Carla Lockhart
MP for Upper Bann · Democratic Unionist Party · United Kingdom
“Yesterday, in a session of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, Mr Eddy Montgomery—a senior Home Office official—revealed to my right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson) that this Government are focusing purely on the ports.”
“Does the Secretary of State accept that while there can never be any excuse for criminal disorder, there is equally no excuse for a border policy that leaves Northern Ireland exposed? How many more incidents will it take before he and this Government deal with the open border with the Republic of Ireland, which is being exploited daily?”
“I thank the right hon. Member for giving way; he is speaking very eloquently. The British people believe in a simple principle: if you do the crime, you should do the time.”
“Last year, a Government-funded agency approved more than £50 million of taxpayers’ money for solar geoengineering projects, one of which endeavours to dim the sun.”
“Q14. Last week in Northern Ireland, a former Member of this House was convicted of the most horrific child sexual abuse against two girls. I commend the victims for their extraordinary bravery in coming forward; it was their courage that secured a conviction, and I have no doubt that their resolve will help others to find their voice.”
“The Minister talks about protecting the steel industry, and we can all agree with that, but steel users in Northern Ireland have been left with confusion, uncertainty and rising costs, and price gouging from suppliers is already happening.”
The complete record
Every one of 602 lines we hold for Carla Lockhart, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 13.
“They did not stop to give any officer an opportunity to walk away. Terrorism must never be sanitised or justified. Those who defended the innocent must never be sacrificed to appease those who glorify violence.”
“Such is the subversion of the legacy process in Northern Ireland that the murder of innocents at Enniskillen has never had a public inquiry. In recent times, the Secretary of State visited Loughgall and heard directly from innocent victims of the IRA’s East Tyrone brigade, one of the most brutal, ruthless killing wings of the IRA. He spoke with two men whose families endured unimaginable suffering at the hands of some of the IRA’s most notorious killers, and their testimonies were powerful and deeply moving. The East Tyrone brigade were not freedom fighters, but a heavily armed terror unit. Having already killed hundreds of innocent people, they mounted a killing operation at Loughgall, intending to obliterate any RUC officer in that station. They never paused in their murderous intent.”
“There was always an alternative to murder; there was always an alternative to placing bombs under cars; and there was always an alternative to shooting innocent men, women and children. I want to take the House back to two significant events in 1987: the IRA bombing of the service of remembrance at the cenotaph in Enniskillen, killing 12 people and injuring at least 60 more; and the Special Air Service’s engagement of heavily armed terrorists in Loughgall in my constituency. Which one of these incidents do Members think was granted a public inquiry? It was not the murder of innocents and the injuring of many more. Instead an inquiry was granted into the heavily armed terror gang, which was rightly engaged with and eliminated by the security forces, who saved countless lives in the process.”
“At the outset, let me restate unequivocally that we DUP Members will always stand with the innocent victims and survivors of terrorism in Northern Ireland. We will stand with the families whose loved ones were cut down by a ruthless and bloody terrorist campaign. Their pain has not diminished, and neither will our determination to defend truth, justice and moral clarity. We continue to hear attempts to justify or sanitise and romanticise terrorism. We hear repeatedly from Sinn Féin’s leadership, the self-proclaimed First Minister for all and Mary Lou McDonald, that there was somehow no alternative to the IRA’s barbaric campaign of violence, and that it was justified. Justified? That is an affront to every innocent family whose loved one was murdered.”
“Across border areas, families have credible concerns about the Irish state’s failures—failures to arrest, to extradite, and to share intelligence, and failures that allowed terrorists to flee across the border and live openly. We will stand with every innocent family whose loved one was murdered. We will stand with the RUC, with the Ulster Defence Regiment, with our veterans, and with the SAS. Terrorism was wrong. It was never justified, and it cannot be sanitised.”
“The Government have allowed the Irish Government an entirely disproportionate role in shaping legacy, while innocent victims in Northern Ireland feel sidelined. Let us be very clear: the Irish state has its own legacy—a dark, uncomfortable legacy—that it has yet to confront with honesty or transparency. That same state’s own tribunal, the Smithwick tribunal, found collusion between members of the Garda Síochána and the IRA on the murders of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan. Those two senior Royal Ulster Constabulary officers were ambushed and executed after information was passed by the Irish police to terrorists. It was the same with Ian Sproule, the 23-year-old from Castlederg. These are not isolated incidents.”
“Absolutely. That was a point well made. This Bill speaks of inquests, and we firmly believe that every family deserves a full and fair investigation, but Loughgall—really? Not only has that event been before the European Court of Human Rights, where the UK was found to be justified, but there is to be a second inquest. How does that make innocent victims feel? There must be no more vexatious pursuit of the security forces, and this Bill does not protect them. Only 10% of troubles-related deaths were caused by the security forces, and almost all of those occurred in engagements with terrorists, yet the narrative we hear is deliberately inverted. There is no comparison—none—between terrorists and those who stood as a human shield in their path. The SAS soldiers who served in Loughgall deserve this Government’s full support.”
“Yesterday, the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland reported that the Police Service of Northern Ireland’s cyber-crimes team lacked the capacity and capability to manage the threat posed by prolific online sex offender Alexander McCartney, whose abuse led to the tragic death of 12-year-old Cimarron Thomas in 2018 and targeted at least 70 other children. Will the Minister confirm what steps are being taken to ensure that cyber-crime teams across the whole of the UK are properly resourced to deal with online child sexual exploitation?”
“Last week, we learned that the BBC upheld a complaint about presenter Martine Croxall. It is alleged that she changed—correctly —the wording of “pregnant people” to “women”. Somehow, the BBC found her eye-roll to have conveyed a personal view. There are two genders—male and female —and one of those genders can become pregnant: women. That is a scientific fact, and it is the view of the Supreme Court. Will the Secretary of State therefore ensure that the BBC leadership abides by the Court’s ruling, and does she agree that the BBC’s lefty, woke agenda is certainly not in step with the majority of right-thinking people, who want common sense at the core of broadcasting?”
“Remembrance must never be limited to the past; it must also be about the living and about ensuring that no veteran who served this nation is ever left without a home, a job or hope for the future, or subject to vexatious prosecution. There is no glory in war, but there is immense honour in service. There are acts of heroism that go unseen and sacrifices that go unspoken, yet they are the foundation upon which our freedoms rest. We will remember them.”
“We lost prison officer David Black as recently as 2012, and Constable Stephen Carroll in 2009—both were killed in my constituency. We remember them with gratitude that cannot be measured in words. Northern Ireland’s record of service to the Crown runs deep. Our people have time and again stepped forward when called upon. Today, that legacy continues in men and women like Air Chief Marshal Harvey Smyth of Lurgan, who is now Chief of the Air Staff of our armed forces. We also think of those who served in more recent conflicts—the Falklands, Iraq and Afghanistan. My thoughts today are with the families of Lance Corporal Stephen McKee of 1st Battalion, the Royal Irish Regiment, who was from Banbridge, and Lieutenant Neal Turkington, platoon commander of 1st Battalion, the Royal Gurkha Rifles, who was from Portadown.”
“We in Northern Ireland know perhaps more than most what our armed forces mean for the safety of this United Kingdom. For decades, through some of the darkest times, they stood as a human shield between good and evil. They put on the uniform and went toe to toe with bloodthirsty terrorists in defence of innocent people. Alongside the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the Ulster Defence Regiment and other branches of the security services, they defended life and liberty in Northern Ireland. Too many paid with their lives. More than 1,400 members of our armed forces were lost during Operation Banner. Hundreds were murdered by terrorists simply because they wore the uniform of their country. Three hundred and two members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary were killed, along with 29 prison officers.”
“Today, our nation paused together in quiet reflection. In doing so, we remembered those who stood firm in the face of fear, served with courage, and made the ultimate sacrifice so that we might live in freedom. As a daughter of Ulster, my thoughts turn to the fields of France—to the Somme—where so many young men from my homeland laid down their lives. On that terrible July morning in 1916, the 36th Ulster Division went over the top with unmatched courage. Within two days, thousands were killed or wounded. Captain Wilfrid Spender, who witnessed that charge, wrote that he “would rather be an Ulsterman than anything else in the world.” I commend the Ancre Somme Association and the Royal British Legion for continuing to educate and remember in my area.”
“The Minister will know that I am unashamedly pro-life. While I strongly welcome the Government’s commitment to ending violence against women and girls, surely that must mean protecting women from harm and coercion in every setting. Given the serious safeguarding concerns and reports of coercion linked to abortion pills by post, will she commit to reviewing that policy to ensure that women are never put at risk?”
“I commend the hon. Member for securing this important debate. As he said, the frustration among communities is felt deeply. Does he agree that whether it is HMOs, buy-to-lets, which are often problematic, or hostels, if there are breaches within them, or if landlords are not keeping to the rules, action should be taken swiftly by the authorities?”
“Asylum accommodation costs are set to quadruple in Northern Ireland, from £100 million to £400 million, and across the UK to £15.3 billion in the next decade. Before hiking taxes again, should the Chancellor not look at where the waste really lies, when we are funding an asylum system that is failed, chaotic and expensive? This is not racist or far-right; it is looking after our own citizens who cannot pay their bills.”
“The hon. Member is making a very powerful speech. High streets across my constituency are struggling, and one additional burden that they carry is a parcels border in the Irish sea caused by the Windsor framework and the protocol. It cost a children’s clothes retailer over £200 to get a delivery from GB. Does the hon. Member agree that this is an extra burden that retailers should not have to carry, and that the Government need to do something about it quickly before businesses go out of business?”
“Nothing frustrates genuine welfare claimants more than seeing claimants who are not deserving, or who are defrauding the system. In Northern Ireland, the cost of fraud is £240 million per annum and, to be honest, that is just the tip of the iceberg, given the restrictions around investigations. In Northern Ireland, the Communities Minister has started naming and shaming. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that there needs to be a UK-wide strategy on fraud to ensure that those in real need do not miss out?”
“The United Kingdom has always stood as a defender of human rights. I say this with deep conviction: how many burned churches and murdered worshippers in Nigeria and Sudan will it take before we call this what it is: namely, a campaign to exterminate Christians? British aid must never bankroll corruption or indifference. Will the Minister urgently press the Governments of Sudan and Nigeria to protect all citizens, but particularly Christians, and ensure that our aid goes towards addressing their needs?”
“Sinn Féin’s historical revisionism, exemplified by the First Minister’s comments following the verdict, is therefore defamatory. To equate murderers with those who defended democracy is an attempt to smear our veterans, and it should not be allowed.”
“I welcome the clear and just verdict delivered by Mr Justice Lynch, which rightly found Soldier F not guilty on all charges—vindication for a man who served his country with honour and distinction. Does the Secretary of State agree that this case again exposes the disgrace of vexatious prosecutions of aged veterans, pursued where there was never evidence capable of meeting the threshold for conviction, and that it is time to end the witch hunt once and for all? Does the Secretary of State further agree that around 90% of all deaths during the troubles were caused by terrorists, and that of the 10% that involved the security forces, the largest proportion occurred while engaging terrorists who were engaged in murderous and criminal activities?”
“I thank the Prime Minister. He is speaking very powerfully about families and about human stories. I commend him for the number of human stories he has talked about today in this place. Will he agree to meet the families of the Chinook disaster, when 29 lives were lost and two pilots wrongly blamed? The families have been consistently refused even a meeting with Ministers, officials and Prime Ministers who have gone before. Will he do the right thing and meet them, and ensure that the Bill also covers them?”
“The hon. and learned Member is making a powerful point. The Minister referred to devolved competences. Does he agree that this Parliament is sovereign and has on many occasions intervened in laws in Northern Ireland that are devolved? It is therefore upon this Government to do the right thing and make all of this legislation applicable to Northern Ireland.”
“Will the Minister give assurances to the House that this Government are utterly committed, along with our international allies, to eradicating Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure, and that they will not cease until Hamas have been fully dismantled and obliterated, and the remains of those hostages murdered in captivity have been returned?”
“I make no apology for repeating a comment that I have made previously, and that my grandfather tells me every Sunday at the dinner table: if the farmer is not doing well in this country, no one is. In Northern Ireland we have over 26,000 farms. They form the backbone of our rural life—”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered the impact of agricultural property relief and business property relief on family farming in Northern Ireland. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. I am very grateful for the opportunity to bring forward this debate on an issue that cuts right to the heart of rural Northern Ireland and indeed Britain. The proposed changes to agricultural property relief and business property relief will have devastating consequences for family farms across our nation. Agriculture is not just another sector in our economy; for Northern Ireland it is our very foundation. It sustains our rural communities, feeds over 10 million people annually, underpins our agrifood industry and provides work for tens of thousands of families.”
“It recognises that farming is asset-rich but cash-poor, or as we would say in Northern Ireland, “We are asset-rich but penny-poor.” A farm may be worth millions on paper, but that value is tied up in land, livestock, machinery, buildings and—most concerningly for many farmers—debt. Farmers spend money and they thrive in advancing. But for what—when they see what this Government are doing to them?”
“I thank my hon. Friend for his consistent voice on this issue. I will come to “Countryfile” later in my speech. The vast majority of our farms in Northern Ireland are family run, often handed down proudly through several generations. The farm is not just a business: it is a home, a heritage and a legacy. That is why any policy that affects how farms are passed on to the next generation goes to the very core of who we are as rural people. For many families, the dream is simple: to see the next generation take over, work the same land and continue the proud tradition of stewardship. The reality of that dream is now under threat like never before. Agricultural property relief has existed for a reason.”
“I agree with the hon. Member. I thank him for using his intervention to speak up for Northern Ireland farmers, because they will be hard hit because of the land values. When a farmer dies, there is not the liquid cash available to meet a large inheritance tax bill. That is precisely why successive Governments introduced and retained APR, so that farms would not have to be sold off bit by bit, just to pay the tax man. It was a recognition that the nation needs farms to continue and not be broken up at the point of succession. The change is being dressed up as modernisation or rebalancing, but in reality it is an attack on the very concept of family farming. I am pleased to say that colleagues from every party in Northern Ireland have been absolutely united in our opposition to the policy.”
“The hon. and learned Member is right; the policy is stifling growth. As I have said before, farmers want to advance and grow, and they want to spend money.”
“Absolutely. It does not take much arithmetic to work out the facts of that scenario. In a recent joint letter to the Chancellor, signed by all MPs and peers from Northern Ireland, we set out a clear position: “Agriculture is not simply an economic sector; it is a way of life. The removal or restriction of Agricultural Property Relief will place an unfair and unsustainable burden on family farms, jeopardising their ability to pass on their farms to the next generation and threatening the future of family farming.” Those are not my words alone. They are the voices of rural Northern Ireland, speaking in unison in the House today.”
“Land values in some counties, including my own, are in excess of £30,000 per acre. It does not take much arithmetic to see that many modest family farms would easily surpass the £1 million threshold.”
“I agree with the hon. Member. According to an estimate from the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs in Northern Ireland, the policy will impact a third of all farms and three quarters of dairy farms. Think about that for a moment. Three quarters of our dairy farms—the heart of our agrifood export industry—could be hit by a tax change that would make succession financially impossible. The knock-on effects will be vast. Meat factories will face reduced throughput and rising costs, forcing scale-back and possibly relocation. Feed and supply companies will see demand collapse, threatening jobs and investment. It is not just farms that will be hit, and this is not a matter of large estates or wealthy landowners. The average Northern Ireland farm is about 40 hectares.”
“In short, it is bad economics and bad morality. Across Northern Ireland, opposition to this proposal is widespread and heartfelt. From the Ulster Farmers’ Union, who are here today, the National Sheep Association and the Dairy Council to the agrifood processors, the message is the same—this change must be reconsidered. At rallies and meetings across my constituency and beyond, farmers have told me they feel under siege, squeezed by rising costs, regulatory pressures and now this looming tax threat. They want the Government to work with them, and not against them, which is why I have described this policy as a “farm tax heist”. That is how it feels to those who have given their lives to feeding our people.”
“It would make us more dependent on imports and less resilient to crisis, while sending a terrible message to those who feed our nation. The policy is being advanced in the name of fairness, but there is nothing fair about it. Farming families have worked their land for generations, paid their taxes and cared for the countryside. They are not speculators; they are custodians. APR is not, as it is presented in public discourse, a loophole; it is a lifeline that allows farms to pass from parent to child without having to be broken apart. To impose a new tax burden at the point of bereavement is not reform; it is punishment for choosing to farm. Let us be clear: the yield from this policy—even in Treasury terms—would be marginal compared to the cost it would impose on rural communities and the wider economy.”
“This will deter young farmers from taking on the responsibility of a business that leaves them saddled with debt before they have even begun. We cannot afford to drive the next generation away from farming. Once that chain of succession is broken, it is almost impossible to restore. This debate is not just about fairness for rural families: it is about food security, which is a matter of national importance. We have learned through recent global shocks—the pandemic, supply-chain disruption and now inflationary pressures—that domestic food production is essential. To undermine family farming through ill-judged taxation would be a profound mistake that this Government will rue. Certainly, rural MPs will rue it in the days and weeks to come.”
“I commend the Member for the stand he is taking and for encouraging the Minister in this way. We are not talking about millionaires; we are talking about hard-working family farmers who live modestly and work from dawn to dusk to feed us all. If these proposals proceed, we will inevitably see forced sales of land simply to pay the tax liability when a family member dies. That means the fragmentation of farms, the loss of viable holdings and the disappearance of many small-to-medium sized family farms. The Government talk about a fair and balanced approach, but what about the 80-year-old who has not got time to plan? Did my brother think my dad would pass away at age 66? Absolutely not. Does a family think they are going to lose a son or a daughter at age 40, 41 or 42? They do not.”
“I ask Labour to stop, halt, talk to us, engage, get it right. Do not go on this collision course. I urge the Government to scrap this farm tax and rethink.”
“They form part of a wider Labour agenda that is anti-rural, anti-farmer and anti-common sense. That is how it is seen out in rural Britain, and it is somewhat similar to the direction of travel of our own Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Minister in Northern Ireland. While our producers face rising costs and red tape, Labour’s response is more tax and more barriers. Their net zero plans are driving good farmland out of production and into solar panels and their planning rules are choking rural life and pushing young families off the land. On national TV this week, the reality was laid bare. I can still see Charles Rees in my mind as he said “if something doesn’t change by next April I’d probably top myself.” If that does not send a shiver down every spine in this place today, we are not in touch with the public.”
“We speak often in this House about sustainability and food strategy, but sustainability begins with sustaining the people who produce our food. We cannot say we care about the environment and rural life on one hand and on the other make policies that threaten to strip families of the land they have cared for over generations. I say to the Exchequer Secretary, with the full force of rural Northern Ireland behind me: think again. Listen to the voices of those who know the land and who understand the realities of farming life. Do not create a policy that will devastate small family farms in pursuit of a marginal tax return. Agriculture is a national asset, not a target for revenue generation. The changes to agriculture property relief are not reform. They are an attack on our family farming.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for his comments, and I wholeheartedly agree. I urge the Treasury and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to pause, and engage in genuine consultation with the farming community. Sit with us and talk to us. They have refused every meeting request. We need a review that recognises the unique structures of Northern Ireland farming, made up of predominantly family-run farms and regional variations. Many suggestions have been made that are worth exploration, including in the latest Centre for the Analysis of Taxation report, as has been noted. I am not saying that it is a silver bullet, but we should sit down, talk about it and start to engage in the conversation. At its heart, this debate is about how we as a society value those who feed us.”
“The Minister is certainly sticking to the script, but can he give us even an opening through the door of the Treasury? Will he open that door and speak with the farming unions across the nation?”
“The hon. Member is making a powerful speech. Family friend Hannah Garrity, who is now in her 20s, took her stroke at the age of eight. She was a little girl, who woke up one day and took a severe headache, and out of that, she had a very severe stroke. She is an inspiration. She is now teaching art in schools. She is a Sunday school teacher in her local church, and she gives so much back to society. Would the hon. Member agree that more research is needed, particularly in relation to strokes in young people and children, given the increase in the number of them who are taking strokes?”
“Does the Minister agree that foreign nationals convicted of serious drug offences in Northern Ireland should be deported without delay? Will he ensure that his Department works with international partners and prioritises swift removal agreements to stop those involved in organised immigration and drug crime re-offending on our streets?”
“Digital IDs are nothing short of a direct attack on our freedoms and I am utterly opposed to them. The claim that they will help to tackle illegal immigration is utter nonsense. If the Government were serious about that, the Prime Minister would strengthen border security, crack down on smugglers and traffickers, and invest in real enforcement. Quite frankly, digital IDs will not stop a single boat and they will not stop the endless cycle of people illegally entering the UK, mostly of working age, who do not want to work and will not work. Digital IDs are not wanted by the people in my constituency of Upper Bann—they feel that it is “Big Brother is watching you” on steroids. At the end of the day, who pays for digital IDs but the ordinary people here in the United Kingdom?”
“There should be nothing more precious in the eyes of this Parliament than the protection of children, particularly those who suffered at the hands of these barbaric individuals. Many of us are parents, aunts, uncles and grandparents and this cuts very deep. I know that the Minister cares and is a caring person, but today we need decisive action. Given that one of the victims has walked away from the inquiry—”
“Given that two of the victims have walked away from the inquiry, will the Minister clearly state how she will ensure that a fully independent inquiry can take place and that it prominently includes victims?”
“I differ slightly in my view. We certainly do not want badgers to be culled unnecessarily, but the evidence shows that a sustained badger cull does reduce TB. Northern Ireland has not had a badger cull and our TB compensation costs are soaring to more than £100 million this year. Reports from Somerset and Gloucestershire show that the badger cull reduced TB rates by 50%. Does the hon. Lady agree that although vaccination is good in theory—I want to get that point across—we need a cull to control TB in the first instance? Certainly, no one wants to see a badger die from TB, because it is quite horrendous.”
“I thank the right hon. Member for giving way and for his engagement on this issue. I wrote to him at the beginning of the year, asking him to come to hear directly from businesses in Upper Bann. The offer was declined, but he kindly sent officials along. The impact was laid bare at the meeting with those officials last week by used agricultural machinery folks, by small retailers who are impacted by the parcels border, and by agrifood businesses. Each business around the table noted the diversion of trade. Today, we are alerting the Minister to the diversion of trade. What is he doing about it? There is anecdotal evidence from each of those businesses, but there is also evidence from the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency that the proportion of GB manufacturing selling to Northern Ireland has reduced from 20.1% to 12.9%.”
“Cyber-security costs are rarely taken into account by any company, but for a company such as JLR, such costs should be easily absorbed because of its profit margins. SMEs do not have that luxury. Their profit margins will not necessarily cover the costs, and often they hold just as much personal and financial data. The Government should be coming alongside those businesses and assisting them to ensure that their security is industry-standard and that they are secure. Can the Minister give me an update on that?”