PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Business of the House - 4 December 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)
Debate Detail
Monday 8 December—Consideration of Lords message to the Employment Rights Bill, followed by consideration of Lords message to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, followed by consideration of Lords message to the Mental Health Bill [Lords].
Tuesday 9 December—Second Reading of the Railways Bill.
Wednesday 10 December—Opposition day (14th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition. Subject to be announced.
Thursday 11 December—General debate on St Andrew’s day and Scottish affairs, followed by general debate on the impact of foreign interference on security, trade and democracy. The subjects of these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
Friday 12 December—The House will not be sitting.
The provisional business for the week commencing 15 December will include:
Monday 15 December—Second Reading of the Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill.
Tuesday 16 December—Second Reading of the Finance (No. 2) Bill.
Wednesday 17 December—Second Reading of the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill.
Thursday 18 December—General debate on matters to be raised before the Christmas Adjournment. The subject of this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
The House will rise for the Christmas recess at the conclusion of business on Thursday 18 December 2025 and return on Monday 5 January 2026.
A couple of weeks ago, I invited the House to join me in supporting our cricketers down under. That was the kiss of death: they instantly lost the first test. So I am now thrilled, and I hope the House will join me in congratulating Joe Root on his majestic hundred in Australia in the present test.
Once again, the past seven days have not been a thing of glory for the Government. Not a single measure in the Budget has been scored by the Office for Budget Responsibility as positive for growth, while the OECD and a host of other experts have warned that the Chancellor’s tax rises last week will actually hold growth back. Except for seven Members, every Labour Member voted in favour of keeping the two-child benefit cap in 2024; last week, they voted in exactly the opposite way. Junior doctors will go on strike for the third time this year in the run-up to Christmas. In fairness, though, I should say that there has been one chink of light: the Government have rightly dropped day one protections in the Employment Rights Bill.
Yesterday, we were treated to the inglorious sight of the Prime Minister misusing the engagements question once again to make a party political broadcast at Prime Minister’s questions. We do not have a presidential system in this country, thank the Lord, nor do we insist on a rigid uniformity of practice in this House, but if the Prime Minister wishes to make a statement to Parliament, he may do so in the usual way, giving notice to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, or to the Speaker, and taking questions from colleagues in this House on the policy. I therefore ask the Leader of the House, as our spokesman in the Cabinet, to tell the House what he will do to prevent this practice from recurring. I am also asking Mr Speaker to make it clear in public that this will not be tolerated by the Chair in future.
It was reported this week that the Government will be drawing on German start-up companies to fill a supposed drone gap for the British Army. I am sure the whole House will share my view that the UK should seek to offer a welcoming environment for foreign investment, and all the more so after a Budget that has done nothing to support economic growth. I also recognise the value of having leading international companies competitively involved in the testing and development of drones. However, it is a serious concern that there appear to be no plans within the Ministry of Defence to provide strategic leadership, investment and support to start-up drone companies created, led and managed in this country and by British nationals. We have been promised a defence investment plan, but Ministers have been unable to say when this plan will be presented to the House. It looks as though they may be leaving it to the last full week of term, perhaps to avoid a proper measure of parliamentary scrutiny. Experience has repeatedly shown that, in times of crisis, the nation needs to have core capabilities solidly based in UK-owned and led domestic manufacturing. That was one of the lessons of the pandemic. It is hard to imagine a more significant emerging defence need than that of high-quality, high-technology and cost-effective drones. There are superb companies in this country ready to scale, as needed.
Last June, the Prime Minister called for what he termed a “national conversation” on defence. He made it clear, rightly, that the defence of the realm was not just a matter for the Ministry of Defence; the whole of our society, as well as the whole of Government, needed to be mobilised into a better understanding of the threat. Since then, that threat has become only more serious. I am delighted that the Prime Minister is in Lossiemouth today to make an announcement, but the sad fact is that he has said precisely nothing to lead that wider national conversation or raise awareness of the threat. Meanwhile, the public are uncertain on the need and rationale for new spending, and key aspects of our defence and security readiness are, if anything, getting worse. May we, at the very least, have a statement next week on what the Government are planning to do to support the UK drones industry in filling that important strategic need?
Let me also congratulate one of our senior Doorkeepers, Paul Barwell, on his outstanding 20 years’ service to this House. I know all Members value the excellent support of the Doorkeepers, and I am sure the whole House joins me in thanking Paul for his commitment and service.
I join the shadow Leader of the House in sending congratulations to Joe Root on his inaugural test century in Australia. I also send—I hope on behalf of the whole House—our condolences to the friends and family of the legendary Robin Smith, who unfortunately died recently.
This House is embracing the Christmas spirit. We have seen the arrival of Christmas trees. I note that at least one came from Kielder forest in Northumberland; as a north-east MP, I am very proud and very grateful for that.
On wider matters this week, on World AIDS Day, the HIV action plan was published. It commits to one of the most ambitious public health goals of our time: ending new HIV transmissions in England by 2030. We will tackle the barriers to accessing treatment, such as stigma, discrimination and inequality, backed by the first ever national investment in engagement initiatives.
I hope that this weekend Members across the House will be supporting the UK’s 5.5 million small businesses on this year’s Small Business Saturday. Small businesses are the backbone of the UK economy. They provide essential services, create jobs and drive growth. The Government are determined to make the UK the best place to start and grow a business, fostering a culture for risk-takers in every community and high street by removing the barriers that had held them back too long. The festive season is a critical time for many small businesses and I hope they are set for a bumper Christmas.
To keep communities safe over the busy Christmas period, we announced a further crackdown on town centre crime. Police and local partners will work together to tackle shop theft and street crime across hundreds of our town centres. We also want people to stay well this winter. One of the ways we will be doing that is by rolling out online access to nearly every GP practice, benefiting patients across England. We promised to end the 8 am scramble. This is a massive step towards that ambition, making it easier and faster to get GP appointments.
Let me now turn to the questions from the shadow Leader of the House. He mentioned growth in the economy and the Budget. Of course, central to the Budget was our ambition to get growth moving. I gently point out that growth has been moving in the right direction and that we are the second-best performer in that regard in the G7.
On the start of Prime Minister’s questions, Mr Speaker has already made very clear his views on this subject. I, too, make it clear in Cabinet, on matters around statements and questions, that it is important that when Ministers come to this place, they are held to account and that they do so within the conventions of this House. As I have said before, in some senses Ministers, including the Prime Minister, cannot really win on this one, because if they do take time to update the House on something important, they are sometimes told, “That was not the right time to do it,” but if they do not tell the House about important events that are going on, they are criticised for that too. I do think there needs to be some balance.
With regard to the defence matters that the shadow Leader of the House raised, it is very important that we see investment in drone companies; indeed, there is a very successful and expanding drone company in my constituency. I will draw his concerns to the attention of Defence Ministers. I do not agree with the slant that he put on the Government’s approach to these matters. We take national security very seriously. The Prime Minister takes national security very seriously. He is aware of the current and growing threats, and is determined that our country be ready to step up and meet those threats. I will draw the concerns of the shadow Leader of the House to the attention of Defence Ministers and see whether we can get a statement at the earliest opportunity.
Earlier this week, the Government announced a trade deal between the US and the UK on drug prices and medicines. Having reportedly rejected a price increase of £2.5 billion earlier this summer, the Government’s negotiators went back to the table and will apparently now pay £3 billion more instead. There is a live debate over how much the NHS should pay for drugs, which I respect. Big pharma has always wanted to drive up prices and has clearly not liked the purchasing power of the NHS, but the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence thresholds have not changed for some time, and there are some who argue that that means we are missing out on particular medicines. Others make the alternative argument that the opportunity cost of that spending in other areas of healthcare means that the thresholds should stay where they are.
Wherever we stand on that debate, two things are clear. First, this considered debate should not be settled by the bully-boy tactics of President Trump. He introduced 100% tariffs, breaking the World Trade Organisation rules on tariffs over this, and has come out with the explicit intention of putting Americans first. Secondly, the Government should explain how this huge price increase will be paid for. Daniel Elkeles, the chief executive of NHS Providers, says that
“it is not yet clear how it will be paid for”,
and there are fears among GPs, dentists and community pharmacists that they will be the ones who will suffer as a result of the increase in prices. Will the Leader of the House urge a Health Minister to come to the Dispatch Box to answer questions about the impact of this new deal?
The hon. Gentleman raises an important matter, but the reality is that, due to the strength of our relationship with the United States, we have secured the first and best deal on pharmaceutical products—indeed, it is the lowest rate offered to any country. This deal is a win for patients and for our life sciences sector, and that is an important part of our plan for growth. Better access to innovative medicines is critical to keeping people healthy and treating illness more effectively. We are protecting the NHS and its frontline staff with record investment and reforms to deliver better care. That also means making sure that we have the best deal in place on pharmaceuticals.
Turning to my own question, last Saturday I visited Humberside airport with the shadow Transport Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden), where management outlined the challenges faced not just by them but by regional airports up and down the country. They are facing increased national insurance costs, and in the case of Humberside, they face the potential loss of business from Eastern Airways, which is in administration. If work in the North sea—on the rigs and so on—declines, they will face the loss of the helicopter transfers that they rely on. Will the Leader of the House provide Government time for a debate on the role of regional airports?
On the constituency matter the hon. Gentleman raises, the Government recognise the importance of regional airports for the communities they serve and the local economy. He outlines the challenge to Humberside airport. We do recognise the potential impact of the Eastern Airways issue on employees and the airport itself, so I thank him for raising the matter. I will raise his concerns with Ministers, and should he seek a meeting to see what can be done to help in that situation, I will arrange that.
“I have proportionate respect for the work of the other place”.—[Official Report, 5 November 2025; Vol. 774, c. 978.]
However, this House and the public—especially young, lower-paid and insecure workers—expect a popularly elected Government’s manifesto commitments not to be held up, compromised or rejected by the other place. Will the Leader of the House therefore schedule an urgent debate, in Government time and in this, the elected Chamber, on whether we should now abolish the House of Lords?
Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.