PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Engagements - 5 March 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

Tomorrow marks 13 years since six young British soldiers were on patrol in Afghanistan when their vehicle was struck by an explosive, tragically killing them all. Sergeant Nigel Coupe was 33, Corporal Jake Hartley was 20, Private Anthony Frampton was 20, Private Daniel Wade was 20, Private Daniel Wilford was 21, and Private Christopher Kershaw was just 19, a teenager. Tomorrow also marks the 18th anniversary of the death of Benjamin Reddy, a 22-year-old serving with 42 Commando Royal Marines, who was killed in Helmand Province in 2007. These men fought and died for their country—our country. Across the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, 642 individuals died fighting for Britain alongside our allies. Many more were wounded. We will never forget their bravery and their sacrifice. I know that the whole House will join with me in remembering them and all those who serve our country. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]

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.

The Prime Minister has rightly made growth his key mission, but can he outline for my constituents in Southampton Test how our Employment Rights Bill will not only deliver improvements for them, but put more money in their pockets as part of our plan for change?

I thank my hon. Friend, who is doing a fantastic job for her constituents. The Employment Rights Bill is the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation and will benefit more than 10 million workers in every corner of the country. It will tackle low pay, poor conditions and poor job security that hold our country back. It is pro-worker, pro-business and pro-growth.

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

Divisions between Ukraine and the US only serve Vladimir Putin. President Zelensky is right to try to rebuild his relationship with President Trump. He is keeping a cool head under very difficult circumstances, and I was glad to see President Trump receive his letter positively. What is the Prime Minister doing to help rebuild their relationship after a challenging week?

The right hon. Member is absolutely right: we need to do everything we can to ensure that the US, Europe and Ukraine are working together on lasting peace. I am doing everything that I can to play my part in that, and I am in regular contact with all of the key players at the moment, including talking to President Zelensky yesterday afternoon.

I thank the Prime Minister for that answer. All of us in this House know that the British armed forces are a huge source of pride to our country. They put themselves in harm’s way to defend our values. As the Opposition, we support efforts to resolve the conflict, but we cannot write a blank cheque. If British peacekeeping troops in Ukraine were attacked—whether directly or via proxies—we could be drawn into conflict with Russia. Can the Prime Minister reassure all those who are concerned about the UK being drawn into war?

Yes; that is the last thing anybody wants to see. The whole point of ensuring that there is a lasting peace, and that any deal—if there is a deal—is defended, is to avoid conflict so that we do have peace. The way to ensure that we have peace is to ensure that there are guarantees for any deal that is in place, because the surest risk that there will be conflict is if Putin thinks that he can breach any deal that may be arrived at.

The Prime Minister is quite right, and we on the Opposition side of the House agree with him. The objective for his visit to Washington was to get that US security guarantee for Ukraine, and I commend his efforts in that very difficult task. None the less, on Monday the United States withdrew military aid for Ukraine. Can he update the House on the steps he is taking to persuade America that it is also in its national interest to provide a security guarantee?

I am pleased to inform the House that on Thursday of last week we did discuss security guarantees. The President made absolutely clear his commitment to article 5 of NATO, made absolutely clear that he would have our backs because of the relationship between our parties, and agreed that our teams would sit down together to talk through security guarantees. I have spoken to him, I think, three times since then on the telephone, because it is vitally important that we work with the US, with Europe and with Ukraine and ensure that if there is a deal, it has proper security guarantees in place.

I know that the Prime Minister is unable to comment on specific intelligence matters, and I am certainly not asking him to do that. However, there are concerning reports that the United States has instructed Britain to suspend intelligence sharing with Ukraine, and there are other reports that Five Eyes itself may be at risk. We need to ensure that America does not disengage. There are some in the House who argue that Europe should go it alone, but does he agree with me that without this country’s greatest ally, any peace agreement would place a terrible burden on Britain and our taxpayers?

I agree wholeheartedly. That is why, as in the debate we had just two days ago, I have always been clear that we need to ensure that the US, the UK, Europe and Ukraine are working together, but we must not choose between the US and Europe; we never have historically, and we are not going to do so now.

I thank the Prime Minister for his comments on that. He will know that it is not just the security situation that worries people; they are also concerned about trade wars and the economic impact of tariffs such as those levelled on Canada and Mexico yesterday. The best way to avoid America putting tariffs on Britain is to reach agreement on a trade deal. Following the Prime Minister’s trip to Washington, have talks on a UK-US trade deal begun?

I was pleased that in the meeting last week we did discuss an economic deal and agreed that our teams would indeed sit down rapidly to talk through a deal. That is what they are doing. As the right hon. Lady rightly says, that is far better than getting drawn into conflict in relation to tariffs.

I am glad that the Prime Minister has confirmed that those talks have started. People across our country are worried—worried about national security; worried about whether we can equip our military fast enough; and worried about whether we will deploy troops in Ukraine, and whether we will be able to keep the peace. They are also worried about our economic security—can we afford all this?

The world is changing fast and we need an entirely new approach to our economy and our energy security. The Budget last year halted growth with higher taxes and higher borrowing. Yesterday, farmers were protesting in Whitehall again. People are hurting. Will the Prime Minister now change course so we can have the economic security that we know we need for our national security?

We were doing so well. [Laughter.] What we inherited was insecurity in our economy. We inherited a £22 billion black hole, and we have now turned that around. We have got the highest investment coming into our economy. We have got wages higher than prices, and interest rates have been cut three times. That is the difference between stability with Labour and instability with the Conservative party.

Our plan for change is built on national security and that has to go hand in hand with economic security. As we return to 2.5% for the first time since the last Labour Government, that investment must mean UK skills, UK jobs and UK apprenticeships. I was very pleased that on Monday we were able to announce a new hub and new spending targets to help 12,000 small and medium-sized enterprises access the supply chain, which will boost economic growth. That will be really important in so many constituencies—and of course I will consider my hon. Friend’s invitation.

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

Yesterday I visited Kingston’s Army Reserve centre and met members of the Royal Army Medical Service who had served bravely in Iraq and Afghanistan, so I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s initial remarks.

On Monday the Prime Minister rightly said that a minerals deal only was not a sufficient security guarantee for Ukraine. The Trump Administration has since said that a minerals deal is the only guarantee on the table, and President Trump has removed military aid from Ukraine and said that the British cannot share American intelligence with Kyiv. Both those decisions mean that more brave Ukrainians will die, while further emboldening Vladimir Putin. Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether he still believes that President Trump is a reliable ally? If Ukraine does not get a sufficient security guarantee from the White House, what is the Prime Minister’s plan B?

We work very closely with the United States on defence, security and intelligence, as we have done for many, many years; we are intertwined, and of course they are a reliable ally. We are operating on that basis day in, day out across the world, as the right hon. Gentleman knows.

In relation to the situation as it develops, obviously our only focus is on a lasting peace in Ukraine. There are many moving parts and there are many discussions to be had. What I am doing is staying focused on what I think is the single most important outcome: a lasting peace in Ukraine, which is good for Ukraine and for Europe and, of course, essential for the United Kingdom.

The Prime Minister knows that we all support him in that effort, but may I take him back to President Trump’s reliability? Four British women have accused Andrew Tate of rape and human trafficking. British police have issued arrest warrants. The Tates have tried to escape justice, first to Romania and now to the United States. I am delighted that Florida has, thankfully, opened a criminal investigation. Does the Prime Minister agree that people who are wanted by British police for such appalling crimes should stand trial in our country? Given his assessment that President Trump really is a reliable ally, will his Government request an urgent extradition of the Tate brothers?

This is a live issue, as the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate, and therefore I will tread carefully. The principle is absolutely clear: justice must be done in all cases, including in this case. But I will not go into the details because this is a live case, as he knows.

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this familiar topic. We inherited a SEND system that failed to meet the needs of children and families. That is why we are investing £1 billion in SEND, alongside £740 million for councils to improve inclusivity and expertise in mainstream schools and to ensure that special schools can cater for children with the most complex needs. We are working closely with partners in Devon to deliver an accelerated progress plan and we have deployed SEND advisers to offer support to the local authority.

By cosying up to Putin, Trump is making Europe less safe. We all recognise the need for Europe to adapt. Germany is changing its fiscal rules to boost investment in defence and infrastructure and creating a €500 billion fund to strengthen its future. Will the Prime Minister please consider a similar approach, focusing on strategic investment rather than imposing further hardship on the poorest through cuts to welfare and international aid?

As the right hon. Lady knows, it is important that, if we are to increase defence spending as we are, and to have that fully costed and fully funded, we need to put that plan before the House, which is what I did last week. She talks about fiscal rules and funding, but I have to say that it was highly regrettable that Plaid Cymru voted against £1.6 billion to fund public services in Wales. She needs to explain how that helps her constituents and the people of Wales.

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this really important issue. All children and young people must be treated fairly, and there is no place for hate or prejudice in our education system. I will ensure that she gets a meeting with the relevant Minister to discuss this further.

On the question of assets, we are using the interest on the assets to help fund Ukraine and we are looking, with others, at whether it is possible to go further. Obviously, I will update the House if that is possible. But I have to say that, at a time when defence and security in Europe and the UK must be ramped up for all the reasons that the hon. Gentleman readily understands, the SNP maintaining its position of wanting to get rid of the single most effective deterrent that we have—the nuclear deterrent—really has to be explained in its historical context.

Labour promised free breakfast clubs in every primary school, and the first 750 will open in April, giving every child the best start in life through our plan for change. It will also put up to £450 a year back in the pockets of working families. I am delighted to say that two of the breakfast clubs will be opening in the constituency of the Leader of the Opposition in April, and I hope she will welcome them when they do.

I thank the hon. Member for raising this issue, because it is a duty to increase our spending on defence and security, but it also provides an opportunity for jobs across the country—good jobs, well-paid jobs, skilled jobs, as he rightly identifies, and jobs with a real sense of pride, and we are working on that.

I am sure that I speak for the whole House when I say that I am very sorry to hear what happened to my hon. Friend’s grandfather. These are just awful cases, and the deaths are terrible. I have no doubt that he was a wonderful man, and he would have been very proud to have seen her in her place today. I will ensure that she gets a meeting with the relevant Minister.

I do not doubt the aspirations of all parents for their children. What we have been able to do is ensure that we release the funding to ensure that our state secondary schools have the teachers they need. There is no point the Conservatives pretending that they are interested in state education when they left them without the teachers they needed.

That is a lie!

Order. I presume something was said that should not have been said. I am sure the Member would like to withdraw what was said, if they have anything about them.

Withdrawn.

Forty-eight children that we know of have been killed by known domestically abusive parents during court-permitted contact visits, including Paul and Jack Sykes, who were tragically murdered at the hands of their father in a house fire. Their mother, and my constituent, Claire Throssell has campaigned against the presumption of contact, which allows such abusers to have unsupervised contact with their children. Will the Prime Minister meet Claire and me to discuss the urgent need to remove the presumption of contact in law?

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, and to my hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley (Josh Fenton-Glynn), who have both raised this critical issue. I particularly pay tribute to Claire. Her courage and strength are outstanding. Family courts must never be a tool that domestic abusers can use to continue their appalling abuse. We are expanding a number of Pathfinder courts to protect the welfare of children and are reviewing the presumption of involvement that she raises.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that—I know that he speaks for the whole House. We remember the role that we have played historically with our allies, and we remember in particular those who made the ultimate sacrifice in that duty for their country and for our allies. That is why it is so important that we make that point today.

Meur ras ha gool Peran lowen—happy St Piran’s day—to the hundreds of thousands of people in Cornwall and around the world who are celebrating it today. Will the Prime Minister confirm our Government’s commitment to national minority status for Cornwall, and will he join me in wishing Cornish folk the world over a very happy St Piran’s day?

Yes, let me wish my hon. Friend, his constituents and everyone in Cornwall a very happy St Piran’s day. We do recognise Cornish national minority status—not just the proud language, history and culture of Cornwall, but its bright future. I know that he and Cornish colleagues will continue to be powerful voices for Cornwall.

On the coroner’s ruling, I have not seen the details, I am afraid, so I cannot comment. On the broader point, it is right that we should protect those who serve our country, wherever they serve our country—getting the balance right is critical. I did not think that the legislation put forward by the Conservative Government achieved that, but I believe none the less that, in the interests of everybody in Northern Ireland, of all those who served and all those who are victims, we need to renew our efforts to find a way forward on this important issue.

My constituents in Hastings, Rye and the villages are fed up with the constant failures of Southern Water: dumping sewage in our sea, flooding, and leaving us without water for days—all while taking huge bonuses. We on the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee have been hauling in the water bosses one by one and hearing about their failures. The boss of Southern Water finally agreed to give my constituents millions in compensation for a major water outage. Will the Prime Minister tell me how the Labour Government are cracking down on the bad behaviour of the water industry?

I applaud my hon. Friend for her dedicated work on the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee and in her constituency. Last week, our Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 became law. It gives new powers to ban the payment of bonuses for polluting water bosses and bring criminal charges against lawbreakers. We are determined to fix our broken water system after years of companies pumping sewage into our waterways and infrastructure not keeping pace with demand.

We put a record amount into farming in the Budget—£5 billion. We have set out our road map for farming, which has been welcomed by the National Farmers Union. As the right hon. Lady knows, the vast majority of farms will not be affected by the provisions that we are putting in place.

For months, my constituents in Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme have been telling me how fed up they are with not being able to get an appointment because of the 8 am scramble. The last thing they need when they are ill is to have to pick up the phone and wait, and fight again to be first. It is great news that the Government’s new GP contract will start to resolve that, but can the Prime Minister reassure my constituents who cannot use technology that they will still be able to book an appointment?

Last week, for the first time in four years, the British Medical Association agreed the GP contract with the Government, worth an extra £889 million. Patients will be able to request appointments online from October, but I absolutely reassure my hon. Friend and others that that will free up the phones for those who need them most, and help end the 8 am scramble.

I think all should, and all do, make a contribution at this vital time.

These are delicate moments for the country, and the Prime Minister has led with British values, moral courage and decency, as a true statesman, and with skilled and careful diplomacy. All elected politicians in this House must appreciate that everything we say could impact that diplomacy, so does the Prime Minister agree that a united House could help us to achieve a lasting peace?

Let me broaden out my hon. Friend’s words to the whole House, because it is hugely to the credit of this House that it is speaking loudly, in a united way and with one voice in the face of Russian aggression. That is why we must have lasting peace based on the sovereignty and security of Ukraine, but it certainly helps all those observing across the world to see this House speaking powerfully and with one voice, united across these Benches. I am pleased that we are able to continue in that way.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that issue. I recognise the huge and historic importance of the fishing industry in his constituency, and others, and I am determined to make the sector more secure, sustainable and economically successful. We have already secured over 720,000 tonnes of fishing quota for the year, worth up to £920 million, including through agreements with the EU and Norway. We also want to tackle the problems of labour shortages, which he will be familiar with. I am pleased that his constituents in Peterhead will benefit from £20 million under our plan for neighbourhoods, and we will do everything we can in relation to that issue.

Medway Maritime hospital in my constituency of Gillingham and Rainham has today received a concerning Care Quality Commission report, following an inspection of the emergency department in February last year. Testimonies include patients having to wait up to 50 hours to be seen, and others being told to soil themselves because staff were not available to take them to the bathroom. Will the Prime Minister please outline what this Government will do urgently to tackle the crisis in our NHS, after 14 years of Tory mismanagement?

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this case. Her constituents deserve the highest standard of care. The Conservatives left the NHS in dire straits. We are investing £26 billion and our reform plan will cut waiting lists. I am really pleased to say that waiting lists are down and we have delivered over 2 million extra appointments to get the NHS back on its feet.

Marriage between first cousins carries significant health issues for their children, many of which are not knowable until post-birth. When practised generation after generation, there is a significant multiplier effect. In addition, the real impacts on the openness of our society and women’s rights in our country are significant. After all, there are significant dynamics in sharing the same set of grandparents. On Friday, this Government have the choice to let my Bill to ban first cousin marriage go through to Committee stage. Will the Prime Minister think again before instructing his Whips to block this legislation?

Mr Speaker, we have taken our position on that Bill.