Brian Leishman
MP for Alloa and Grangemouth · Labour · United Kingdom
“Fuel is being transported hundreds of miles from Stanlow in Cheshire to Scottish airports, increasing emissions and undermining our local fuel distribution industry.”
“Both were launched when the Iranian Government were sat around the negotiating table. Secondly, there is the rapid unravelling of the subsequent ceasefire under Trump’s maximalist attitude, with his having stopped the military campaign which his Administration had started in the first place without agreement or approval internationally.”
“We must also openly denounce and separate ourselves from the Trump Administration’s dangerous and hypocritical tactics, specifically Trump’s willingness to initiate and pursue illegal wars while claiming to negotiate.”
“I have often quoted the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in this place, and it says: “It is now 85 seconds to midnight.” That is the closest the world has ever been to annihilation.”
“This could easily become an all-out full-scale war with devastating consequences, not just for the people of Iran but for the wider middle east region and, of course, for hundreds of millions more, with the economic and environmental impacts reaching across the globe.”
“We now witness a new cycle of rapidly worsening tit-for-tat military action, with the Islamic Republic Government targeting commercial shipping in the strait of Hormuz and US assets in neighbouring countries, and the US launching blunt-force bombardments, primarily of cities and areas along Iran’s southern coast, but also elsewhere in the…”
The complete record
Every one of 423 lines we hold for Brian Leishman, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 9.
“Fuel is being transported hundreds of miles from Stanlow in Cheshire to Scottish airports, increasing emissions and undermining our local fuel distribution industry. What will the Department do, alongside the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, the Department for Business and Trade and the Scotland Office, to protect fuel security and Scottish jobs, including those of tanker drivers?”
“It is completely in line with the various recent stances the US has taken with regard to Venezuela, Greenland, the Panama canal and even neighbouring Canada. This should serve as a stark warning to all countries, particularly those attempting to appease Trump by accelerating their own militarisation in compliance with his diktats, as was recently demonstrated at the NATO gathering in Turkey.”
“We now witness a new cycle of rapidly worsening tit-for-tat military action, with the Islamic Republic Government targeting commercial shipping in the strait of Hormuz and US assets in neighbouring countries, and the US launching blunt-force bombardments, primarily of cities and areas along Iran’s southern coast, but also elsewhere in the country. Innocent Iranian civilians are the casualties of war. The Trump Administration on the one hand cite the illegality of Iran’s attempt to exact a toll on the strait of Hormuz—“It’s an international waterway”—but on the other talk about exacting their own 20% tariff on traffic through the strait. That blatantly demonstrates the US imperialist aims regarding control of the strait and the wider Persian gulf.”
“Iran is the arena in which it can wage war at any time, all while demanding that independent and sovereign countries such as the UK fall into step and provide direct support without question. If there is no consideration of entering a protocol of diplomacy, that is the abandonment of international law and basic humanitarian principles. Despite the rhetoric of those on both sides of the conflict claiming some sort of major victory, the reality remains that Iran, and primarily the beleaguered Iranian people, have suffered immense loss and devastation, while the Trump Administration have clearly failed to achieve any of his constantly shifting objectives.”
“Both were launched when the Iranian Government were sat around the negotiating table. Secondly, there is the rapid unravelling of the subsequent ceasefire under Trump’s maximalist attitude, with his having stopped the military campaign which his Administration had started in the first place without agreement or approval internationally. Thirdly, there is US Secretary of State Marco Rubio declaring the launch of a campaign systematically to dismantle the International Criminal Court under the pretext that that global tribunal is interfering with US military and law enforcement operations, and thereby threatening US sovereignty. There is no doubt that we are entering a phase in which the US feels emboldened. It is giving short shrift to the basic tenets laid down in the UN charter and in international law.”
“This could easily become an all-out full-scale war with devastating consequences, not just for the people of Iran but for the wider middle east region and, of course, for hundreds of millions more, with the economic and environmental impacts reaching across the globe. By actively seeking to assert unilateral US hegemony, the Trump Administration are dragging the middle east and the wider world into a perilous situation that is worsening by the day. It is abundantly clear that diplomacy and international law are in tatters. We can see this by three recent developments. The first is the illegal and indiscriminate US-Israeli 40-day military bombardment of Iran. That was following the equally illegal and unwarranted 12-day barrage of the country in June 2025.”
“Life for ordinary Iranian people is getting ever more difficult. Right now, they are caught between a rock and a hard place. There is the brutally repressive and theocratic regime’s systemic economic mismanagement and rampant corruption, and an inhumane and suffocating package of US sanctions that hurt the Iranian people long before any regime official feels the pain caused. The two devastating waves of US-Israeli military strikes in just over a year have pushed the country to the brink, making virtually every aspect of daily survival an enormous struggle for most ordinary Iranians. The latest developments in relation to the rapidly re-escalating conflict between Iran and the United States are incredibly alarming.”
“I have often quoted the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in this place, and it says: “It is now 85 seconds to midnight.” That is the closest the world has ever been to annihilation. A lot of that is down to environmental aspects, but it is also down to politics, politicians and the political decisions that are made in various parts of the globe. I would like to think that there would be the international leadership to say, “No.” The right hon. Gentleman is well aware of my position on military spending: I think we have higher priorities than that because our nation has crumbling infrastructure, some 3.5 million people and rising using food banks, and 14% of children living in food insecurity. Those are the issues in my inbox and those are the things that I want to tackle.”
“Trump is absolutely throwing his weight, his heft and his influence politically and militarily across various parts of the globe. His behaviour is in contravention of international law. It is heinous in the extreme, and he is a danger to—to use a broad phrase—world peace. There is no doubt about that. However, Ukraine and other parts of the world, such as Kashmir, are very much on the brink. We have seen mass displacement and ethnic cleansing of millions. We have seen—I may be wrong, and pardon me if I am—the biggest humanitarian disaster in Sudan. When we amalgamate all those crises in various bits of the world, we see that the world is on the brink—it is on a precipice.”
“We must also openly denounce and separate ourselves from the Trump Administration’s dangerous and hypocritical tactics, specifically Trump’s willingness to initiate and pursue illegal wars while claiming to negotiate. Above all, we must keep it in our minds that the vast majority of Iranian people desire peace and wish to rebuild their shattered country. This devastating war has set back the vital efforts of and the painstaking progress made by civil society and trade union activists, who have been valiantly struggling to achieve genuine freedom and social justice and to steer Iran towards a democratic, popular, fair and progressive transition. The future of Iran remains the sole preserve and remit of the long-suffering and long-struggling people of Iran themselves—and absolutely only them.”
“My hon. Friend touches on something that I want to expand on further: spending for defence is not limited to weapons, drones and so on. I regret that my Labour Government have cut overseas development aid, which is an echo of what Donald Trump did with the US Agency for International Development package. Even the most marginal, minute bit of analysis appreciates that overseas development aid is an investment in more dangerous, volatile parts of the world to combat another hot political topic in this country at the moment: immigration. There is more than one way to spend to secure our borders. The UK must join the moral and principled calls for an immediate and lasting ceasefire, to be followed by a swift resumption of negotiations.”
“I agree with everything that the hon. Gentleman has said so far—he is making an excellent speech. Does he agree that the actions of Trump and, therefore, Netanyahu are not born out of a passion for the liberation of the Iranian people but are an imposition of imperialist forces, and with imperialism naturally comes capitalism? It is ordinary Iranian people who are suffering on the back of that.”
“Climate change is upon us, and it is costing lives. We must change society to try to stop the situation from getting even worse. Even with the smallest amount of analysis, we know that extreme weather hits the poorest in Britain the hardest. What steps are the Government taking to close inequality gaps, as an essential way of improving our resilience to climate change?”
“I want a social security system that is a genuine safety net, one that stops people from descending into poverty. We are at war right now with poverty and inequality, and our people are dying because of it, so I urge Members not to look the other way the next time they are in Westminster tube station.”
“When I watch the news on television or scroll through my phone and I see conflict, ethnic cleansing, the displacement of millions, the destruction of Ukraine, Gaza and Sudan, and Trump and Netanyahu’s illegal war on Iran—remember, a girls’ school got bombed—I do not think, “You know what the world needs? We need more weapons. We need more death.” I think that what we need is obvious. We need diplomacy, we need the de-escalation of tensions abroad, and we need a domestic agenda not of war, but of prosperity and peace. I want us to invest in health, education and public services—all the good stuff that keeps communities together. I want better wages, the reindustrialisation of forgotten heartlands across the country, and the redistribution of wealth and power to create equal opportunities for people.”
“A consistent theme ran throughout, pushing the narrative that we must spend on defence above all else. Of course, I appreciate that the first duty of Government is to keep our citizens safe and to defend the realm, but what about that man at the bottom of the tube station steps? Who is keeping him safe? What about the children who are going to school with no food in their bellies—do they feel safe? Over 3 million people need a food bank to survive—people who, when the winter comes, will have to decide whether to eat a meal or put their heating on. How safe do they feel because of political choices that have seen other departmental budgets cut? I do not think it needs to be this way. Tony Benn used to say regularly in this place that if we can find money to kill people, we can find money to help people.”
“I took the underground to Westminster this morning, and at the bottom of the steps at the entrance into Parliament there was a homeless man sleeping against the wall, lying on the cold, dirty floor of the tube station. He was the last thing I saw before coming into this grand palace where we sit as legislators, taking decisions and making political choices that impact that man and everyone else in the country. Last week, £15 billion was found for weapons that will get us ready for a conflict that many politicians, much of the media, and various think-tanks and lobbyists say is imminent. That hawkish rhetoric is ramping up—of the 22 questions asked at Defence questions on Monday, three contained mention of Russia, and two were about defending the High North.”
“What is not helping climate change is transporting fuel from the Stanlow refinery to Scottish airports. This negatively impacts the environment, increases pressure on road infrastructure and will reduce employment and negatively impact Scottish supply chains. Are the Government concerned about the future of fuel distribution in Scotland, and if not, may I respectfully and politely suggest that they should be?”
“It is not right that they should live in fear and terror that the person who committed the offence could be released early. Survivors must matter above all else. Convicted sex offenders should serve the entirety of their sentence, and I urge the Government to adopt that and reflect on what my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Wavertree (Paula Barker) said in her earlier intervention.”
“Looking closer to home in my constituency, the statistics in Clackmannanshire show that it is the most dangerous place in Scotland for women and young girls to grow up in. I have been fortunate enough to visit support groups and mental health organisations and to meet volunteers in my constituency. I have heard from women and also from men who have survived rape, sexual abuse and other indescribable things. They may be at home watching this debate, and they and the people in the Gallery will be looking at the discourse in this debate. What should be at the front of all our contributions is the welfare of survivors, because I have heard from survivors, and many tell me that they feel like an afterthought when it comes to receiving justice.”
“It is right first to acknowledge the condition of our prison estate, the issues with capacity and the impact it all has overall on our criminal justice system. I associate myself with the Justice Minister’s comments on all of that from earlier. I want to say early on in my contribution that I will not get involved in a political tit-for-tat on who did what or who did not do something when they were in power. This is far too serious an issue for people, and to sink to political point scoring leaves a bad taste in my mouth and does no one any good whatsoever. People convicted of sexual abuse against an adult or child, of rape, of grooming or of the attempt, conspiracy or incitement of offences should not be allowed early release from prison. That is not a left-wing or right-wing political debate; it is what is just and right for survivors.”
“The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to encourage Falkirk Council to introduce a reduction in speed limit to 20 or 30 miles per hour in Torwood Village to enhance the safety and wellbeing of the village community. And the petitioners remain, etc. ] [P003214]”
“The petition requests “that the House of Commons urges the Government to encourage Falkirk Council to introduce a reduction in speed limit to 20 or 30 miles per hour in Torwood Village to enhance the safety and wellbeing of the village community.” Following is the full text of the petition: [ The petition of residents of the constituency of Alloa and Grangemouth, Declares that the village community of Torwood has seen a significant rise in traffic, including heavy freight, since Forth Valley Hospital and a new slip road from the nearby M876 were opened; further declares that this poses a risk to residents’ safety as they attempt to cross busy roads, for example to access public transport, or use their own cars; and further declares that the noise pollution from the increased vehicle traffic is disturbing local residents during the day and night and reducing comfort in living in the area.”
“I present this petition on behalf of my constituents in Torwood village, who are incredibly concerned about excessive speeding, which is negatively impacting their quality of life through increased noise pollution and which also poses a serious danger to their and road users’ safety. I note that the petition I present today builds on a similar petition that 75 local people have signed, showing the strength of feeling about this issue in Torwood.”
“Since we rightly recognised the state of Palestine, I put it to the Minister that actually nothing has changed. The settlement expansions are ongoing, as are the land grabs and ultimately the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people. The cultural, economic and educational genocide inflicted on Palestinians carries on regardless. For years, we have seen what drives Benjamin Netanyahu—what his ultimate goal and ambition is—and that is the eradication of Palestinian people and of Palestine. My fear is that diplomacy once again will fail. What will the UK Government do to stop the eradication of Palestine and the Palestinian people?”
“The Secretary of State spoke about different political priorities and tough decisions being made, but today we have seen departmental budget cuts to fund an extra £15 billion for war preparedness. We talk a lot in this Chamber about defending our values, but what values are we actually defending when 14% of children in the UK are living in food insecurity? We are a nation with crumbling infrastructure, and we have more than 3 million people needing food banks to survive.”
“In providing a genuinely just transition for workers and communities, we have the chance to say exactly who we are and who we are for, and to re-establish ourselves as the political voice for workers and communities. My constituency needs reindustrialisation, and so do the constituencies of many other hon. Members and right hon. Members. We have a blank canvas in Grangemouth. We could create something special that would transform my community and Scotland for generations. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero has to shape up and deliver that, and it has to do it quickly.”
“An unjust transition means an exodus of skills and talent, with workers and their families having to leave the local area—the place they grew up in and call home. That means that communities then become poorer. I do not how many times I have asked the Minister this, but I will ask again, in the hope that he will give an answer: when will we see these new industries come to Grangemouth? When will my people in my community, who I am here to represent, see the change that they desperately need? They need jobs and reindustrialisation. Will the Government take at least some form of ownership of these new industries, which they will definitely need for decades—centuries—to come? Finally, in a party political moment, I say to the Minister that the electorate in Scotland do not know what the Scottish Labour party is about any more.”
“So far, however, all of that is just words. Scotland judged Scottish Labour in the Holyrood elections and in Aberdeen last week. Put simply, if one set of jobs is lost and a new set of jobs is not available, that is the very definition of an unjust transition. That is clear and obvious. People want evidence of what a genuinely just transition would be and how we can provide it, but most importantly, what people really want is action. There has not been nearly enough of that. It was 16 months ago this week that the Prime Minister promised £200 million for Project Willow and a bold new industrial future to be homed at Grangemouth. So far, we have had the MiAlgae and the Celtic Renewables announcements, and I welcome them, but again, those jobs are for the future—they are not for the now. Workers need jobs.”
“But in all honesty, I do not care about any of those parties, because I am a Scottish Labour Member, and there is no doubt that right now our oil and gas policy has left voters incredibly worried. My congratulations go to the hon. Member for Aberdeen South (Douglas Lumsden). It was an excellent victory last week, and I commend him and his party on it. That by-election result in the north of Scotland really was telling for the Scottish Labour party. Even though we had an excellent candidate, we finished fourth. As a party, we often say the right things: that oil and gas will be part of the energy mix for decades to come, that we must detach ourselves from relying on the volatile fossil fuel market and, crucially, that we want to provide a just transition for the highly skilled workers of this industry.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss, and I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this debate. Let me say at the outset that we should not rewrite history. We know that under the Conservatives there were mass job losses in the oil and gas industry. It was also interesting to hear in the last 20 or 25 minutes that, after decades of not having a plan for the industry, the SNP now does have one. I look forward to hearing more about that in due course. Then, of course, there is Reform. Its Members just want to carry on regardless and to hell with the environmental consequences. Their absence from this debate shows their contempt for workers and working-class communities.”
“I would like to think that legislators at every level of government consider that to be the baseline for any of their decisions. Of course, technology will play an increasing role in our society, but proposed developments like the one in Larbert rightly have people worried. Its proximity to the hospital, care home and many houses shows that people are right to be concerned. It is shameful that tech companies do not seem to be bothered about that. Technology cannot and must not be an industry that exploits people, communities and our environment for profit.”
“That intense thermal exhaust can raise temperatures by up to 9°. Surface warming can impact areas up to six miles away. As I said, the proposed site is just 20 metres from a care home, 500 metres from a hospital that serves approximately 300,000 people and is in a residential area full of families with children. The proposal is outrageous. The noise being produced by the data centre will be constant. It will include infrasonic noise, the long wavelengths of which travel vast distances and can penetrate walls and glass, even defeating ear protectors. That pollution can cause serious physical and psychological harm and distress. Surely there will be consensus in this Chamber when I say that technology should not come with a health warning to people, families and communities.”
“An environmental impact assessment shows that the proposed data centre would emit pollution that would rank it among the worst 10 polluters in Scotland. The data centre requires its own electricity substation and 200 diesel generators as back-up. Even if they are never run for operational purposes, the generators will have to come online as part of a regular maintenance programme. As we are here in Westminster Hall today in sweltering temperatures in the middle of a heatwave, let us also ponder the scale of the low-grade waste heat that the AI data centre would produce. The direct thermal exhaust creates hot air, which needs to be dispersed into the atmosphere. AI chips created by the big tech company Nvidia get so hot that they need liquid cooling, creating a warm liquid that must then be piped out.”
“It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I thank the right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) for bringing this debate to Westminster Hall. Apatura has submitted a planning application to Falkirk council for a 300-MW AI data centre just 500 metres from Forth Valley Royal hospital, 20 metres from a care home and next to a densely populated residential area. From the outset, it is worth noting that the council has received nearly 1,800 objections from local people. It is no wonder that the strength of feeling against this big tech project is so strong: the proposed site, which covers about 55 acres of land, is being labelled as “sustainable”, which is frankly insulting to my constituents.”
“It is about creating a healthy, well-educated nation and about people having good, well-paid, secure jobs and adequate housing. As I say, it is always about political choices and about priorities, and I make no apology for those being mine.”
“Is it not absolutely absurd that we have three different figures that are deemed acceptable but are all, in all honesty, so low that they are nowhere near enough for people to live on? For heaven’s sake, we are one of the biggest economies in the world, yet we have 14% of our children going hungry, workers needing food banks to survive, low wages, decimated public services, poverty, inequality, and communities that have been asset-stripped for decades. If we want to talk about national security, let us acknowledge that all those things are killing our people right now. What kind of country do we live in when we allow that kind of poverty? What are we actually supposed to be defending here? National security is about more than defence spending.”
“And let us not forget the Liberal Democrats’ part in the early days of the austerity coalition that created a new strata of society—that of the in-work poor. In 2010, 30,000 people used food banks. More than 3 million people use food banks today. It was not as if the Conservative Government of the day were investing in defence—quite the opposite. During those austerity years, the state gradually withdrew itself every year, cut by cut, until we were left with a social security system that is no longer a genuine safety net. People are falling through it; they will never escape poverty. Does no one here in this Chamber question why we have a national minimum wage, a living wage and a real living wage?”
“The Opposition has framed this debate specifically with welfare as the target. With that in mind, I will talk a little about welfare. Just under a fortnight ago, with my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne), I organised an evidence-gathering session in Grangemouth for the Right to Food UK Commission, which has toured the country investigating the state of food insecurity and poverty. In Grangemouth, we heard from fantastic local organisations that provide food to individuals and families who are living in such a dire, precarious position that they are reliant on the generosity of others. Those organisations laid out the stark reality: the reason that people are in that situation is low wages that have not kept pace with inflation all the way through the Conservative Governments from 2010 onwards.”
“I give my thanks and gratitude, alongside those of hon. and right hon. Members, to those who serve and have served. In opening the debate, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge) talked about putting politics to one side, but everything is a political choice. Decisions are based on ideology, priorities and one’s belief of what is the right course of action. I accept that my contribution to the debate will be an isolated one, but it is based on my personal ideology, priorities and beliefs. The bare minimum in any debate should be honesty. It is therefore important that, straight away, we address with honesty that any movement from the self-imposed strait jacket of the fiscal rules through an increase in defence spending will have to mean a cut to other areas.”
“I thank the right hon. Member for Islington North for bringing forward this urgent question. I do not think that anyone can possibly dispute that energy shortages will prove fatal, as will the disease that will inevitably follow, and hyperinflation for essential items will price millions of Cubans out of buying goods. Do the UK Government recognise that the American blockades are a lethal method of economic terrorism? Why on earth do the UK Government not call out internationally our counterparts in the American Administration for that?”
“Q4. Ninety-seven homes in Coalsnaughton have been evacuated due to ground movement—that is hundreds of people enduring severe emotional and financial distress. This is absolutely life-changing. The Mining Remediation Authority is now conducting an eight-week investigation into who will ultimately be held responsible. In the meantime, my constituents are looking to the UK Government for help. Will the Prime Minister commit to working with the Scottish Government and Clackmannanshire council to ensure that affected residents receive whatever support they need for a speedy and fair resolution?”
“Progress? Not when it comes to Scotland’s jet fuel supply, because yesterday there were fuel shortages at Scottish airports, meaning lengthy delays. Those on the Front Bench will say it was because of a tanker driver shortage—a logistics issue—and they would be absolutely right to do so. However, the fact is that 2,822 supply chain jobs were lost because of the Grangemouth oil refinery closure, leading to transport problems like the one we saw yesterday. Jet fuel shortages will happen again; what are the Government going to do to stop that happening?”
“T3. I have concerns about recent reports that the Society of Media Lawyers, which opposes the reform of strategic lawsuits against public participation, has had significant access to Ministers and civil servants while lobbying against stronger protections for journalists, whistleblowers and campaigners. SLAPPs continue to be used by the super-wealthy and super-powerful to silence investigative reporting and public interest speech. Will the Government bring forward meaningful and undiluted anti-SLAPP legislation?”
“Fifteen months ago, at the Scottish Labour party conference, the Prime Minister announced Project Willow, with £200 million for Grangemouth’s bold industrial future. Let us get these new green, clean future industries into Grangemouth, but let us do it more quickly. It has taken far too long. Workers need jobs and the local community must see the benefit of those industries coming to Grangemouth. Scandalously, for far too long private capital has exploited the local area, extracted profits and not put anything back into the town that has given it oh so much. Let us take public ownership of these new industries and reinvest in Grangemouth—in the town and the people. It is high time that we, the working class, started to reap the benefits of our labour.”
“We know that when essential national infrastructure is in the hands of a foreign Government and a private company, workers, their communities and our nation’s energy security will not stand in the way of shareholders getting their dividend. That is what private capital will always do. British Steel being taken into national ownership is great news, but I ask the Minister why the same did not happen for Grangemouth oil refinery. Last Christmas my Labour Government did step in and save the UK chemicals industry at Grangemouth, with 500 jobs secured and a profit-sharing agreement reached: positive Government action for Grangemouth and for all of Scotland. That was the right thing to do—it was the Labour thing to do—and the same goes for nationalising British Steel.”
“Coalminers were the original victims of an unjust transition and, 40 years on, the Grangemouth oil refinery workers are the modern-day equivalent. PetroChina, the Chinese state-owned petrochemical company, and Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s Ineos ended a century of Scottish oil refining because they—a foreign Government and private capital—wanted to make even more money. The closure meant: 435 jobs on site—redundant; 2,822 supply chain jobs—gone; local businesses, which needed refinery workers’ custom— hammered; £400 million a year from the Scottish economy—lost; Scotland’s energy security—weakened; and Scotland’s national security—compromised. The previous Tory Government were uninterested and the SNP Scottish Government were negligent.”
“In finishing, I say to any colleague who thinks I am wrong: please do have a look at the polls—look at the by-election results that we have had. The Prime Minister said that we would put country before party. Today, with this vote, he has the perfect opportunity to do just that. The Prime Minister needs to stop putting Labour MPs in awkward situations. The open and honest thing would be to refer himself to the Committee of Privileges. If he will not do that, then I am afraid that he has left me with no choice: I will have to vote for the motion this afternoon.”
“Whether it be Tory lockdown parties or trips to castles hundreds of miles away to test eyesight, the SNP abandonment of care homes and the “do not resuscitate” notices placed on patients without their consent during covid, we need to be better than all of that. But truthfully, in our first 20 months in government, the public do not think that we are. Because of the mistakes, the decline in standards, the secrecy and the lack of accountability, we are paving the way for a hard-line, far-right Government to come next. And let us be under no illusions: that Government would set the country back to the days of mass unemployment, dire poverty and inequality. They would want to create a society that is as intolerant as it is unfair, and it absolutely terrifies me.”
“It really is a low bar that we have been set, but people genuinely think that we are all the same—they see no real difference. To echo other right hon. and hon. Members, I think that the Prime Minister should refer himself to the Privileges Committee. It would say to Parliament—and, more importantly, to our voters across the country—that he knows that he will be proved innocent, that he will be vindicated, that he has got nothing to hide, and, importantly, that transparency and accountability really are at the heart of our democracy. I say to my colleagues on the Labour Benches that we were elected based on the promise of providing change—an end to the scandals and the cover-ups that people are so disgusted with.”