← LEADERSHIP TERMINAL

UK PARLIAMENT · SITTING

Ian Byrne

MP for Liverpool West Derby · Labour · United Kingdom

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

“First, will the Government work with the Charity Commission to issue guidance so that trustees know what due diligence is expected, to avoid funding organisations or people directly or indirectly involved in enforcing the illegal occupation of the west bank?”

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. First I want to pay tribute to Father Bashar, a Palestinian priest who spoke so movingly this afternoon about his experiences of settler violence in his town of Taybeh in the west bank. What he said about what people were living through was extremely moving.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“The regulations we are discussing today give the Foreign Secretary the power to enforce his calls. I raise that in the context of charities. It has been reported that a UK charity gave around £5.7 million between 2017 and 2021 to a school in an illegal settlement in the occupied west bank.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“We cannot condemn illegal settlements while failing to confront the money that sustains them. The Government have rightly strengthened their powers. What Parliament, charities, businesses and, above all, the Palestinian people now need to know is when the powers will be used.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“I know that my right hon. Friend is fully aware of the care we must all take over the language we use when we discuss troubles-related affairs. He may recall that the Law Society and the Bar Council have called recent references by some hon. Members to supposed “IRA lawyers” grossly irresponsible and said that it puts people at risk.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“I thank my right hon. Friend for that intervention and I look forward to working with him and the Department to ensure that what comes out in the House of Lords is the Hillsborough law, that it does exactly what we wanted and that it applies to Northern Ireland, because families should never, ever depend on the goodwill of institutions wh…”

House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

The complete record

1,020 held · 610 searchable for Ian Byrne. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 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.

  1. “Until there is full transparency and genuine accountability for how decisions of national importance are made, public trust in this place will continue to erode, and that is a very dangerous place to be going. That principle should have applied to Peter Mandelson, but it clearly did not, and what a catastrophic mistake that was and continues to be. Moving forward, it must also apply to all those currently exercising power within this Government and anybody seeking to lead this Government in the years ahead.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  2. “While many in Westminster are preoccupied with the gossip, personal exchanges and political intrigue contained within these documents, I am far more concerned by what is absent: the gaps, the redactions, the missing correspondence that may never come to light because relevant material was withheld or “phones were stolen”. Those missing pieces would not simply demonstrate that Peter Mandelson was embedded within the machinery of government; they would reveal the consequences of that influence. They would show how decisions affecting our public services, our NHS and our democracy may have been shaped by unelected power, corporate interests and private relationships operating beyond public scrutiny.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  3. “Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), ruled out ending Palantir’s contract earlier this year, citing efficiency gains, despite evidence that many NHS trusts using the platform had not reported clear benefits of the software. For me, it is here that the missing documents become extremely significant. Just months after Mandelson sought a meeting with Palantir UK’s Louis Mosley, the former Health Secretary, who we know was in regular contact with Mandelson, held a private meeting with Mosley himself, as reported by The Guardian among others. A legitimate question arises: did Mandelson facilitate that meeting in the same way he appeared to broker discussions between Palantir and the Prime Minister?”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  4. “NYC Health + Hospitals withdrew from its contract with Palantir earlier this year, while a proposed Metropolitan police contract was blocked last month. Those decisions reflected principled leadership and a recognition that public trust must come before corporate influence, and I thank Mayor Khan for showing that desperately needed leadership, which is a real example to others. The concerns that were acted on are shared by many NHS staff and many of my constituents, who are deeply uneasy about the growing role of Palantir in managing sensitive personal data. That is why I was particularly concerned when the former Health Secretary, my right hon.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  5. “My greatest concern is Palantir’s growing role within our national health service—a matter that the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee today described as “an unacceptable point of weakness”, which could leave our data “at the mercy” of hostile actors. I first raised concerns about this company in 2023 when the federated data platform contract was awarded. Since then, I have repeatedly called on the current and the last Governments to exercise the 2027 break clause and end this relationship. Yet despite widespread concerns from parliamentarians, healthcare professionals and members of the public, for some reason Palantir’s presence within our NHS and access to patient data has only continued to grow. That expansion comes despite significant concerns being raised elsewhere.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  6. “Those meetings followed the Prime Minister’s visit to Palantir’s Washington headquarters in February—a meeting reportedly brokered by Mandelson, for which no official minutes or transcript were produced. Following this, later in the year, in September, during the state visit of Donald Trump, there was a pledge by Palantir to expand its work with the Ministry of Defence to a value of £750 million over five years. I and many others in this place and beyond do not believe a company associated with military operations in Gaza and the facilitation of aggressive immigration enforcement in the United States should be entrusted with expanding influence over any public services in this country.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  7. “I, like many others, await Government actions on the progress of that crucial piece of legislation, and I hope that the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister can shed some light on its stalled progress when he winds up the debate. The ongoing police investigation means that Mandelson may yet face further scrutiny. However, the absence of so much correspondence, together with the significant redactions in material already published, means the true extent of his influence over Government decision making may never be fully known. My particular concern centres on the relationship between this Government and the US technology firm Palantir, a former client of Global Counsel. The documents reveal that Mandelson arranged meetings with Palantir’s founder Peter Thiel—historically a supporter of Donald Trump—and Louis Mosley, the company’s UK head.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  8. “The question many of my constituents are asking is: how could an unelected figure, whose public record is so controversial, wield such influence over the decisions of Government while facing so little scrutiny or accountability? That lack of accountability also helps to explain why the latest disclosures were not far more uncomfortable for Mandelson and those around him. As we know, despite requests to do so, he refused to hand over his personal phone as part of the evidence-gathering process. That speaks to a wider problem of culture in Westminster and Whitehall, and is exactly why we need a duty of candour that a Hillsborough law would introduce. There can be no more exemptions from transparency for the powerful; there can be no special rules for those at the top. Public confidence depends on accountability applied equally to everyone.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  9. “No record of the meeting was disclosed. Mandelson’s influence, exercised through figures such as the Prime Minister’s former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, was vast, unaccountable and entirely undemocratic. Based on the great lengths that McSweeney and others went to ensure that Mandelson was given the job as US ambassador, including by applying pressure on civil servants, it is very reasonable to conclude that Mandelson’s influential position was reward for his support of the Labour Together faction. The damage that organisation has done to my party and this Government cannot be ignored, so I once again reiterate my call to the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister for a full, transparent and independent inquiry into Labour Together and all those involved in the organisation.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  10. “Even his association with one of the world’s most notorious paedophiles was seemingly outweighed by the usefulness of those connections and—shamefully, for those responsible for his appointment—with no apparent regard for the victims of Jeffrey Epstein. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones) for her speech, which outlined that so powerfully. Though the latest documents reveal moments of embarrassing sycophancy, they tell us little that we did not already know. Mandelson’s fingerprints are all over this Government. His involvement stretched from Ministers and advisers to the very centre of power. Just yesterday evening, we learned that the Chancellor asked Mandelson to visit her at the Treasury to advise on trade matters while he was chair of the private lobbying firm Global Counsel.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  11. “The latest Peter Mandelson scandal epitomises everything that my constituents in Liverpool West Derby detest about the political establishment and why so many are losing faith in this place. Here was a man who brought Government into disrepute on multiple occasions—a man who repeatedly placed personal interest and profit ahead of public service—yet instead of being consigned to political history, he was rehabilitated by senior figures in my own party and elevated through a position of extraordinary, unelected influence. Why? Because his value to the political establishment was never rooted in principle or public service; it was rooted in his history of brutal, factional manoeuvring, his network of powerful contacts and his ability to pull strings behind the scenes.”

    House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  12. “It means finally rebuilding a welfare state that protects people instead of punishing them, and, yes, price caps on essential items. These are not extreme demands; they are the bare minimum standards of a civilised society, because in 21st-century Britain nobody should be going hungry. In the communities we have visited, everybody agrees that food is our most basic human right. Good food should be a fundamental human right for all, and a right to food would place this at the very heart of Government decision making. History will ask all of us in this House a very simple question: when millions of children were going hungry, what did you do about it? I know what side I am on.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  13. “Working-class people feeding each other, looking after each other and organising together show more humanity in church halls and community centres than many have ever experienced from Government. That is the spirit, and that is what the right to food campaign is built on, because people do not want charity forever; they want dignity, they want security and they want to know they can feed their families without fear. Hunger is a political choice, and if hunger is a political choice then ending hunger must become a political priority. That means universal free school meals. It means wages people can actually live on. It means secure work and stronger trade unions. It means proper enforcement of a legal right to food, and it means investments in community kitchens and local food programmes.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  14. “Earlier this week the Mayor of Greater Manchester spoke about the damage done by 40 years of neoliberal economics, and he was spot-on because everywhere the commissioners travelled there was a sense deep in communities that people have been abandoned. In Northumberland, one woman said something I will never, ever forget. She said, “Don’t you dare call us disadvantaged; call us asset-stripped.” My God she was right. That is exactly what has happened to working-class Britain—asset-stripped, hope-stripped, industry-stripped, security-stripped—and then those very communities are blamed and demonised for the consequences of political choices. But despite everything—despite all the hardship—those communities still fight for one another. That was the beautiful thing we witnessed everywhere we went. Solidarity is still alive in this country.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  15. “That is the truth at the heart of this debate: it is not about scarcity, but poverty—low wages, insecure work, sky-high rents, a broken security system, and an economic system that protects wealth while punishing the poor. That is why I say gently to Ministers that surplus food redistribution is not a solution to hunger. Yes, any support for struggling families matters—of course it does—but we cannot build a just society on leftovers. We cannot normalise emergency charity as permanent public policy, and we cannot allow food banks to become the fourth emergency service of the British state. Because if we do, we are accepting managed poverty instead of ending it, and I reject that completely.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  16. “This is the result of political decisions: 40 years of neoliberal economics have seen people and communities disempowered and left behind, industries destroyed, trade union power weakened, public services hollowed out, and wages and incomes driven down while wealth has flowed upwards—and after all that, people are told to be grateful for charity. Food banks were never supposed to be part of British life. They are the clearest sign that our economy and society are broken, but an entire generation of children are growing up believing that they are normal. That is not normal or acceptable, and it is not inevitable, because hunger in Britain is not caused by a lack of food; it is caused by poverty.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  17. “I have listened to disabled people tell us that they are sitting in freezing homes, deciding whether to put the heating on or to buy food—let alone a treat, a day trip or, God forbid, a holiday. I have met workers in full-time jobs relying on food banks to survive. That is the scandal of modern Britain, because these people are not failing: Britain is failing them. We heard evidence from Public and Commercial Services Union members that civil servants are using food banks because of low pay. The Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union reports that the very workers who make our food cannot afford to put it on their own tables. We should think about how obscene that is, and about how flawed our economic system must be if that is the result. We must stop pretending that this happens by accident; it does not.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  18. “They understand better than anyone the scale of food insecurity in this country, and how it is impacting the lives and health of people who are living with hunger every single day—and living with its consequences. The commission has gathered evidence for what I believe will be the defining report of our generation—a road map to finally making the right to food the law of the land. In one of the richest countries on Earth, millions of our people are going hungry, and that should shame every single one of us in this place. I say this truthfully because what I have heard over the last few months has left me absolutely devastated. I have sat with parents who skip meals so their kids can eat.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  19. “However, the redistribution of surplus food will not begin to end the food insecurity faced by over 14 million people in this country. It is a sticking-plaster over a gaping wound. We need a solution that acknowledges the sheer scale of hunger across the UK. Over the last five months the Right to Food UK Commission, which I am proud to be part of, has travelled across these islands from Liverpool and Knowsley to Newcastle and Northumberland, and from Cardiff and Aberdare to Belfast, with Glasgow and London to come next month. It has listened to the people this country too often ignores—not economists in boardrooms, not corporate lobbyists, but working-class people in working-class communities.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  20. “I welcome any debate that has the collective security of the British people at its heart, because I believe one of the greatest threats to our security is the economic system governing this country, which has consistently failed working-class people and communities, and which will undoubtedly be made worse still by the illegal and ill-planned war in Iran. Now more than ever, we need a radical restructuring of priorities and policies: more council housing, a total end to right to buy, and the nationalisation of our industries that were sold off and gutted by Thatcher, including water and energy. In 2026, no one in Britain should be going hungry, so I welcome the Government’s recognition in the King’s Speech that there is a food poverty crisis in the UK.”

    House of Commons20 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  21. “As I set out in my question to the Leader of the House on Thursday, I welcome the Government tabling this carry-over motion for the Hillsborough law, but in truth it should never have come to this. It is wrong and difficult to accept that we find ourselves here today with no Hillsborough legislation in effect. Responsibility for this delay rests solely with a Government who, at times, have refused to push past the vested interests that were always going to oppose transparency and accountability. It was never in doubt that we would face resistance—the Minister and I have discussed that before—but political courage and determination are essential in seeking to change a culture of cover-ups that has damaged our country and undermined trust in our institutions.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  22. “A firm commitment without delay to delivering on this Government’s promise is the very least that those who have fought for justice for so long deserve. It must happen as soon as this House returns in May.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  23. “My amendments would have zero adverse impact on national security, so as the parliamentary lead for the Hillsborough law, I ask again: why can those amendments not be adopted, and why can the full Hillsborough law not be passed when the House returns in the next Session? In what has been a difficult 18 months for this Government, marked at times by damaging and totally avoidable political choices, we must not allow this to become another self-inflicted wound, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The Hillsborough law is far too important. Delivered in full, it would be transformational, placing social justice at the very heart of Government and showing the public clearly and convincingly whose side we are on. I know that that is what we both want, Minister.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  24. “My amendment 23, which is supported by more than 70 Members of this House, would remove the carve-out for the intelligence and security services that exempts them from the duty of candour. Since the Bill was shelved in January, no Minister has been able to explain why my amendments cannot be accepted, or why those services should not be subject to the same duty. The amendment, which is fully supported by all campaigns connected to the Hillsborough law, simply applies existing national security safeguards that are already used elsewhere to the duty of candour. This ensures that those bodies are not placed above the law, while maintaining full protection for national security. The Government’s stated concerns about national security therefore do not withstand scrutiny.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  25. “That includes families affected by the nuclear test scandal and those impacted by the Chinook disaster, whose pursuit of truth has been obstructed for far too long. In both cases, it is understood that thousands of documents remain restricted, despite the events being decades ago. There must be no built-in escape route, whereby any state body can decide for itself what evidence it provides to an inquiry or an investigation, as exists in the Government’s current provisions; that would be carte blanche for future cover-ups. Campaigners on these causes have stood shoulder to shoulder in the fight for a Hillsborough law, and I and many other hon. Members from across the House will not abandon them now, nor should this Government. Any proposed amendments that weaken that commitment must be withdrawn.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  26. “The truth is that if the political will existed, this could be resolved in a single day by the Government adopting my amendments, which would restore the Bill to the full Hillsborough law that was promised. I commend every single person who has fought for this legislation. It is my job in this place to ensure that the Government deliver a Hillsborough law worthy of the name. It is rightly described as a legacy for many, but more than that, if we get this Bill right, it will ensure that state cover-ups are far harder to carry out in future. That would be a legacy of real and lasting value to this country, for future generations, and for those whom we will never forget. A duty of candour that applies to all and ensures that nobody is above the law is essential to groups still fighting for justice.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  27. “Every delay causes real and profound distress to bereaved families, survivors and campaigners—people who have spent decades fighting for truth, justice and accountability against a state that failed them and sought to cover up those failures. Crucially, as we have always said, this law is vital for the many people who do not yet know that they will one day need it, so it is essential that this carry-over motion is not merely a procedural device to keep this Bill alive, but a clear signal of the Government’s intention to implement the Hillsborough law in full at the earliest opportunity, as has been promised. This motion must now be matched with urgency and action.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  28. “I thank the hon. Gentleman for those kind words. The Minister and I both stood for election in 2024 on a clear manifesto commitment to deliver the Hillsborough law in full. The Prime Minister promised on multiple occasions that passing the Hillsborough law would be among the first acts of this Government, yet two anniversaries of Hillsborough and an entire parliamentary Session have passed without it being delivered. That is simply not good enough. I hear that certain Ministers oppose this legislation due to pressure from the security services and the Ministry of Defence, and that is precisely why leadership is required. The buck stops with the Prime Minister. We must push through disagreement and ensure that this Bill is delivered in its entirety.”

    House of Commons27 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  29. “Friend ensure that I am directly informed and included in all meetings and briefings moving forward as the parliamentary lead for the Hillsborough law campaign?”

    House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  30. “I warmly welcome the Government’s tabling of the carry-over motion for the Hillsborough law. A lot of people who were extremely worried about what was happening will be relieved today. However, that motion must be matched with urgency. Ministers must end the delays and deliver the law in full, as promised, without carve-outs for the intelligence and security services. That will achieve the cultural change that the country desperately needs, as we have seen this week. Will my right hon. Friend remind some in government that negative media briefings against key figures in the campaign risk undermining confidence in the process and should cease? Following the Prime Minister’s commitment at PMQs last week, will my right hon.”

    House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  31. “As I have done on multiple occasions in both letters to the Prime Minister and speeches in this place, I once again call for a full, transparent and independent investigation into the activities and practices of Labour Together, both prior to and after the election of this Government. Only then will we fully understand how this exclusive political network has been able to undermine our democracy and institutions right at the heart of Government.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  32. “His professionalism and dedication, after a week in which he has been publicly hounded by some in government, were commendable, and it was good to see his trade union backing him steadfastly at the Committee today. Robbins will be a loss to the FCDO and the country, and it was all brought about by a series of catastrophic political decisions by No. 10. That is not right, not fair and not what the public expect of elected officials. Because of that, the public will rightly demand accountability and cultural change. That must begin with a thorough review of the political operation which brought the Prime Minister to power and which clearly continues to carry undue influence over this Government.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  33. “10 and the governing of our country. It points to a political culture that lacks candour, that exists to promote wealth and power, and that ignores all else in pursuit of them. It is a culture where proximity to power outweighs principle, where access counts far more than accountability, and where the suffering of victims is overshadowed by connections. When decisions are driven by patronage and power is concentrated in an inner circle, it is not only our internal party democracy that suffers, but the integrity of our public institutions and our country. Too often, it is our civil servants—those who serve with professionalism and integrity—who are left to carry the consequences. I commend Sir Olly Robbins for giving evidence today.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  34. “Peter Mandelson once spoke of the Labour left being sealed in a tomb. Today, it is the toxic politics he came to represent that should be buried—politics that repels millions and that is far from the values on which our party was founded. If we are serious about renewal and about learning the lessons of this troubling episode, we must confront the culture that enabled it. That means looking at figures such as the Prime Minister’s former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, a protégé of Mandelson, and at the network of influence around him. Mandelson’s appointment did not happen in isolation, as we have learned today. It reflects a wider direction under the Prime Minister, where those behind the Labour Together project wielded significant influence in developing the toxic culture that has been allowed to take hold of No.”

    House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  35. “As a company arming slaughter in the middle east, mining American citizens’ health data to conduct violent deportations and advocating the demise of the NHS, that trust cannot be Palantir’s to hold. We call on the Government to exercise the break clause in this contract in 2027, award no further contracts to Palantir and create a publicly accountable and ethically grounded approach to the handling of data.”

    House of Commons16 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  36. “People are genuinely frightened, and a loss of trust in the NHS is potentially catastrophic to health outcomes in the UK, as the Minister will know more than most. Palantir’s reprehensible contribution to human rights abuses has been even more devastating in its complicity with the Israeli Government’s ongoing war crimes. A UN report in June 2025 found Palantir’s technology to have accelerated the Israeli Government’s campaign. It is shameful that Palantir is anywhere near anything that we have in this country. Our NHS was built on a simple, powerful idea: healthcare is a human right, not a commodity. It was built on the trust of patients who must share personal details to receive the care they are promised.”

    House of Commons16 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  37. “In its own country, Palantir’s software enables the raids by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, that forcibly separate children from their parents and carry out prolonged detention and deportation. What is even more startling is a leaked document that showed the platform’s ability to generate dossiers on individuals and to mine data from the American Department of Health and Human Services. That is exactly the type of data that Palantir now has access to here. Palantir should be nowhere near our NHS data and patient data, and that view reflects the hundreds of emails that I have had from extremely concerned constituents, which is an experience that I am sure is shared by Members across this House.”

    House of Commons16 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  38. “I first raised concerns about the Palantir contract in August 2023, in a letter I wrote to the Health Secretary in the previous Government. I am here today to raise my huge concerns again, because I believe that this contract is an affront to the values of our country and the NHS. Palantir’s co-founder and chairman Peter Thiel, a historic Donald Trump backer and donor, has said that the NHS makes people sick and has called for its privatisation. Palantir deals in chaos, oppression and war, all in the pursuit of power and profit—the antithesis of the values that our NHS was built on. I also note with keen interest that New York City Health and Hospitals has pulled out of a contract with Palantir due to ethical concerns, which I will now outline.”

    House of Commons16 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  39. “Will you commit today to ruling out any carve-out for the security services and finally delivering a full Hillsborough law worthy of the name, or will they be failed by the state once again?”

    House of Commons15 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  40. “Q3. As the Prime Minister said, 37 years ago today, 97 innocent children, women and men went to a football match and were unlawfully killed at the hands of a corrupt state. I was at Hillsborough, and I was one of the lucky ones who survived and walked away.As parliamentary lead for the Hillsborough law campaign, I stand here with a huge sense of obligation to the 97, all the families—including my constituent Debbie Matthews—every survivor and every victim of this state cover-up, who are all part of this collective campaign. There are signs of progress after last night’s Government concessions, but we have heard this before. Prime Minister, this is your responsibility. It is within your power to take control of this process and make good on your promise to deliver this legislation.”

    House of Commons15 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  41. “If the Government take forward the call for an inquiry, as I hope they will and I fully support, the Hillsborough law could be a huge element in getting truth, accountability and justice. For people like Andrew Candy, it cannot come soon enough.”

    House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  42. “That cannot stand. If there is a gap through which the FCA can escape accountability, it is our duty to close it, because no regulator should be above the law, no institution beyond scrutiny and no citizen left to fight alone. Andrew Candy’s case is not isolated, as we have heard. It is a warning of what happens when power operates in the shadows. As parliamentarians, we must shine a light, demand truth and stand with those who have been wronged. I understand that amendments to the Hillsborough law are being considered to extend the duty of candour to regulators, including the FCA. The case for that will be compelling, certainly given what we have heard today, and is likely to command strong support in both this place and the Lords.”

    House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  43. “He was later hit with a £70,000 break cost that had never been disclosed. His business collapsed, and he sold his family home. What followed was 17 years of stress and injustice, with no proper accountability or resolution. That story is familiar to many sitting behind me in the Public Gallery. Even attempts at compromise were met with further loss and distress. This is not just a banking failure; it is a regulatory failure due to a fear of standing up to the big banks. Shamefully, the FCA stood by and did nothing. Worse, there are concerns that it obscured the truth, including the existence of hidden credit lines, and colluded in the practices, as we have heard from hon. Members today. Here lies the deeper issue: the FCA is a private company limited by guarantee. It has immunity from civil liability and can resist scrutiny in the courts.”

    House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  44. “We have heard that whistleblowers were sidelined, dissent suppressed and an official line enforced. This is not a regulator acting in the public interest—it is an organisation protecting itself. When regulators fail, people pay the price: water, energy, finance—the list goes on. Let me turn to hidden credit liabilities. The APPG report highlights serious concerns about the FCA’s handling of the mis-selling of interest rate hedging products to small businesses, including the failure to address hidden credit line risks and a pattern of evasion when challenged. Take the case of Andrew Candy. In 2008, he sought a simple fixed-rate loan. Instead, he was sold a complex product without being told by the seller at HSBC about hidden credit lines, margin calls or the risks involved.”

    House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  45. “The Hillsborough law is about driving a cultural change in institutions that resist transparency, and that is precisely where the Financial Conduct Authority is falling short. Time and again, the FCA has failed to give straight answers to straight questions. This is not regulation; it is evasion. We have seen this culture before in Hillsborough, the Post Office Horizon scandal, the contaminated blood scandal and many others. This scandal may well join that damning list of state failure and cover-up. The 2024 report by the all-party parliamentary group on investment fraud and fairer financial services should have raised alarm bells for the then Government. A former FCA employee described it as having “the worst staff culture” of their 40-year career.”

    House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  46. “It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) for securing this debate and for his fight for truth and justice over many years. Many believe that this issue goes to the very heart of the Hillsborough law, or Public Office (Accountability) Bill, for which I am proud to be the parliamentary lead. My focus is on ensuring that the law delivers a true legacy for the 97 who died at Hillsborough and for all those who have suffered at the hands of a state that failed them. It may also form part of the solution to the issues we are discussing today, because this is about power without accountability, when institutions close ranks and ordinary people are left to fight alone.”

    House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  47. “Will she join me, the nuclear test veterans and the LABRATS campaign in calling on the Government to deliver the Hillsborough law in full, without carve-outs for any state institutions, as a matter of urgency, so that we can get justice for our nuclear test veterans and their families?”

    House of Commons25 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  48. “I pay tribute to all those who served in our armed forces as part of the nuclear tests overseas, to those who suffered illness or died prematurely as a result of the tests, and to the bereaved families and family members who were born with rare disabilities as a result of the radiation that our nuclear test veterans faced. I am fortunate enough to have worked closely with some of the nuclear test veterans and families due to the Hillsborough law campaign, and I thank them for their incredible solidarity with the Hillsborough families and survivors. I thank my hon. Friend for her outstanding work in trying to gain truth and justice for the test veterans, who have been victims of a state cover-up.”

    House of Commons25 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  49. “The Right to Food UK Commission, launched last November, is gathering vital evidence from policy experts and those with lived experience of food poverty from across the UK—next week we will be Aberdare and Cardiff. I would like to put on the record my thanks to my hon. Friend the Minister for the positive meeting we had last week on the commission. Will the Secretary of State commit to meeting me later this year, upon publication of the commission’s legislative road map, so that we can work together to ensure that the right to food is finally committed to law and tackle the scourge of hunger in our communities?”

    House of Commons19 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  50. “Eight months after the Prime Minister promised a call for evidence on Gabe’s law following the tragic death of 15-year-old Gabriel Santer, we are still waiting. Meanwhile, preventable deaths continue in multi-storey car parks. Companies such as Q-Park, despite multiple incidents and no estate-wide suicide prevention strategy, are still being awarded NHS contracts. Does the Leader of the House agree that that is unacceptable, and will he commit to setting up a meeting with Gabe’s father, who leads the Gabe’s law campaign, and the relevant Ministers to discuss the prospect of the Government reviewing those contracts to ensure that all operators that apply for Government contracts meet consistent nationwide suicide prevention standards across all their sites?”

    House of Commons19 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗