Seema Malhotra
MP for Feltham and Heston · Labour (Co-op) · United Kingdom
“Public sector productivity is improving, with the latest Office for National Statistics figures showing output continuing to grow faster than inputs, and Departments being challenged to improve efficiency and modernise outdated processes.”
“I was proud to support the Feltham Convening Partnership’s young leaders summer programme last month. What struck me was their ambition for themselves and their community, as well as their call for more work experience opportunities.”
“We will be working to commence the socioeconomic duty on public bodies in section 1 of the Equality Act to require public authorities to put addressing socioeconomic disadvantage at the heart of their strategic decision making. There will be more on that to follow. Let me again thank my hon.”
“For generations, the message to those who want to enter public life or elite professions has been that if they want to get on, they must sound like everybody else. When Margaret Thatcher became leader of her party in the 1970s, she famously underwent intensive elocution lessons with a tutor from the National Theatre.”
“Whether a young person chooses a degree or a trade, their journey must be determined by merit and their potential—never by whether they have to change their voice or pretend to be someone else to fit in.”
“Interestingly, studies also regularly show that regional accents such as Welsh or Yorkshire are rated by the public as trustworthy, warm and honest. Yet when those same studies measure perceived intelligence or employability, standard southern English and received pronunciation invariably top the metrics.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,023 lines we hold for Seema Malhotra, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 101.
“The hon. Member continues to put on record his concerns. He will know that, as we move forward following ratification, we will continue to have detailed conversations. It is important that the rules and regulations are clear for all to operate by. I was just referring to how we have been moving forward on the Bill to ensure that the devolved Governments are engaged in advance of regulations being made and are able to make their own provision on devolved aspects where they wish to do so. We continue to work closely together to support the timely and effective implementation of the agreement.”
“I thank hon. Members for their contributions. I will make a couple of comments about the timing of amendments in the other place. There have been ongoing discussions with the devolved Governments. It is important to recognise this Government’s respect for the devolution settlements and our adherence to the principles underpinning the Sewel convention; we aim for them to be our core considerations and to inform how we work. We have been working closely with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to get agreement on moving forward with this legislation together, and that was part of the reason for the delays.”
“The shadow Minister also asked whether there is a risk that requirements in Scotland for an environmental impact assessment for marine activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction might be different from those in other parts of the United Kingdom. It is the case that Scotland could choose to implement the requirements slightly differently. We will continue to work closely with the Scottish Government to ensure that differences are kept to a minimum and that the United Kingdom as a whole takes a consistent approach. That is very much in the spirit in which we have been working, collaboratively, to respect devolution settlements while recognising the importance of this agreement to both the Scottish and UK Governments. That has been an important part of how we have progressed.”
“Member for Fylde (Mr Snowden), asked about legislative consent motions. While foreign affairs and treaty making are reserved matters, implementing international obligations in domestic law is not reserved where those obligations concern devolved areas. Several provisions in the Bill, particularly in parts 2, 3 and 4, relate to matters such as environmental protection and scientific research, which fall within devolved competencies for Scotland and Northern Ireland. Consequently, the legislative consent motion process is engaged to varying degrees. The assessment of whether legislative consent motions are required for this Bill has been agreed across the relevant UK Government Departments, including the Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales Offices, and in consultation with the devolved Governments.”
“Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) asked about the process of the Bill. Following the passage of the Bill, we will be laying two statutory instruments, one of which will define digital sequence information for the purposes of the BBNJ legislation. The other, along with an associated Scottish Government SI, will amend the marine licensing regime, where needed, to implement part 4 of the BBNJ agreement on environmental impact assessments. Those will be progressed as soon as the BBNJ Bill has received Royal Assent. Once the SIs have been passed, we will be able to ratify the agreement by laying the instrument of ratification formally at the United Nations in New York. We are keen to see that happen as quickly as possible, as I know my hon. Friend is. The shadow Minister, the hon.”
“In relation to the comments raised regarding multilateral co-operation, I want to mention some ways in which we continue to work with other states to support ratification. We continue to be proactive in preparing for implementation of the BBNJ agreement, and we are committed to partnering with others, including the global south, to ratify and implement it. Indeed, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has worked with the Commonwealth Secretariat to support smaller member countries with their implementation work. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has also published research that developed a shortlist of potential area-based management tools, including marine protected areas, that could be proposed once the agreement is in force. My hon.”
“I will make some progress. I acknowledge the importance of moving ahead quickly with the Bill to ensure that we have a seat at the table for discussions with other parties to the agreement, including on MPAs. We wanted to ensure that the Bill’s provisions in devolved areas were watertight, which is why we had constructive conversations with the devolved Governments. Part 2 obligations do not apply to fishing. The hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) has left his place, but he can be reassured that the Northern Ireland Assembly will have concurrent powers to implement provisions in areas of devolved competence. Under part 3 of the Bill, the UK will be involved in MPA decisions and will carefully consider the impacts on fishing.”
“Plastic pollution is a transboundary issue with its source on land, and it is appropriate for it to be addressed by a bespoke treaty for the full life cycle of plastics, including the phasing out of problematic products, improving waste management and reducing leakage. The BBNJ agreement focuses on conservation and sustainable use of resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and is therefore not best suited to addressing plastic pollution across the life cycle. However, the hon. Lady makes an important point, and it is a matter of concern across the House.”
“We are at the start of the process. The spirit in which we have been working, and the way in which we have reached agreement on how to work alongside the Scottish Government, are important to how we will continue to work going forward. In the light of those conversations, I believe that a collaborative approach will continue, because it is in all our interests. Let me make some further comments in response to the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage), who speaks for the Liberal Democrats. I know that it is important to Members on both sides of the House that there is a separate process under way to agree a global plastic pollution treaty.”
“Business of the House (Today) Ordered , That, at this day’s sitting, proceedings on the motions in the name of Secretary Heidi Alexander relating to (i) High Speed Rail (Crewe – Manchester) Bill: Carry-over and (ii) High Speed Rail (Crewe – Manchester) Bill: Select Committee shall be brought to a conclusion no later than one and a half hours after the commencement of proceedings on the motion for this Order; the Speaker shall then put the Questions necessary to dispose of proceedings on those motions; such Questions shall include the Questions on any Amendments selected by the Speaker which may then be moved; proceedings on those motions may be entered upon and may continue, though opposed, after the moment of interruption; and Standing Order No. 41A (Deferred divisions) shall not apply.—( Sir Alan Campbell.)”
“The United Kingdom has always played a leading role in advancing global ocean governance. With this Bill, we have the chance to continue that leadership. The ocean cannot wait, and nor should we. Lords amendment 1 agreed to. Lords amendments 2 to 12 agreed to.”
“It is a world-leading institution, and it highlighted the value of this agreement in improving the visibility and transparency of UK-led marine research, as well as in strengthening international research collaborations. I want to put on record my thanks to the centre for its work and leadership. I am sure that hon. Members will agree that the health of our oceans is inseparable from the health of our planet. Although we may not often see these ecosystems with our own eyes, the responsibility to protect them falls on all of us and on the wider international community. The BBN J Bill is the UK’s opportunity to rise to that responsibility, to safeguard fragile ecosystems, to support sustainable development, and to ensure that the benefits of ocean science are shared fairly and responsibly.”
“That is indeed a matter of concern, and it has been raised in debates by Members from across the House. Although my hon. Friend will know that bottom trawling is not within the scope of the agreement, he will also be aware that we are consulting on restricting bottom trawling in more vulnerable marine habitats. It is important that the consultation and that work continue. This is a landmark piece of legislation. It ensures that the UK can ratify the important BBNJ agreement and take full part in the conference of the parties. It contains measures that will not only safeguard marine ecosystems, but deliver real benefits for the UK’s research and innovation community. In January, I was pleased to visit the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton, to which the hon. Member for South Cotswolds referred.”
“I thank my right hon. Friend for her work both in this area and with Zelda Perkins, who has rightly been recognised in the new year honours list. I am proud that our Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a new measure that will void any provision in an agreement between a worker and their employer that prevents a worker from speaking out about harassment or discrimination in the workplace. My right hon. Friend will be aware that implementation of this measure is subject to consultation. We have engaged closely with the Department for Business and Trade on this policy and continue to do so.”
“The Secretary of State for Business and Trade has stated that the delivery of the non-disclosure agreement measure is his personal priority. The Government will be consulting on the secondary legislation to ensure that we deliver on protecting workers from the misuse of NDAs in cases of harassment and discrimination. It is a high priority and we will move forward as quickly as possible.”
“The race equality engagement group, chaired by the wonderful Baroness Lawrence, is determined to tackle race inequalities and barriers to opportunity. Strengthening the Government’s links with ethnic minority communities is crucial. The group has already convened roundtables of experts and those with lived experience of inequalities in entrepreneurship, policing and maternal health. We are meeting with relevant Ministers across Government to discuss its findings and to make sure that we tackle race inequalities wherever they persist.”
“My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue. The race equality engagement group is engaging with minority communities across the country to tackle inequality. We are committed to our manifesto commitment and to making the right to equal pay effective for ethnic minority people. We are also introducing mandatory ethnicity pay gap reporting for large employers. Last year, we published a call for evidence on equality policy, which closed last summer. We are working to analyse the responses and will update the House on our plans soon.”
“As I have highlighted, we are continuing to move forward with our plans. We published the call for evidence and are analysing the responses. We will update the House on our plans soon.”
“It is a pleasure to respond to this debate. Let me start by saying that the Government oppose the motion. The treaty guarantees full UK operational control of Diego Garcia for generations to come.”
“Let me make a few remarks before I give way. The motion proposes a wildly exaggerated cost, in contrast to the actual costings published by this Government at the time of the treaty’s introduction, which has been verified by the independent Government Actuary’s Department. The motion invokes an exchange of notes, which the Government have publicly confirmed is being updated with our US partners. It also attempts to bind parliamentary procedure on that exchange despite that exchange not having been finalised. That is not patriotic. That is political point scoring at the expense of our national security. It is a sad indictment of what the Official Opposition have become.”
“No. Furthermore, I will have no truck with Reform, which has no record on supporting the security of our country, especially given what has happened in Wales. The Opposition may not want to hear this, but they backed negotiations over Chagos every step of the way. Some 85% of the Chagos negotiations took place under the Conservatives, and were led by the former Foreign Secretary. [Interruption.] They may not want to hear this, but it is important to share that, in November 2022, the former Foreign Secretary said that through negotiations— [Interruption.] I think a lot of people are interested in the past.”
“Indeed, the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), debated it for more than two hours last week and for 45 minutes on Monday in an urgent question. Baroness Chapman of Darlington has spent hours debating the topic in the other place, including during an urgent question on Monday. We have committed to this deal and to these hours of debate because it is important that we do so. Courts had already begun to make decisions that undermined our position in relation to the security of the base.”
“Let me make a little progress before giving way to the right hon. Gentleman. In November 2022, the former Foreign Secretary said that “taking into account relevant legal proceedings, it is our intention to secure an agreement on the basis of international law to resolve all outstanding issues”. —[ Official Report , 3 November 2022; Vol. 721, c. 27WS.] In February last year, a spokesperson for the Leader of the Opposition insisted that negotiations over the islands were needed due to the international legal position. [ Interruption. ] I am referring to the current Leader of the Opposition—some might not remember who she is, but she is still in post, I believe. She may have defected to Reform. What I will say—this is a serious point—is that there has been ample time for debate on this topic.”
“I thank the right hon. Member for his comments. The answer to that question has been set out by Lord Coaker, and I will be laying it out— [ Interruption. ] The answer is yes, and it has been set out by Lord Coaker in the other place. I will come on to that in my remarks. There have been questions from the Opposition today about the legal matters behind this treaty. It is important to say that Mauritius’s legal claim of sovereignty over the island of Diego Garcia is supported by a number of international institutions, including the UN General Assembly. The International Court of Justice considered this issue in the advisory opinion delivered in February.”
“I will be coming on to that point in my remarks. That is important. I want to finish my point on the legal matters that have been raised. What the International Court of Justice said in its advisory opinion carries significant weight and is likely to be influential on any subsequent court or tribunal that considers the issues arising out of disputed sovereignty and whose judgment would be binding in international law. The ICJ—”
“I will finish my remarks on this point. The ICJ concluded that “the United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible”.— [ Interruption. ] The right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) may want to listen the next bit. The 2019 advisory opinion was followed in 2021 by a special chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in a case about delimitation of the boundary between Mauritius and the Maldives, which ruled that Mauritian sovereignty was inferred from the ICJ’s determination.”
“The hon. Member will know that these matters have been shared before with the House. Perhaps I may remind him what US Secretary Hegseth said: “The UK’s (very important) deal with Mauritius secures the operational capabilities of the base and key”— [ Interruption. ]”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I remind the hon. Member of what US Secretary Hegseth said: “The UK’s (very important) deal with Mauritius secures the operational capabilities of the base and key US national security interests in the region. We are confident the base is protected for many years ahead.””
“I will continue my remarks, but I will give way shortly. It is, therefore, the UK’s long-standing legal view that if Mauritius challenged us again in the courts, we would struggle to defend our position. Our Indo-Pacific foothold and the operation of the base could be put at risk within weeks. That is why the Government remain fully committed to the deal to secure the joint UK-US base on Diego Garcia, which is vital for our national security.”
“I thank the shadow Defence Secretary for his intervention. It is a long-standing policy, as he will know this from having been in government, that we do not comment on operational matters or the location of nuclear weapons. The Opposition know— [ Interruption. ] Perhaps I may make some comments on the Pelindaba treaty—”
“The right hon. Member could not have known it, but I was on the first line of a page of comments on that exact issue. I am sorry that he chose that moment to interrupt proceedings. As I was saying, it is a matter of long-standing policy that we do not comment on operational procedures. The Conservatives know that and, of course, took the same approach in government. As the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth, told the Foreign Affairs Committee: “We are confident that nothing in this treaty conflicts with our abilities to uphold international law, and to continue to operate the base as we do today.” As Lord Coaker has—”
“We have agreed with the Mauritian Government that nothing in the treaty conflicts with our respective commitments, and we are absolutely clear that we can continue to operate the base as we have done and as we do now.”
“I will continue my remarks. It is as if the Conservatives cannot decide who is speaking from the Front Bench today. As Lord Coaker told the other place in November, the UK-Mauritius agreement “enables the continued operation of the base to its full capability.” He said that we will continue to be able to “deploy the full range of advanced military capabilities to Diego Garcia.” —[ Official Report, House of Lords, 25 November 2025; Vol. 850, c. 1313.] It is not just us; the agreement has been tested at the highest levels of the US security establishment under not one but two Administrations. They too were satisfied that it protects the full operation of the base.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Given the security risk, this Government, like the Government before us, made the decision to negotiate with Mauritius to secure a deal to protect the base and the UK. Our agreement ensures full operational control of Diego Garcia; a 24 nautical mile buffer zone where nothing can be built or placed without UK consent; a rigorous process including joint decision making to prevent any activities on the wider islands—some over 100 nautical miles away—from disrupting base operations; full UK control over the presence of foreign security forces on the outer islands, whether civilian or military; and a binding obligation to ensure that the operation of the base is never undermined.”
“We have made strong progress towards finalising an updated UK-US agreement and will reach an agreement on it before the agreement between the United Kingdom and Mauritius concerning the Chagos archipelago, including Diego Garcia, is ratified. These matters are still under negotiation, so it remains to be determined whether any updated agreement will be subject to ratification. We will keep Parliament informed about that.”
“I will continue with my remarks for the moment. As I have said, we are confident that nothing in this treaty conflicts with our ability to uphold international law and continue to operate the base as we do today. Moving on to the UK-US relationship, we have been clear that before the UK can ratify the treaty, we will need to do the following: pass primary and secondary legislation; update the UK-US exchange of notes; and put in place arrangements on the environment, maritime security and migration. This Government consider it our duty to protect the public. Therefore, it is our duty to pursue this agreement with clarity and resolve, and we will not put party politics ahead of national security, as we see the Opposition doing today.”
“The hon. Member will have heard me say that before the UK can ratify the treaty, we will need to do the following: pass primary and secondary legislation; update the UK-US exchange of notes; and put in place arrangements on the environment, maritime security and migration. It is important—”
“It is a vibrant and diverse community that now sees the Conservatives’ political tactics. They are the same Conservatives who, after ruling our resettlement for the Chagossians and committing to a £40 million package of support in 2016—they may want to answer to those two things—succeeded in spending just £1.6 million by the time this Government came into power.”
“Those who seek to imply that the Government have misled the public on that do so without the facts, so let me set those out. First, the Office for Statistics Regulation welcomed the Government’s approach to setting out the methodology and confirmed that it is in line with the principles of intelligent transparency. Secondly, the Office for Budget Responsibility has confirmed that the discount rates used by the Government were the reasonable ones to use. Thirdly, the figures have been verified by the House of Commons Library and scrutinised by BBC Verify and The Independent . All those confirmed that the Government calculated the figures correctly. Beyond the numbers, it is also important to debate, as this House has done, the challenges that have been raised in relation to the Chagossian community, and rightly so.”
“I will continue with my remarks, because I want to finish shortly. The strength of the deal and the protection of national security is exactly why the US endorsed the deal last year and why Secretary of State Rubio called it a “monumental achievement”. The agreement safeguards the interest of both the United Kingdom and the United States well into the next century. I will briefly turn to costs. A financial contribution over 99 years was always necessary to safeguard the operation of such a vital base. We published comprehensive detail on the payment schedule alongside the treaty. That was laid in the House within minutes of the signature of the treaty. The figures used by the Government were verified by the independent Government Actuary’s Department, in line with standard accounting practices.”
“Officials from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office have engaged with Chagossian individuals and groups more than 30 times and they are regularly in conversation with the Minister responsible for the overseas territories, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth. In conclusion, doing this deal was right and essential. It protects our national interest, it defends our national security, it protects the Diego Garcia base from legal threat, it supports the Chagossian community and it preserves the unique environment in the archipelago. We know that the best way to do that is to pursue this deal. It is time that the Conservatives realised—or should I say, remembered—that too.”
“I will conclude my remarks—I am sorry but I have taken a number of interventions today. Since coming into power, this Government have been clear on our deep regret for the way in which Chagossians were removed from the islands and have sought to recognise the wide range of views within the Chagossian community. We remain committed to building a relationship with that community that is built on respect and an acknowledgment of the wrongs of the past. We have established a contact group to give Chagossians a greater say in UK Government support to their communities and are in the process of enhancing that group, as Baroness Chapman committed to doing in the other place.”
“The Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary also publicly identified two issues: the consolidation of China’s diplomatic estate in London and public access. Those require resolution before a decision could be made. In November, they wrote to confirm that appropriate resolutions to those issues had been reached. As the director general of MI5 commented last month, our security services have over a century of experience of managing the risks that arise from foreign embassies on UK soil, and I have full confidence in their ability to do so effectively.”
“Friend knows, we never comment on conversations with allies regarding intelligence matters. I can nevertheless reassure her and the House that we continue to work closely with our Five Eyes partners and other like-minded countries on a wide range of issues, including those pertaining to domestic security. These partnerships are essential for our shared security. We have been consistently clear that national security is the first duty of Government, and it has been our core priority throughout the embassy process, with the close involvement of the security and intelligence agencies. Our intelligence services have been involved throughout, and a range of measures have been developed and are being implemented to protect national security.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her question, and I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to it. She will know that discussions with Five Eyes partners relating to domestic security matters are primarily a responsibility for the Home Office. The decision on planning permission for the proposed Chinese embassy at Royal Mint Court rests solely with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government in his quasi-judicial capacity. He has set 20 January as the target date for his decision, and I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham will agree that it would not be appropriate for me to cut across that process. I appreciate that there has been significant interest in our engagement with allies and partners on this matter. As my hon.”
“It is also important to say that we do routinely engage with our allies, including the US, which is our closest ally, on a range of issues, including security and intelligence in relation to China. It is important to recognise that we do that routinely and that it is important to discuss national security factors that we may consider. My hon. Friend referred to transnational repression. She will know that the UK Government will not tolerate any attempts by foreign Governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics overseas, especially in the UK. We continually assess potential threats in the UK, and we take the protection of individuals’ rights, freedoms and safety very seriously.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her remarks. I reiterate that our intelligence services have been involved throughout. A range of measures have been developed and are being implemented to protect national security. She will also know that the Government are still to make a decision. That planning decision will be made independently by Ministers from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government on planning grounds. It is also important to recognise that we have set clear red lines through this process. That has included, for example, the consolidation of the diplomatic presence of China from seven buildings to one, which will have security benefits.”
“It is also important that we continue to ensure that there is a focus on security and, in relation to concerns about those who may experience attempts under transnational repression, that we continue to stand up for the safety and security of all our people in the United Kingdom.”
“It is taken extremely seriously by the Home Office and the Foreign Office. It will be important that we continue to ensure that we have conversations, as we do routinely, with our allies and with the US, and that we take into account any security and intelligence, which we also share on a routine basis, in relation to China. As I have already mentioned, where there are concerns about national security, it is important that our intelligence services are involved throughout, and a range of measures have been developed and are being implemented. I am sure that these matters will continue to be part of the debate, and that the Minister for Security, my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley North (Dan Jarvis), will address them further.”
“I thank the shadow Minister for her remarks. First, in relation to the Prime Minister’s visit, any prime ministerial or ministerial travel will be confirmed in the usual way. Secondly, it is right, and we are clear, that the planning decision is one for the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government to take independently and that that decision is made in a quasi-judicial capacity. It is also important to say that the decision on the embassy will be taken in the proper way, regardless of any attempts at pressure from anyone, and we have been clear throughout that this is a planning decision for MHCLG Ministers. It is important to recognise that national security is the first duty of Government—the shadow Minister will understand that more than anyone, given her own background—and we will always act to protect it.”