Richard Burgon
MP for Leeds East · Labour · United Kingdom
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. These regulations are important in their potential and, of course, in their application. I very much welcome the Government’s recognition that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory is unlawful, in line with the International Court of Justice’s historic 2024 opinion.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Minister confirm that these regulations can apply to officials, politicians and private entities, including UK charities responsible not only for physical blockades, but administrative obstruction of aid, including decisions on permits, crossings and those financing aid obstruction?”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have four key points for the Minister, and I would welcome a response. First, what counts as a serious violation of international humanitarian law? Will the Minister confirm that, as a minimum, the definition will follow that of the International Committee of the Red Cross?”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will these powers cover international humanitarian law violations across all Israeli settlements, not just new ones, and be applicable to those financing such violations? Secondly, on aid, here—as with E1—urgent designations against those meeting the legal tests can make a real difference.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Minister make it clear today that banks, charities, financiers, contractors, insurers and technology companies supporting these international humanitarian law violations risk sanctions?”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this vital debate; he is right. People in Leeds and across the country know there is a council house crisis and they support, I believe, Shelter’s campaign for the Government to make national council house building a mission, because building council houses not only provides homes; it is a bit lik…”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,864 lines on record for Richard Burgon, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, without an account. Most recent 500 lines shown. Search to find more. Page 1 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.
“Will the Minister make it clear today that banks, charities, financiers, contractors, insurers and technology companies supporting these international humanitarian law violations risk sanctions? Finally, these regulations will need to be accompanied by additional Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office resources to tackle Israeli war crimes. Will the Government provide the staff, the legal expertise and the resources on a scale matching their work on sanctions against Russia?”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Minister confirm that these regulations can apply to officials, politicians and private entities, including UK charities responsible not only for physical blockades, but administrative obstruction of aid, including decisions on permits, crossings and those financing aid obstruction? Thirdly, these powers must apply to those funding and supporting violations. Regulation 8 makes it clear that an “involved person” includes those supporting IHL violations, as well as direct perpetrators. Back in March 2022, the Government targeted six banks in a package aimed at key industries supporting Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. We need the same determination to stop money flowing from or through the UK to sustain illegal Israeli settlements or the wider unlawful occupation.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will these powers cover international humanitarian law violations across all Israeli settlements, not just new ones, and be applicable to those financing such violations? Secondly, on aid, here—as with E1—urgent designations against those meeting the legal tests can make a real difference. Regulation 4(4) creates new grounds regarding aid obstruction. With winter approaching, aid is again being blocked when it comes to Gaza. Last week, Israeli political figures joined a blockade of aid trucks bound for Gaza. Without naming individuals here, will the Minister confirm that the Government are preparing sanctions against those obstructing or supporting the delivery of aid to Gaza this winter?”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have four key points for the Minister, and I would welcome a response. First, what counts as a serious violation of international humanitarian law? Will the Minister confirm that, as a minimum, the definition will follow that of the International Committee of the Red Cross? The ICRC’s role, under the Geneva conventions, makes it an authoritative voice on the rules of war. The ICRC states that “‘Serious violations of international humanitarian law’ are ‘war crimes.’ The two terms are…interchangeable”. Will these regulations apply when an occupying power transfers its civilians into occupied territory, forcibly transfers an occupied population or deliberately attacks civilians or civilian infrastructure? These are war crimes that Israel has repeatedly carried out.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. These regulations are important in their potential and, of course, in their application. I very much welcome the Government’s recognition that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory is unlawful, in line with the International Court of Justice’s historic 2024 opinion. I also welcome the associated sanctions package, including the regulations before us today, as an important first step towards meeting our obligations under that ICJ ruling. These regulations add grounds for sanctions, including for serious violations of international humanitarian law, for serious breaches of liberty and security, and for aid obstruction. Used effectively and quickly, these powers can help to prevent further crimes and can help to ensure accountability for those crimes already committed.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this vital debate; he is right. People in Leeds and across the country know there is a council house crisis and they support, I believe, Shelter’s campaign for the Government to make national council house building a mission, because building council houses not only provides homes; it is a bit like rent controls. An intervention in the private market can bring rents down because the private sector cannot solve the council house crisis and the housing crisis. Does my hon. Friend agree?”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As winter bites and the humanitarian situation worsens, will the Secretary of State commit to supplying food aid to Gaza, at least to last year’s levels? Will he use his welcome new sanctions regulations, laid earlier this month, to sanction those Israeli figures blocking aid from getting into Gaza?”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to take into account the requests of the petitions and consider the resource benefits of a windfall tax on banks when allocating funds in the Budget. And the petitioners remain, etc. ] [P003251]”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The petitioners therefore request “that the House of Commons urge the Government to take into account the requests…and consider the resource benefits of a windfall tax on banks when allocating funds in the budget.” Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the United Kingdom, Notes that Britain’s largest banks are making unusually high profits from the higher interest rates that simultaneously have driven up rents and mortgages, and that experts estimate that a windfall tax in line with that introduced on the oil and gas firms would generate up to £15 billion a year, providing resources to fund emergency action to address the cost-of-living crisis.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to present this petition on a windfall tax on the banks in the autumn Budget, further to a corresponding online petition signed by over 13,000 people. This petition of residents of the United Kingdom states that a windfall tax on the super-profits of banks, like that introduced on energy companies, could generate £15 billion per year, providing essential resources to tackle the cost of living crisis affecting millions of people.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am incredibly disappointed in today’s decision on Jackdaw; I believe that it flies in the face of all the evidence and will do nothing to lower people’s energy bills, create jobs or improve our energy security. The Minister has a strong record in making the case for Britain to be a renewable energy superpower, so can he confirm that today’s decision in no way implies or means that the approval of Rosebank will automatically follow?”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Enough of all this: full public ownership is what is needed. Let us get into step with the rest of the world, focusing on cleaner water, lower bills and a system that actually works and is fit for the climate challenges of the future. People out there in the country know this is a disgrace, and they know it needs sorting out now. We need public ownership of our water system now.”
House of Commons14 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“With climate change leading to further droughts and water shortages, the iniquitous role of the leaderships of private water companies, and the system they represent, will only get worse. We hear a lot about Thames Water, but we also need to talk about Yorkshire Water. Under Yorkshire Water, bills have gone up by over a third in two years, and every year it dumps hundreds of thousands of hours of sewage into our rivers and seas. It is performing so badly that it has been downgraded to a one-star rating by the Environment Agency. Yorkshire Water was recently hit by an £89 million performance penalty for under-delivering, yet its chief executive’s total salary is running at over £1 million a year, so privatisation has worked for some. That is rewarding failure—as long as the profits keep flowing.”
House of Commons14 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I start by thanking the more than 200,000 petitioners across the country, as well as the hundreds of my Leeds East constituents, who have signed the petition. When discussing the arguments for public ownership, we need to start by staring the facts in the face. England and Wales are the only countries in the world to have fully privatised their water and sewerage systems. We are the odd ones out, and something needs to be done about it. The privatisation of our water system has been a catastrophic failure—not for shareholders, or for the chief executive of Yorkshire Water, but for the public, the environment and, as we have heard, even children.”
House of Commons14 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What we are considering today is not the general principle, “Do we or do we not agree with assisted dying?”; it is this Bill. We are not a debating society; we are a Parliament. I therefore ask my hon. Friend why it is the case that virtually no disabled people’s organisation in this country supports the Bill. Disabled people often feel voiceless, and I think it is important that their voices are heard today. They are outside Parliament, so I would like her to address that point in her speech.”
House of Commons11 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“These sanctions on Israel for its illegal occupation are incredibly welcome as a step towards meeting our moral and legal obligations. Will the Foreign Secretary continue to resist pressure from those who say that he should not make international law apply to Israel? May I urge him to push forward and demand the full implementation of the ICJ ruling so that the Palestinian people can have justice?”
House of Commons8 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Further to the earlier request from my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova), may I push the Government for a debate on the progress of their measures to tackle the ongoing failure of Capita to effectively administer civil service pensions? May I also urge the Government to publish the advice of Grant Thornton on a secondary recovery plan now that Capita’s own internal deadline for sorting it out has also passed? The matter has been raised by my constituents, by people across the country and by the Public and Commercial Services Union, and it would be great to see some progress.”
House of Commons3 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The decisions we take on climate action should be driven by the public interest, not fossil fuel interests.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Beyond party donations, there is a complex web of fossil fuel interests, climate deniers, donors, so-called think-tanks and other organisations seeking to shape our politics, and no doubt they were delighted with the Conservative party’s shift against climate action in recent years. Those interests, as we have seen, have had huge success in shaping US politics. We need to avoid there ever being that scale of influence here. For decades, across the globe, oil and gas money has sought to buy influence to help delay the action that we desperately need. My new clause 22 is one step towards ending that, and I thank the cross-party group of MPs who have backed it. I hope that we can continue to work together to stop fossil fuel money polluting our politics.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For example, research by the environmental investigations group DeSmog and The Guardian found that when the previous Conservative Government were considering new North sea fossil fuel licences, the Conservative party received more than £400,000 in one year alone in donations from individuals and companies linked to the oil and gas industries. That was part of what DeSmog estimated was the over £2 million donated to the Conservative party by fossil fuel interests between the 2019 and 2024 general elections. DeSmog research has also highlighted what it describes as Reform links to oil and gas interests.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The principle of my new clause is clear: those profiting from and helping to drive this crisis should not be using their wealth to pollute our politics, spread misinformation and delay the action needed. It would put a stop to any donations from oil and gas companies to political parties and candidates at elections. Of course, the problem goes way beyond direct donations, but my new clause can be part of the action needed to break the link between fossil fuel wealth and the influence it seeks to exert on our politics.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, if we are to have a fighting chance of preventing the worst of climate change, we need to rapidly cut fossil fuel use. That will mean breaking the vast power that oil and gas companies have over our politics. That is where my new clause 22 comes in. Fossil fuel giants have not only driven us towards climate disaster, but have done so knowing the consequences. They did their best to cover up the science, and used their vast wealth and power to distract, and to delay action, so that they could keep raking in obscene levels of profits—profits that have soared even higher in recent years, while people have been hit with horrendously high bills.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to speak to my new clause 22, to stop oil and gas companies donating to political parties. The context is the extreme heat; there were tens of thousands of heat-related deaths in Europe alone this summer, as well as dangerous wildfires and the droughts. All these things give us a terrifying glimpse of what climate breakdown means, and they underline just how dangerous it is to deny climate breakdown or delay the action needed to tackle it. The reality is that climate breakdown will shape our country for decades. It will affect food prices, whether people can live and work safely, and the functioning of key public services, as well as our economic and national security. We must do all we can to tackle climate change and protect people from its increasingly severe impacts.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In September 2024, the Government suspended some arms sales to Israel over its war on Gaza. Given the escalating Israeli violence in the west bank, will the Government review their export licences to ensure no British military equipment is supplied to Israel that could be used there?”
House of Commons1 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have been inundated with representations from my constituents who have friends, family and loved ones in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. They are deeply concerned that the blackout has been going on for a month. Does my hon. Friend agree that the only way forward is peaceful resolution and for the Government of Pakistan to return to the table for peace talks, and that our Government can play an important role in making those representations to the Pakistani Government?”
House of Commons7 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I commend the Minister and the team on their approach. Tackling climate change needs to be a national and international effort. We should all be pulling together on this goal. Is it not time to call out some of the Opposition parties and their friends in the right-wing media for engaging in a propaganda wave of climate change denial? That poses a real risk to our future jobs, economy, fuel security and way of life.”
House of Commons7 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I commend those journalists on the work they have done, but I also want to put on record how unacceptable it is that the public cannot easily access clear information about MPs’ second jobs on Parliament’s own website. The Westminster Accounts has had to navigate the fiendishly complex way Parliament reports this, so there may well be discrepancies in the data, but if so, that is not the fault of the journalists; it is a failure of parliamentary transparency. Parliament needs to address that and start providing this information in a much more accessible way. In total, MPs have taken an eye-watering £11 million in outside earnings since the general election. The top 10 MPs account for over £7 million in total, so just 10 MPs have pocketed nearly two thirds of all second job money declared.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Banning MPs’ second jobs is one of the key steps to restore trust in politics. I hope that the incoming Prime Minister, when giving their speech on the steps of Downing Street in the coming weeks, commits to real action to clean up our politics, because there are very dangerous forces out there that want to take advantage of public distrust to roll back basic democratic norms, as we have seen in the United States. Before I turn to why we must ban MPs’ second jobs, I want to look at the scale of the problem. All the figures I will reference today are from Sky News’s Westminster Accounts, a database compiled from the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move, That this House has considered the potential merits of a prohibition of second jobs for hon. Members. It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I am delighted to have secured this debate, but let us be totally honest from the start: confidence in our politics has collapsed. People look at Westminster and see a political system increasingly disconnected from their lives. They see stories about freebies, dodgy donations and so-called gifts, and they see politicians collecting six-figure sums from second jobs. They know that the system is not working for them, and it chips away at the public’s trust in Parliament; it damages their confidence in democracy. If we want politics to serve the people, not elite interests, we are going to have to take bold action. That is why I have called this debate today.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My Bill shows exactly how it can be done. It would prohibit MPs from holding paid second jobs, while allowing sensible exceptions. The Bill is not about stopping a genuine public service. A doctor or nurse treating patients is serving the public; sitting on a corporate board for large pay cheques is not. My Bill would not stop someone doing the limited hours of work needed to maintain professional qualifications, nor would it stop someone working out a short notice period when unexpectedly elected to Parliament.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is funny that the MPs who claim to want real-world experience never seem to find it doing the jobs of ordinary workers, such as stacking shelves, driving buses or caring for the elderly in a care home. I did not find too many of those jobs in the list of MPs’ extra earnings. The reason is obvious: it is really about getting money, not real-world experience. If MPs genuinely wanted real-world experience, they would seek it where real people actually work, not in corporate board rooms. When people say that Parliament should benefit from a diverse range of life experience and professional expertise, I totally agree; but that should be from the experiences they gained before being elected, not from corporate contracts secured because they are MPs. The other argument we always hear is that a ban would be too difficult, but it would not.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Politics should be about public service, not personal enrichment. So many families across the country are under massive financial pressure, struggling through no fault of their own. They work long hours, struggle with rising bills and worry themselves sick about making ends meet. Is it any surprise that people are angry when MPs get more from their second jobs than ordinary workers earn in a year? I have campaigned against second jobs for many years. When I do, one argument always gets raised. We are told that second jobs provide valuable real-world experience. Frankly, that argument is laughable. Highly paid second jobs do not bring MPs closer to the real world, because real people do not live like that. Huge second salaries are the experience of a tiny elite, not of the vast majority of constituents we are here to serve.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If someone wishes to pursue a highly paid private sector career, they are entitled to do so. But if that is the MP’s priority, they should resign. Our democracy would be better for it. We do not need MPs here chasing ever more cash. Another obvious reason to ban MPs’ second jobs is that they create real conflicts of interest. An MP should have one loyalty—loyalty to the people who sent them here. The moment other employers pay an MP tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or in some cases even well over a million, divided loyalties arise. People rightly ask, “Who comes first: the constituents who elected them or the company paying them?” No one can serve two masters. Even if people claim there is no conflict of interest, it is clear that second jobs fuel a growing sense that politics is becoming detached from everyday life.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the steps taken by this Government to restrict second jobs, but so far they go nowhere near far enough. We need a proper ban. The key principle of my Bill is straightforward. Being an MP is a well-paid privilege. The nearly £100,000 a year salary places us in the highest 5% of earners in the country, so being an MP should be a full-time job. The public elect us to represent them, to fight their corner and to devote our time to their concerns. They do not elect MPs to spend their time lining their pockets. When MPs do that, they short-change the public who pay them and they undermine our democracy. We even have 18 MPs who have been paid more from their second jobs than from their MP’s salary. For them, it seems, that being a Member of Parliament is a second job.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is more than £22,000 per hour for a man who last year argued that a minimum wage of £10.85 per hour for young people in his constituency, my constituency and constituencies across the country may be too much. Some man of the people! It is all very Donald Trump. We hear a lot about why second jobs are acceptable, but the public know that when an MP can earn more for a couple of hours’ so-called work than a nurse earns in a year, there is something deeply broken in our politics and change is needed. There is no doubting the scale of the problem. In 2022, I presented the Members of Parliament (Prohibition of Second Jobs) (Motion) Bill, a private Member’s Bill for a total ban on MPs’ second jobs. I hope that can become law under the new Prime Minister.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not say this to make a party political point, but it is a fact that the top 10 includes eight Conservative and two Reform MPs, including Reform’s party leader. Beyond the top 10, looking at all MPs’ outside earnings, Conservative MPs account for around 66% of the total, Reform MPs around 20%, and Labour MPs around 7%. Can I just say—because it needs to be said—that I am disappointed that the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), the leader of Reform, is not here? On Monday, I wrote to him publicly, inviting him to come and explain why MPs should be allowed to rake in vast sums from second jobs. Yesterday it came to light that he has been getting paid £22,500 per hour promoting a gold dealer, which takes his second job earnings to approaching £2 million in just two years since the general election.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I must confess, when I have been out and about in my constituency and in others, I have never met anyone who says, “What we really need to do is pay MPs more.” We are already in the top 5% of earners, so I do not think that paying MPs more is the issue. Being an MP is an incredible privilege—an incredibly well-paid privilege. It is second jobs that we want to stop; we do not want to argue for further pay rises for already very well-paid MPs. We talk about second jobs, but for some MPs there are third jobs, fourth jobs, fifth jobs, sixth jobs and many more. For some, it seems, being an MP is the second job. I am opposed to MPs having second jobs, whether those MPs are Conservative, Reform, Labour or from any other party.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for her important point. The details of the Bill could be debated and amended in the House and at Committee stage, if it were taken forward, as I invite the next Prime Minister to do. I was trying to make the point that, if someone needs to do a handful of hours per year to remain on a professional register, I would have no objection. Perhaps the Bill can be enhanced and improved, including by my hon. Friend, if it progresses further. Beyond the limited exceptions that I have outlined, the practice of second jobs should end.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope that the next Prime Minister will help to clean up politics and defend our democracy, starting by ending the ludicrous gravy train of MPs’ second jobs, which quite rightly turns the public’s stomachs.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member has come forward with a very good idea. Of course, a party could change its own rules and expectations in that regard, but to fully clean up politics, I think that this should be passed by Parliament. This issue is going through the Modernisation Committee at the moment, and the discussions taking place there are very important. Some will say that my restrictions are too tough. They are tough, but trust in politics has been damaged over many years, and rebuilding that trust requires bold action. That is what the public want. Parliament must show that it understands that the rot runs deep and cannot be tackled with half measures. There should be no more reviews or excuses; action is needed.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I also hope to speak to the next Prime Minister about that plan, because it could be part of a new era. It could be part of a fresh start to show that we are not all the same, that we defend our democracy and that we believe in public service and a better kind of politics. I thank every single Member who has contributed to the debate and you for chairing it, Mr Western. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the potential merits of a prohibition of second jobs for hon. Members.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank every single Member of Parliament who has contributed to the debate and the Minister for her constructive and encouraging response. The message from the debate to the public is clear. Many of us understand and believe that when Members of Parliament chase corporate cash, they are not only short-changing their constituents, but undermining our democracy. That is a very serious matter indeed. Trust and public confidence in politicians, Parliament and our democratic process has never been lower. We have a historic duty to turn that around. That means change. It means, among other things, banning the gravy train of MPs’ second jobs. I look forward to passing the Minister a copy of the Bill I drafted back in 2022. It is a full, comprehensive plan.”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q2. I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s comments on the horrific events in Belfast. The co-founder of US tech giant Palantir once claimed that the NHS “makes people sick”. Now, Palantir is running the NHS’s new data platform. The Financial Times has reported that Palantir staff have had “unlimited access” to identifiable NHS patient data. There are also deep concerns about Palantir’s human rights record in relation to Trump and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Israel’s military action in Gaza. NHS patient data should not be left in the hands of a US tech giant. The Government have an opportunity to end this contract through a break clause next year. Will they take that opportunity and kick Palantir out of our NHS next year?”
House of Commons10 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I very much welcome the Bill. I recently had a productive meeting with the Rail Minister in the other place regarding my amendment to close loopholes that could allow private companies to creep back into operating GBR rail services. He kindly promised to take that on board, and I am pleased to see those issues addressed by Government amendments 92 and 106, as well as the commitment to bring in further changes regarding the Secretary of State having powers of designation to ensure that they cannot be used for back-door privatisation. May I invite the Minister to provide further commentary and reassurance to the House regarding the Government’s moves on that issue and the very welcome position they have taken?”
House of Commons10 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is it not totally outrageous that energy giants will make billions in extra profits from Trump’s war on Iran while ordinary people are hit with higher costs? Does the Minister agree that we should introduce an emergency war profits tax to ensure that they cannot make a single extra penny in super-profits from this crisis? We can use that money to fund urgent cost of living support.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let us just imagine that, this weekend in our capital city, there was a “great Russian real estate event” selling off Ukrainian land. Quite rightly and without hesitation, the Government would move to ban such an illegal event. This weekend in London, there is the Great Israeli Real Estate Event, openly advertising the illegal sale of land in the illegally occupied Palestinian territories. Given that the Government rightly recognised the state of Palestine, surely we should now move to ban this event, which is selling off land illegally in Palestine.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Greedy privatised water companies have caused huge harm by treating our rivers and seas like an open sewer. They have been ripping off the public while doing that and, at the same time, they have handed nearly £90 billion over to shareholders since privatisation. Does the Minister agree that, as is being done with the railways, the water companies need to be taken into public ownership so that they can serve the public good and be run for the public good, not for private profit?”
House of Commons8 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Disputes between nations must be resolved through dialogue and with respect for international law, so will the Minister confirm that he will use his efforts and those of his office to ensure that diplomacy and dialogue are seen as the best way forward?”
House of Commons8 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I recently went on a three-day humanitarian visit to Cuba where, among other things, we delivered aid to a cancer hospital. When we were in Cuba, not a single drop of fuel had got into the country for three months because of Trump’s fuel restrictions, and I saw with my own eyes that Trump’s fuel blockade was having a devastating humanitarian effect on millions of ordinary Cubans. I am very disturbed and concerned to see the threats emerging from the Trump Administration, but I welcome the fact that, as is our country’s long-standing position, the UK Government continue to vote against the blockade at the United Nations.”
House of Commons8 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Israel’s bombing of Lebanon has seen yet more war crimes. It is incredibly dangerous for the people there. It is also a direct threat to a peace process being achieved between the US and Iran, in a war that is killing people over there and driving up the cost of living for people here. How many more countries does Israel have to bomb before the Government impose widespread sanctions, as they rightly did on Russia?”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗