PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Topical Questions - 23 October 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

This is my first appearance at the Dispatch Box as Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister. In this role, I have been tasked with modernising the state to build a system that will better deliver the public’s priorities and better communicate the changes we are making across the country. Sadly, too many political parties today wish to tear down our institutions and the public services we all rely on as the solution to the public’s frustration with a legacy system that struggles to deliver change, but there is an alternative. This Government are committed to renewal and delivering on the promise of change. We will build a modern state and better public services that are there when people need them. We will lead the way to a Britain renewed.

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will just answer the question from the official Opposition that I could not answer in substantive questions about when I was informed of the Crown Prosecution Service decision to not proceed with the case. I was informed of this decision after the Prime Minister. I should also inform the House that I look forward to answering more questions before the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy on Wednesday next week.

Transforming Britain’s public services will be a mammoth task, but while the white heat of artificial intelligence and digital technology offer a revolutionary opportunity to improve performance and value for money in healthcare, tax services and everything in between, will the Government seize this opportunity to modernise our public services, working with the brightest and best industries across Britain?

The answer is absolutely yes. All our constituents know from their experiences at home, whether they are trying to do their banking, do their shopping or book a holiday, that they have the power to do it, when they want to do it, how they want to do it, on their phone, with services delivered in the way they want. That is in complete contrast to a number of our public services, and the public rightly expect, when they are paying tax money for public services, that we catch up with the private sector and deliver better public services that work in the way they want.

I call the shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

I thank the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster for giving us a degree more clarity. Perhaps he will give us a degree more clarity again. Was he told that the alleged case of spying against Members of Parliament was due to collapse before the information became public and, if so, who told him?

I was not informed.

I believe the right hon. Gentleman, but I find that answer extraordinary, and I think he should find it extraordinary, too. As we have already said, the right hon. Gentleman chairs the National Security Council. He oversees the Cabinet Office’s national security secretariat. The Prime Minister knew, the Home Secretary knew, the Cabinet Secretary knew, the chief of MI5 knew, the Attorney General’s Office knew, but the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister did not. Has he asked why he was not told, and what answer was he given?

The hon. Member seems to be confused by his list of institutions. The only relevant institution in this case is the Crown Prosecution Service. It is the CPS that independently decides whether to bring forward these cases, and it was the independent decision of the Crown Prosecution Service not to proceed. Might I just point out that the Opposition’s arguments over the last few weeks have been quite bemusing? They started with an accusation that there was political interference in a Crown Prosecution Service case. That was proven not to be the case, so they changed their argument and are now asking, “Why did you not politically interfere, because that is the way we do things in this country?”

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for her question. We absolutely recognise the impact that the loss of communication services can have on constituencies like hers. The Cabinet Office is responsible for the co-ordination of resilience and crisis management across Government, and I have seen at first hand the diligence and professionalism of crisis teams in Cobra. I would be more than happy to discuss this matter with my hon. Friend further, and to represent her concerns to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology.

We are on topicals, folks.

The Government take seriously the risk of climate change and the risk it poses to national security. That is why we are taking action to mitigate that risk and to reduce our carbon emissions. As the hon. Lady will know, we publish the outcomes of routine assessments done by the Government in relation to the national risk register on gov.uk, and that will continue to be the case.

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the work that he does in co-chairing the crypto and digital assets all-party parliamentary group. Financial services are integral to our mission for economic growth, and we are absolutely committed to creating the right conditions for a vibrant, competitive and innovative financial services sector. That is why the Government are proceeding with proposals to create a new financial services regulatory regime for cryptoassets.

The Government agree with the principle of the hon. Member’s question. As I said to the House earlier, we want to reduce the layers of bureaucracy and to be able to deliver more action and fewer words. That is why we are taking action to close arm’s length bodies and other institutions. Most significantly, we have announced that we will close NHS England and bring decisions back into the Department for Health and Social Care for Ministers to make.

My hon. Friend is a powerful advocate for infected blood victims, and he can rest assured that I will continue to drive progress as quickly as I possibly can. That is how we have got to the stage where over £1.8 billion-worth of offers have been made, and I will continue to drive that progress quickly.

We are going even further than that, because the Government are looking to negotiate a youth experience scheme with the European Union. It will of course be capped, but it will give significant opportunities not just for young Brits to travel, work and study abroad, but to welcome young Europeans here.

I thank my hon. Friend for again raising this issue. Any scheme would give young Brits, including her young constituents in Aylesbury, the opportunity to travel and experience other countries’ cultures, as well as to work and study abroad. Of course, the exact parameters will be subject to discussion, and negotiations are under way, but we certainly hope to stand up these opportunities for young Brits as soon as possible.

I welcome the Paymaster General’s remarks on the acceleration of the delivery of payments in relation to infected blood. It is very welcome for one of my constituents who has had it. I also welcome his response to the additional report by Sir Brian Langstaff in July. Given that, can he update the House on the lifetime of the public inquiry and any conversations he has had about ending the inquiry, which seems to be going on rather a long time given that the legislation was passed in May last year?

I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman, and I again pay tribute to him for his hugely important work in this area when he was the Paymaster General. On the public inquiry and the recent report, I hope to update the House in due course—subject, of course, to your permission, Mr Speaker—about action on the recommendations. On the public inquiry remaining open, that is of course a matter for the chair, Sir Brian Langstaff.

My hon. Friend is a powerful advocate for her constituents, and the common understanding will of course benefit the businesses she mentions. Our deals on emissions, energy trading, food and agricultural trade will all reduce costs for businesses. Astonishingly, the Conservatives and the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) want to reverse that and reimpose those costs on businesses.

Given that the Cabinet Office advises the Government on establishing public inquiries, will the Minister meet the families of the senior military and intelligence personnel who were killed when an RAF Chinook helicopter crashed on the Mull of Kintyre in 1994? The families have gathered compelling evidence suggesting that the Ministry of Defence was aware that the Mk 2 Chinook in which they were travelling was not airworthy. They are petitioning the Government to establish an independent, judge-led public inquiry. Will the Minister meet the families or at least advise a relevant Cabinet colleague so to do?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, who raises a very serious case. If he were able to write to me directly about it, I will certainly look at what would be the most suitable ministerial meeting.

In our public services, almost everywhere we look, outdated digital and data systems trap us in the past. We are laser focused on reforming the state. Central to that is a free, universal digital ID that will bring the state to all citizens and improve access to public services. A national digital identity system is a public good that is long overdue and this Government will deliver it.

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has just come to the Dispatch Box and said that we have done a new trade deal with the European Union, which I think is news to both the Prime Minister and Brussels. The only thing this Government have done so far in terms of EU relations is to sell out our fishing industry for the next 12 years. With that in mind, will the Minister actually stand up for British interests in future negotiations with Brussels?

I stand up for British interests in every negotiation with Brussels. I will tell the hon. Gentleman what is not standing up for British interests. We negotiated, within 10 months of coming into government, the new common understanding that will be good for jobs, bear down on bills and give us the tools to secure our borders. The leader of the Conservative party opposed it before even reading it.

I have been thinking about the cost of software licensing in the public sector, because North West Anglia NHS foundation trust is trying to move to an electronic patient record and one of the biggest ongoing costs of that is third-party payments for software. Other trusts are in the same position, as are many schools paying for pupil management software. Will the procurement Minister commit to looking into whether we can instead deliver some of that in-house and save significant sums?

Cases of the kind my hon. Friend is talking about are the reason we have been consulting on a public interest test. On the specific case he raises, if he writes to me I will ensure that the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven (Chris Ward) provides him with a response.

My constituent Phil is in the special category mechanism for the 916 people who were inexplicably excluded from the infected blood compensation scheme in February, even though the Government’s expert group said in August last year that they should be compensated. On 5 June, the Paymaster General said he would consider the compensation arrangements. I may have missed it—forgive me if I have—but I also asked for a list of conditions that might be included within that. Does he have an update for me, please?

I am certainly looking at the issue of the special category mechanism, as I undertook to do. If the hon. Lady writes to me I can look at the specific list, but I am also hoping, with Mr Speaker’s permission, to update the House on this and other infected blood issues very shortly.

Residents in a housing development in my constituency are facing a number of issues after yet another developer has gone bust. Parts of the shared communal land have reverted back to the ownership of the Duchy of Cornwall, rather than to the residents themselves, who have to purchase the land back and cover the duchy’s legal costs. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, quite rightly, has Cabinet oversight, but who does the Duchy of Cornwall answer to and what recourse do my constituents now have in this case?

If the hon. Member writes to me with his constituency case, I will make sure that the Duchy of Cornwall looks at it in due course.

Eastbourne is benefiting from some coastal defence scheme funding, the flood defence grant-in-aid, but it leaves heritage assets behind. Only residents and businesses currently qualify, which is leaving Eastbourne’s historic bandstand at risk of severe flooding. Will the Minister meet me and colleagues across the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to review the loophole that leaves our bandstand behind?

I recognise the problem. The decision was to use the budget available to protect people’s homes and that has left other buildings at comparable risk. The relevant DEFRA Minister is working with DCMS on this issue. I will ensure that a conversation can take place.

On the infected blood compensation scheme in Northern Ireland, as of 21 February, 149 people had started the process, with 38 offers made totalling some £48 million. What assessment has been made of the time taken from when an application is made to when a payment actually arrives through the door?

The Infected Blood Compensation Authority is operationally independent, but I am accountable to this House. It is important that I have regular conversations and provide challenge on the kind of timescales the hon. Gentleman is talking about. The infected blood scandal predates modern-day devolution and he can rest assured that all four corners of the United Kingdom are at the forefront of my mind in respect of the speed of delivery.

The Minister was earlier asked about the ever-growing size of the civil service and the Cabinet Office under this Government and whether we would see those numbers coming down, not going up, next year. Instead of answering the question about the future, they talked about the past. Let me ask the question again, but from a different angle: when are this Government going to take ownership of the fact that they are in government now, and these are their problems that they need to resolve?

I am very happy to take ownership of the fact that we are in government, and very happy to confirm that the Conservatives are in opposition.