosed on time, thanks to Labour’s decisions, but of course there is more to do.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Points of order come after statements and urgent questions—[Interruption.] You did not ask a question, though—so the point of order can come after the urgent questions.