Sammy Wilson
MP for East Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · United Kingdom
“If we are going to have economic growth, we must address the issue of the overall burden of taxation, but that has been studiously avoided in this Budget. I am thinking of the farming industry in Northern Ireland.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The advantage of this House is that the Chancellor has brought forward a Budget, albeit one that is inadequate. In Northern Ireland, we are seven months into the financial year and the Sinn Féin Finance Minister has still not brought forward a budget for Departments in Northern Ireland, leaving people in the dark as to what money is avail…”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We may be improving in relation to other countries in the G7, but the fact of the matter is that we still have a level of debt that, as the Chancellor has said, is absorbing more and more of our tax revenue to pay—and that is to pay only the interest. We are borrowing more and we are adding to the debt.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The last big issue is the welfare bill, which has been well aired in the debate today, and how it is increasing day on day. As the Chancellor said, the increase in the welfare bill and the way we do welfare is condemning a whole generation to no work—to not working, being on benefits and being reliant on benefits—and it is taxpayers who a…”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the fact that some pensioners at least will not be dragged into paying tax. I also welcome the support for people with their energy bills—although, as for other Members representing rural areas, 60% of people in Northern Ireland will not be impacted by it.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Of course, any of the big diesel and petrol users would have benefited from greater support from the Government. On the big challenges that the Government are facing, and which they admit they are facing, there has been very little in this Budget.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
4,514 held · 4,513 searchable for Sammy Wilson. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“On top of that are the regulatory costs, which, again, the impact assessment says will be passed on to the operators anyhow. That is before any mitigation measures; those are just the administrative costs. What will the total cost of this be? Those costs are bound to have an impact in many ways. The one thing Members can be sure of is that they will be passed on in higher freight rates, including in the freight rates between Northern Ireland and GB. Some may argue, “Well, that simply means that Northern Ireland producers will look elsewhere.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They cannot opt for the electrification of ships; first of all, it is quite expensive, and secondly, the port infrastructure facilities are not even available. It is also significant that there is no support package either. There was no talk anywhere in the Minister’s comments of the revenues raised being used to help the transition to different ways of transporting goods. The administrative costs that will be imposed through this order have already been mentioned by the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine. The assessment gives us a range of between £103 million and £287 million. I think that shows that it is just a guess, and it indicates that the Government do not have a clue what the administrative costs will be. That is only the direct administrative costs for the operators, by the way.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The order’s impact on emissions will not be all that great anyway. It is not as if the measure will be an incentive for operators to change their behaviour, as they cannot: there are no alternatives other than sea transport. Therefore, whatever additional costs are imposed will have to be borne by consumers. I know the Minister talked about the reduction in emissions and working towards net zero and everything else. Given the nature of sea transport and its importance for transport between Northern Ireland and GB, as well as the lack of alternatives, this policy cannot lead to transport providers changing how they behave. They cannot go for alternative fuels; near-net zero fuels would simply price them out of the market because they are four to five times dearer than the fuels they use.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The impact of the measure will have a disproportionate cost, especially in Northern Ireland, which relies on sea transport for the import of goods from GB, and for the export of goods from Northern Ireland to GB. Although the order is regarded as a domestic measure, it nevertheless affects an important part of our economic infrastructure, all to deal with an issue that results in about 1% of the UK’s total emissions. The order does not deal with a huge amount of carbon emissions, but it will have a disproportionate cost for Northern Ireland. That is on top of the costs that Northern Ireland already experiences as a result of the protocol and the Windsor framework, which has already added significantly to the cost of bringing goods in from GB and taking goods from Northern Ireland to GB.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the statement. It is a pity that it does not include hotels and restaurants, because the hospitality sector in Northern Ireland is under massive pressure due to taxes and the regulations that have been imposed. The Minister has confirmed that this will be new money and therefore there will be a Barnett consequential. Can he indicate how much that will be? More importantly, can he ensure that the Sinn Féin Finance Minister spends the money for the purpose that was intended, rather than spending it for other purposes, which he has done in the past?”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Unusually, the Minister has resorted to bluster today, accusing those of us who are opposed to the treaty of being “irresponsible” and “toying with” the security of the country. Does he not accept that it is the Government who are toying with the security of this country by ignoring the views of the Americans who use the Diego Garcia base, the fears of the Chagossians and the drain on public finances? Are the Government not using their majority and their Members as pawns to push through a deal that they know is wrong, unfair and dangerous for the country?”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Despite the fact that the plan will not apply to Northern Ireland, I welcome the aspect that applies to rented accommodation. Could the Secretary of State confirm whether there will be a Barnett consequential for Northern Ireland? Does he recognise that, even with this plan, there will still be an up-front cost, so low-income families will have to borrow, which will be an impediment? Does he also recognise that despite what he has done on electricity prices, running costs will still be higher, because that is offset by the cost of his net zero policies, which cause electricity to be dearer than gas?”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The figures given by the Secretary of State bear out the right hon. Gentleman’s argument. Of the 200 additional civil cases, 120 are directed towards the Ministry of Defence. Does that not bear out his point that this will be a one-sided outcome and a one-sided operation?”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is not about the rule of law. This is about the terrorist organisations seeking to rewrite the history of the troubles on an industrial scale, using the fact that the Army and the forces of law and order in Northern Ireland have all the records, and they have none. This is therefore a one-sided operation.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is not about the rule of law in Northern Ireland; this is about the abuse of the law by those who cannot accept that they lost in their terrorist campaign, who want to rewrite the history of that terrorist campaign, and who want to put the blame on the forces of law and order who stood between the citizens and the murderers and the criminals.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Veterans will have heard the honeyed words of the Secretary of State at the start of his speech today, when he talked about the debt of gratitude we owe to those who served in Northern Ireland in very difficult circumstances. Yet this order is all about removing protections that would have been available to those very veterans against what is a continued terrorist campaign conducted not through guns, not through bombs and not through killings, but through the courts. I have heard many people on the Government Benches say, “Oh, we’ve got to uphold the rule of law.” That is totally naive.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It will present the chance to rewrite history, and it will lead to huge costs in compensation claims. As has been said, it will also be a warning to people who we call to serve this country in future that this tactic might be used against them. That is why this is bad. The Secretary of State knows that he did not need to bring this measure forward. My right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson), in his excellent speech, laid out the reasons why that is the case, so I will not go through them. Why is the Secretary of State going through with this? He knows the results, so why does he pursue it? I can only assume that he puts the adherence to the ECHR above the interests of veterans and victims, and that is a disgrace.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State told us today that, as a result of this measure, 200 new civil cases will be opened, 120 of them against the MOD. The statistics have shown quite clearly that most of the murders were carried out by paramilitaries, yet most of the civil cases will be taken against the MOD. That is because there is a deliberate campaign to rewrite history. The vast majority of people who take forward these cases want to ensure that they get a case into court, drag out all the information that is available—held by the state—and get a result that paints the picture that the IRA and the terrorists were the wronged parties. If anything, this does not give comfort to victims but only rubs salt in their wounds. That is why this remedial order is wrong.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No, it has nothing to do with justice. Although the Secretary of State and others today have argued that this is all about helping victims, innocent victims will not get any justice through this system, because it comes down to who holds the records. When cases go to the courts, there will be no documentation to bring from IRA campaigns and activities. Members should read the book written by Austin Stack, whose father was a prison officer in Portlaoise and who sought for 20 years to get justice. One line of the book that stands out is when Gerry Adams eventually took him to meet some of the IRA commanders, and in the car on the way there he said, “Don’t expect too much, because we don’t keep records.” That is the problem. The state kept records, but the IRA and the terrorists did not keep records, so the cases are going to be one-sided.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The difference between those figures is significant to our constituents.”
House of Commons20 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The second argument we heard is that the base was under threat and we therefore had to make changes. I noticed what the hon. Member for South East Cornwall (Anna Gelderd) said about the marine protected area and the environmental requirements on the Mauritian Government, but there is no legal requirement in this treaty for the Mauritian Government to protect the marine protected area. Indeed, they have made it quite clear that fishing will be allowed in the marine protected area. What is the danger there? It is of course that Chinese ships can come into the area, and we know that in the South China sea, the Chinese have used commercial ships as their eyes and ears, so the base is under threat as a result of this change.”
House of Commons20 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is a sad day for the United Kingdom. The Government have not been prepared to stand up for the interests of the United Kingdom. Indeed, they seem to be willing to surrender when any challenge is made to its interests. Let us look at some of the arguments that the Minister has made against the amendments. First, the Minister said that nothing has changed since the Bill was originally brought to the House, but of course we have seen that the American attitude has changed. The United Nations says that we are not giving the protections to the people we should be giving them to—in fact, we are more interested in the rights of the Danes who live in Greenland than the Chagossian population. The UN has actually said that we should stay this. So there have been changes, and the changes have been substantial.”
House of Commons20 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is not just a question of ensuring that the 24-nautical-mile exclusion zone prevents spying and everything else; the area would still be left environmentally damaged, and there would still be a threat to the military base. Thirdly, the Government have refused even to consider the Lords amendment about cost. At a time when we are looking for every penny, so that we can supply the citizens of this country with the services that they require, the Government are turning their nose up at an amendment that would ensure that if the base cannot be used, we will no longer pay for it. The Minister has talked about the cost. He has told us all the mechanisms by which the cost has been calculated, but he has not actually told us what the cost is. Is it £3 billion? Is it £10 billion? Is it £37 billion?”
House of Commons20 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is a bad deal for the United Kingdom, and we should be ashamed that the Government’s majority is being used to push the deal through when it is so clear that it is full of flaws and problems for our future.”
House of Commons20 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Most people listening to this debate, even if they do not know a great deal about the Chagos islands and the base, will understand that we have handed over the islands when there was no necessity to do so, only to use taxpayers’ money to lease them back. That is one of the scandals of the treaty. The Minister talked about building a relationship of trust with the Chagos islanders. What way is this to build trust? The Government have refused to give them a say on whether this treaty reflects their interests and deals with their concerns and the despicable way in which they have been treated in the past. The cost is wrong. The way in which we are treating the people who are affected by the treaty is wrong. The Government’s position on the long-term security of the base is wrong.”
House of Commons20 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Whether it is retail, hospitality or pubs, businesses right across the United Kingdom, especially small businesses, are failing. That is due in no small part to action by the Government—increased taxes, increased energy prices and increased regulation. Rates play a big part in that, too. Can the Minister assure us that if there is to be further additional money for support, it will be ringfenced and not given to the devolved Administration in Northern Ireland, where the Sinn Féin Minister has taken the money but spent it on something else?”
House of Commons19 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“People in Northern Ireland on a day-to-day basis know well how casually the democratic process can be set aside, not just by this Government but by the previous Government, who gave the EU permission to impose its laws on the people of Northern Ireland without any say at all. Now the people of England are beginning to experience that—3.7 million people, who would want to vote against the £280 million of additional taxes imposed on them by Labour councils, will now be denied the ability to have their say. Are the Government running scared of Reform, or do they simply not want to be held to account? Do they not realise that behaving like this turns the United Kingdom into some kind of third-world dictatorship?”
House of Commons19 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. We have had a catalogue of reasons why there need to be changes to the arrangements for government in Northern Ireland. We have had collapses, difficulty in getting a three-year budget, the fallout and the use of veto powers by the parties. The thing that strikes me is all these things have happened under different Administrations in Northern Ireland over the last 22 years. When the SDLP and the Ulster Unionists were in power, the Administration collapsed about five times—”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Well, it was collapsed by the parties that were in power at that stage, because they had the ability to keep it running—but they did not. It collapsed again when the distribution of seats changed. It collapsed for a number of reasons, but the important thing is that those arrangements were put in place to safeguard minorities. The Alliance party and the SDLP, which are now calling for reform, were the keenest to have that consensus requirement in the Belfast agreement.”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will give way in a moment. They are now proposing that consensus be removed and—here’s the thing—that we go to majority rule, albeit with a weighted majority of 66%. That is not reform; that is retreating to something that they condemned in the first place, and that they said required the arrangements in the Belfast agreement to be put in place.”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I find it rather odd that the hon. Member has talked about how dysfunctional the Assembly is but wants more powers for it. Either it is dysfunctional or it is not. If it is functional and she wants more powers for it, why do we need the changes? Let us look at the words that are used. “Reform” is one, and I have noticed that another phrase—“keyhole surgery”—has come in. Of course, these are all euphemisms for removing the very safeguards that were required when nationalists were in the minority. That is why they were put in place. Now the arithmetic in the Assembly has changed, and we find that those parties that believed there should be safeguards for minorities no longer require those safeguards and want to revert to a form of majority rule.”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Instead of thinking we could just drive it through, as the current Sinn Féin Minister is trying to do, we had hours and hours of negotiations, compromises and so on to get it through. That might be difficult, but that is no reason to remove the requirement for consensus and the safeguards for minorities. We now have a cabal in the Assembly of nationalists, republicans, the Alliance party and a bunch of individuals, who form a majority and would be able to drive things through if it came to a majority vote.”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If that is the case, the requirement for consensus rather than majority rule is even stronger, yet the proposed changes would remove those safeguards. The difficulty of getting the three-year budget through has been mentioned. I served in the Assembly for a number of years; I was Finance Minister in the Assembly for a number of years. In the first year after I took over, we had an immediate 3% cut to our budget, and then we had a 2% cut year on year, under the coalition Government that existed at that time. We got a three-year budget through, despite the fact that the two biggest spending Ministers were outside with the unions protesting against any cuts. How did we do that?”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think that is wrong, we will be opposing it, and there is certainly no logical, political or community reason why the changes that are being demanded should be made.”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Of course, and we have seen how divisive some of the decisions made in the Assembly have been, whether on cultural issues or economic issues, as the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) pointed out. Alarm bells should ring if we are considering removing the fabric that is there to ensure proper discussion before final decisions are made. I notice that there is not a great deal of interest in this debate from parties other than those from Northern Ireland—and selfish interest, as well. I do not care what has been said; this is selfish interest. In fact, we are now told that the Irish and British Governments should come together and try to force through the changes that the new majority cabal wish to impose on the Assembly.”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman asked why weighted majorities do not give the protection that the consensus requirement gives. There are two reasons. First, it depends at what level the weighted majority is set. Secondly, if the weighted majority were seen to be used in a way that prevented changes or things getting through, we would have exactly the same arguments about the weighted majority: that it should be reduced and reduced in order to free up any logjam. That is why consensus is much more important. It recognises that there are nationalists and Unionists, and that their interests have to be safeguarded.”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the fact that—rather belatedly, two weeks later—the Government have made a statement to the House about the situation in Iran, giving particular attention and praise to the women who have, at great personal sacrifice, led the opposition to the regime, which directs its ire at women in particular. This should stand as a warning to the people who wish to promote sharia law and sharia courts in this country. The Foreign Secretary has highlighted the impact of the Iranian regime on our citizens and our interests. What discussions has she had with the Iranian opposition, to ensure that there is a transition from this repugnant regime to a friendly, democratic and peaceful regime there?”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister is putting on a brave face because a manifesto commitment has been broken. People are going to pay more in income tax despite the promises that were made. Does he recognise that, for many people, this is not money to renew public services, but money squandered on giving compensation to foreign Governments for land that we owned—the Chagos islands—and are now paying for; money that will be spent on an ID system that is totally unnecessary and will not serve the purpose it is meant to; and money spent on net zero commitments that have destroyed our economy and added little in benefits to the public?”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the hon. Gentleman accept that regardless of whether we are talking about a small tax or a large tax, the Chancellor promised that there would be no tax on people who went out to work every day, and no increase in tax on pensioners? It is not really a question of degree; it is about whether the promise is being broken. Clearly, from what the Minister said tonight, the promise will be broken.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They then went on to define “working people” as people who go to work every day, yet we know that by freezing the thresholds, people who go to work every day and are therefore subject to income tax being charged on the money they earn will pay more. Working people know that a promise to them has been broken.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“One reason I support new clauses 3, 13 and 14 is that they at least give people an opportunity to realise what the Government are doing to them, and they show that politicians in this House want there to be honesty with the people. If there was not honesty when the manifesto was written and presented, let us ensure that there is honesty when the implications of the decisions that this Government are making become clear to the citizens of this country. These are confidence measures. Let us just remind ourselves of what the Government promised—we have been around this a number of times tonight. They promised that they would not increase taxes on working people.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, it will have personal consequences for many people facing the current cost of living crisis and finding it difficult to stretch their income to meet their needs. Lastly, the decision will have an impact on people’s confidence in the democratic system. The Government will get this Bill through tonight. They will get it through because they have a massive majority, and they have a massive majority because they made massive promises. They promised that people would not face income tax increases, and I have no doubt that that influenced how many working people voted. However, the Minister has accepted tonight that by the end of this period, £28 billion will have been raised.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Tonight’s debate is not just an opportunity for the Opposition to have a go at the Government. Many people who are getting cynical about politics will say, “Well, of course you would expect them to have a go about taxation and the Government’s behaviour on that issue.” However, this debate goes far beyond that, because the implications of what we are discussing tonight are very serious. First, there are the macroeconomic impacts of the decision not to make work pay, because of higher taxation. The Government have hung a lot of their predictions of economic success on obtaining economic growth, but one thing we will not do is tax our way to growth. This will be an anti-growth measure, which will have implications not just for this year but future years and future Budgets.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The one thing I say in conclusion is that we seem to have a Government who, as their first choice, will spend taxpayers’ money, rather than looking at how the money they already take from taxpayers can be used more effectively.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government have said that it will deliver their net zero policies, but is it necessary to have a bureaucracy of that nature? I know that many Members do not agree with me on this issue, but we are spending billions of pounds on restructuring our economy to meet net zero targets when many other countries are saying, “We are not prepared to damage our economy in that way.” Given the proposals we are debating tonight, the new clauses I have spoken to are not all that demanding. All they say is, “Let’s have some transparency about what all this means to the people who are having to pay the money.” That is not too much to ask. I hope that people will consider that when they cast their vote tonight.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“You can understand why people ask, “Is that what I want my taxes to be spent on?” Of course it is not. The Government estimate that their ID cards system will cost £1.8 billion, while the London School of Economics says that the cost could be £10.7 billion. The Government say that it is to stop illegal immigration, when we know full well that it would not matter if we had six ID cards—those who come into this country illegally will seek to work illegally, and there are other means of checking up on them anyway. There are also the new bureaucracies that the Government have set up. One of their first actions was to set up a huge bureaucracy, Great British Energy, at a cost of £9 billion. Again, what benefit will we get from that?”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If taxpayers thought they were going to get some benefit from these changes, they might have been willing to accept them, but of course, they are not getting that benefit. What are we getting? We are getting wasteful expenditure. As has already been mentioned, £5 billion will be spent on taking money from those who go out to work and paying it to those who do not go out to work. That is not fair, and it does not make any economic sense, either. Then, of course, there is all the other wasteful expenditure that the Government have engaged in, such as the Chagos deal. We had the Chagos islands—we had our bases there and so on. We are now going to pay somewhere between £38 billion and £47 billion to the Government of Mauritius to give the islands back and then lease them back again.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It strikes me as placing a burden on people who go out to work every day, do not earn a great deal of money or have a great reward for it, and now find themselves having to pay tax when they never thought they would have to. As I said in an earlier intervention, people might be willing to pay taxes if they thought it would lead to things that would improve their lives. We had that promise at the first Budget—that the Government were putting up taxes by £40 billion, or whatever it was at that stage, to improve public services. Have public services improved? No, they have not. Has the money been spent on public services? No, it has not. Yes, wage increases have been given, but as the OBR has said, there have been no productivity increases as a result of the extra money that has been spent.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Of course she does. That is one reason why I believe that the new clauses are important—they recognise the need for people to be made aware of the consequences, and the impact on them, of decisions that are being made in this House by a majority Government who got there by making promises that are not being kept. What is that impact? The Minister has already told us: £23 billion more tax will be paid. He justifies that by saying—I think he mentioned this twice—that the Government have sought to be fair, and to place the burden on those with the broadest shoulders. When 750,000 people who are currently earning £12,500 per year are dragged into the tax system, that does not strike me as fair.”
House of Commons12 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I wish you and the staff of the House a happy new year, Mr Speaker. Regardless of the reason for the change in policy—whether it is simply fear of the electoral consequences of breaking election and manifesto promises to farmers, or a belated recognition of the importance of the farming industry to feeding the nation in an increasingly unstable world—I welcome these changes. However, I would point out to the Minister that despite his assurances, 25% of farmers in Northern Ireland will still fall over the threshold he has announced, which will have an impact on family farms because of the cost of land and so on. Having seen the disaster of the policy, does he accept that the only answer is to abolish it altogether?”
House of Commons5 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner has said that this legislation will mean that those who serve in the armed forces are treated worse than terrorists. Former commanders have said that it will affect recruitment and retention and leave soldiers in fear of legal action. Does the Minister not recognise that by giving in to the IRA’s demand for the ability to rewrite the history of the troubles, it is leading to the situation where soldiers will be dragged through the courts in their old age? Should his message to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland not be, “Your job is to stand up for those who served in Northern Ireland and not to kowtow to the IRA, Sinn Féin and the Irish Government”?”
House of Commons5 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State is right that no one should shed any tears at the end of Maduro’s rule. Does it surprise her that Sinn Féin, first of all, defended the fraudulent election as being electorally robust, and then attended the President’s inauguration event in order to show what it said was “solidarity” with him? That highlights once again how it is still wedded to criminality and terrorism. There is an opportunity, now that the Americans have done good for the Venezuelan people by removing the corrupt cancer that so damaged their country. Will the Foreign Secretary outline what steps our country can take to ensure that democracy is restored in Venezuela? From her discussions with the Americans, can she say how much they will co-operate with us in that venture?”
House of Commons5 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Low-income families have been hit by being dragged into tax bands that they were not in before and by energy costs, and now the chief executive of Aldi has said that unless the Chancellor reviews her raid on farm inheritance tax, rising food prices will hit those families as well. If she will not listen to the farmers, will she at least show some concern for consumers, and look again at this tax?”
House of Commons9 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The report makes quite clear the extent of IRA brutality and murder in Northern Ireland, including murders within their own republican community. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that the First Minister of Northern Ireland can no longer remain ambiguous in relation to, first, her acknowledgment of and, secondly, her apology for what her fellow travellers did to people within their own community and within the wider community in Northern Ireland? Does he also accept that the real state collusion occurred when successive Governments in the Irish Republic hid terrorists; allowed them to store arms, train and cross the border; and then refused to extradite them? Instead of giving the Irish Government a role in the arrangements for the legacy of the past, will he commit to holding them to account for their sins of the past?”
House of Commons9 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government have had a lucky break with the coincidence of the OBR’s confession and report on its leak of the Budget details, which has given the Minister an opportunity to use the shame of the OBR to deflect from the real criticism that should lie with the Chancellor, who, weeks before, was using selective information and distorting the forecasts to cover up the fact that she was taking money from those who work to pay those who do not work. Is that not the real shame of what we are discussing?”
House of Commons1 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗