Sir Desmond Swayne
MP for New Forest West · Conservative · United Kingdom
“That is the strategy of this Budget: not to do too much, but to have a few things that make it, in the estimation of the hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins), “popular”.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“According to Bloomberg data, we have lost half the billionaire wealth since 2024, either because it has left the United Kingdom or because its exposure here has been reduced. We might ask ourselves why. Well, it comes back exactly to the issue raised by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will certainly address the hon. Gentleman’s question. This Budget is certainly not popular with me—I have interests, which are set out in the register.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The problem that we have at the centre of our economy at the moment was defined—brilliantly and very candidly, I think—by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he said that, in all the meetings he has, the question he is asked is, “Who can we tax in order to give benefits to others?” That is essentially the issue we are having…”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is always a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Hornsey and Friern Barnet (Catherine West). I believe that this is the cut-and-run Budget.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Nothing could be more calculated to be devastating for the prospects of our young people languishing in unemployment than to suck in European labour. So I say we have that election.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,796 held · 1,795 searchable for Sir Desmond Swayne. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 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.
“What I would certainly want, and what I believe the Government need, is an alternative source of expertise—a competitive source of expertise—particularly statisticians leading in their fields, who would be able to furnish me, to arm me, to arm Ministers, with the right questions to ask about the validity of the modelling and the data. It can only improve the decision-making process. But what is really galling in all this is then to hear on the airwaves Professor Ferguson being interviewed, giving his wisdom to the nation once again, to all intents and purposes as if he were still a key Government adviser. I do hope that the Minister winding up the debate will be able to assure us that that is most certainly not the case.”
House of Commons30 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have to accept, of course, the possibility that they may be absolutely right, but I know this: were I presented by such a lobby of eminent scientists—eminent people leading in their field—and told that they had discovered this new emergency, and that so many more people were going to die, and unless I did what they said, I would be responsible for their deaths, I would find great difficulty in having the wherewithal to identify and ask the right questions to be sure that they were on the money, or 100 miles from it.”
House of Commons30 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not for one moment question the motives of Ministers. I do, however, question their ability, in exactly the way that I question my own ability. When the House rose, the lobby of Government scientific advisers—a lobby, we should remember, that had already publicly expressed their frustration that their earlier strictures on how Christmas should be celebrated had not been fully taken on board by the Government—announced that they had discovered a new strain of the disease so much more transmissible than the earlier one. They bounced the Government.”
House of Commons30 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This House legislated explicitly for specific arrangements to govern the celebration of Christmas, and no sooner than the House had risen itself for Christmas, the Government, by ministerial fiat, changed those arrangements. We are asked this evening to give retrospective legislative approval to the changes that they made. We are in the absurd position of being asked to vote for the ghost of Christmas past. Sometimes in a democracy, process has an importance. I am constantly—daily—confronted by individuals and businesses facing ruin, notwithstanding the huge investment that they made in covid-secure premises and procedures. What we have never had, and what we have always been asking for, is the cost-benefit analysis that the Government made on each of the restrictive measures that make up the menu of their tier system.”
House of Commons30 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The reality is this. These are the questions that my constituents put to me, and I am reduced to saying, “It’s one of life’s great mysteries.” The decision-making process is entirely opaque. That is why I voted against it when I had the chance.”
House of Commons30 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“His waitress tested positive, so the proprietor of the small café closed immediately and went into self-isolation, but test, track and trace has not contacted him, so he is without the wherewithal to claim the allowance. Can the Secretary of State fix it?”
House of Commons17 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Has the Minister seen some of the quite shocking footage of the policing of demonstrations that is available online, and is he aware that the police have been visiting restaurants and demanding people’s names and addresses? What is happening to our country?”
House of Commons14 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for suggesting the lucrative opportunity of exporting conflict diamonds, but just how burdensome will the additional paperwork of which he spoke be?”
House of Commons9 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That would be absolutely disproportionate to a virus with a mortality rate verging on 1%. It would equally be a terrible precedent to set for other vaccines and medicines. I therefore hope that we can get away from that. The way to persuade people to have a vaccination is, of course, to line up the entire Government and their Ministers, and their loved ones, let them have it first, and then get all the luvvies—the icons of popular culture —out on the airwaves singing its praises. Any kind of suggestion of coercion absolutely feeds the conspiracy theory that we are being cowed and our liberty is being taken away.”
House of Commons1 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Why will you be able to buy a pint in a sports venue without getting anything to eat, but if you order a pint in a pub, you will have to have a substantial meal? I will leave that hanging as the great existential question of the day. Suppression in anticipation of vaccination is the reason for the measures before us today, but people have been writing to me for months terrified that a vaccination will be compulsory. I have responded by saying, “Don’t be so absolutely ridiculous—that could never possibly happen. We are a Conservative Government, after all.” Yet now we discover that vaccination may be a passport to the acquisition of your civil liberties, without which you will have all sorts of things that you would otherwise be able to do denied to you.”
House of Commons1 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That would be discrimination. It would be vaccinationism, which we must of course resist. The other thing that any kind of coercion would do is set the seal on this Government’s reputation as the most authoritarian since the Commonwealth of the 1650s; but it is as nothing to the enthusiasm that we have seen from the Opposition Front Bench for even more coercive and restrictive measures.”
House of Commons1 December 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is there any evidence that the financial effects of coronavirus have been less severe on the recipients of legacy benefits than on those on universal credit?”
House of Commons30 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
““He loved Big Brother.” The last ruler that told us how we may or may not celebrate Christmas was Oliver Cromwell. It didn’t end well, did it?”
House of Commons23 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can we have a statement on the impact on lives and livelihoods of the blanket measures that we are now under, and when we are released on 2 December, will we ensure that such blunt measures are not used again?”
House of Commons12 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“These liberties, as we heard in the debate earlier this afternoon, were bought at an extraordinarily high price. Now, as we move into the vaccinated sunny uplands of release and freedom, there is a danger that the state has learned a powerful lesson over the last few months—namely, that the British people do not worry too much about their liberties and that they can be dispensed with conveniently when need arises. I hope that this House will wake up to that danger and seek a remedy.”
House of Commons11 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have received representations from clinicians who have been threatened that their jobs will be taken from them because they have publicly expressed their doubts about the wisdom of the policy or, indeed, their doubts about the misuse or the concealment of data. We had the extraordinary scene of a nurse being charged with assault for seeking to liberate her mother from a care home. Could this have happened in our country? Then we saw those students seeking to effect a great escape from the Stalag Luft III that their university had imposed on them. As these enormities occurred, instead of the expected rising chorus of protest, on the contrary we are told by the pollsters that actually the British people thirst for even greater restraints on their liberty. I am appalled—absolutely appalled.”
House of Commons11 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have made the case against the regulations in this House and we have lost all the votes, and that is democracy. However, liberal western democracy is more than rule by the majority. It certainly includes freedom of association, freedom of expression and freedom to worship. One of the most worrying aspects of our response to the coronavirus has been the way people have simply shrugged as these freedoms have been dispensed with. The Government have armed themselves with all the coercive powers of the state to tell us whom we may meet, when we may meet them, where we may meet them and what we must wear. Freedom of protest has been dispensed with, as has freedom of worship. Is it not interesting, the way that subsidiaries of the totalitarian state, in their eagerness, seek to exceed even what has been proscribed and prescribed?”
House of Commons11 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When the major generals removed liberties, Oliver Cromwell wondered publicly if even arming one in 10 would be sufficient to enforce it. Will the Minister assure me that the armed forces will not be used to enforce any coronavirus regulations?”
House of Commons10 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The amended graphs used to justify the lockdown now show a 40% reduction in the death rate in the upper quartile as against their first presentation, so the NHS would have coped, wouldn’t it?”
House of Commons10 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on the criteria for allowing singing in public during the covid-19 outbreak.”
House of Commons5 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am glad that my hon. Friend has confirmed that at least professionals can continue to rehearse and perform. When will the rest of us be allowed to sing again without some marshal or other agent of her totalitarian state seeking to prevent us?”
House of Commons5 November 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have been told that intensive care units are at 80% of their capacity, but of course at this time of year that is exactly what we would expect them to be. No wonder our constituents are writing to us with ever greater conspiracy theories—it is because our actions defy rational explanation. Hallelujah—the consensus has been broken; the Prime Minister has finally resisted the advice he has been given by the scientists, just at a time when the Opposition have embraced it with enthusiasm. Now at least an argument can be had, and proper scrutiny and freedom from groupthink will arise. The danger is that if we do not change the way in which we respond to this disease, in years to come historians will pick over how a prosperous society entered into such a devastating act of self-harm.”
House of Commons22 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is no good to say, “Well, every other jurisdiction in the world is following basically the same policy”. That would strike me as herd stupidity. Speaking of herds, I understand that a number of Ministers have questioned the existence of herd immunity, which is odd, given that a successful vaccine programme relies on herd immunity and that is the basket in which the Government have placed all their eggs. We can throw into this mix the fact that we appear determined to claim every possible death as a covid death, as though we were in some sort of international league and competition; the failure to be absolutely up front on the limitations of the PCR—polymerase chain reaction—test as a means of tracking the disease; and the way we use large numbers to terrify people.”
House of Commons22 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If we were to ask a scientist, “How do you stop a virus that spreads through human contact?”, we should not be surprised if he answered by telling us that we must stop human contact as far as is possible. It falls to us, however, to decide whether the price is worth paying in terms of the misery and unemployment it generates. We are talking about a generation marred in their life chances; and mind-boggling borrowing that we will have to pay off over years, which will diminish proper investment in public services and industry. All that, and for what? The Secretary of State has told us this week that the average number of deaths is consistent with the long-term average for this time of year. Some 1,600 people die every day, but covid is by no means chief among their killers.”
House of Commons22 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can we have a debate on censorship? Then we would be able to discuss the sinister disappearance of the link from Google to the Great Barrington declaration, wouldn’t we?”
House of Commons15 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What advantage is there to be had from accommodating non-intubated covid cases in Nightingale hospitals, and if there is an advantage what additional facilities would need to be provided?”
House of Commons15 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What does the Prime Minister make of the special envoy’s statement that “We in the World Health Organisation do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus”?”
House of Commons12 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On Tuesday, instead of Ministers filling the time with newspeak designed to obscure the blindingly obvious, will the Leader of the House ensure that they focus rigorously on the key question—namely, if lockdown measures are the answer, why are they not working?”
House of Commons8 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Given that the Minister has pleaded simplicity for the rule of six, is it any less simple that the six should exclude children than that it should include them, or do we imagine that our constituents are stupid?”
House of Commons6 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The question was asked and the answer was that it was for simplicity. It was not a question of evidence: the answer was that it was simpler to include children. Given that there is no evidence, will the hon. Gentleman reassess his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Wycombe (Mr Baker)?”
House of Commons6 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If the effort against covid is a war, then the first principles are the selection and maintenance of the aim. In March, the aim was to flatten the curve and protect the NHS. Has it changed?”
House of Commons1 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A national curfew in the New Forest is rather unfair, given our very low infection rate. Restaurateurs and landlords have invested a great deal in covid-secure measures and reduced capacity, and the loss of the extra hour reduces throughput, particularly for those that want a second sitting for dinner to come through, because it makes it very uneconomic. Will the Secretary of State consider the possibility of devolving the power to impose curfew locally, even to particular establishments, which would provide landlords with a powerful incentive to ensure that their patrons behave sensibly and properly?”
House of Commons1 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the Leader of the House agree that, were the Prime Minister minded to answer the letter sent to him on 21 September by Professor Gupta and other eminent scientists, questioning the selection and maintenance of the aim regarding the Government’s policy in respect of covid-19, he should do so by making a written statement to the House?”
House of Commons1 October 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am glad that the consensus in the scientific community is broken and the critics are speaking out. I do not underestimate for one moment the horrible nature of this disease and its post-viral syndrome, but in terms of the United Kingdom’s killers, it is 24th in the league, accounting for only 1.4% of deaths. As a consequence, I believe the Government’s policy has been disproportionate. By decree, they have interfered in our private and family lives, telling us whom we may meet, when we may meet them and what we must wear when we meet them. We have the cruelty of elderly people in care homes being disoriented, unable to see the faces of their loved ones or to receive a hug. We have the tsunami of deaths that we may experience shortly as a consequence of undiagnosed cancers and heart disease, and the discontinuation of clinical trials.”
House of Commons28 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Not on one day since March have there been infections on a day that were double that of the same day of the week preceding—not once. Where did this doubling come from? What was their purpose in presenting such a graph? It was the purpose of the fat boy in “The Pickwick Papers”: “I wants to make your flesh creep.” It was “project fear”. It was an attempt to terrify the British people, as if they had not been terrified enough. I have been banging on about this since March, and with every criticism I have made, I have been told that the Government were relying on the best possible science. So I was delighted by the letter send one week ago today and containing the nuanced criticism of Professors Heneghan, Gupta and Sikora. I believe that the Government now have to answer that criticism.”
House of Commons28 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Less than a year ago, I celebrated what I thought was the election of a sceptical and liberal Conservative Administration. Now, I am left wondering if the Prime Minister has not been abducted by Dr Strangelove and reprogrammed by SAGE over to the dark side. The purpose of politicians is to impose a sense of proportion on science and not to be in thrall to it. I will make myself very unpopular, but I believe that the appearance of the chiefs last week should have been a sacking offence. When they presented that graph, it was with the caveat that it was not a prediction, but nevertheless it was clear that they presented it as a plausible scenario, with its 50,000 cases per day by mid-October based on the doubling of infections by the week.”
House of Commons28 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I say most gently to the Minister that the last time an Administration sought to restrain celebrations at Christmas was during the Commonwealth, when the Lord Protector was left musing in public whether, if he were to arm one in 10, that would be enough. How many marshals will be required? I conclude by saying that the policy of the Government has been disproportionate in response to this threat. There may be a virus one day that threatens our very way of life, but this is not it, even if we are behaving as if it were.”
House of Commons28 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I deduce that it was much more proportionate. All sorts of criticisms are levelled against the Swedish Government that, on examination of the data and comparing like for like, are without foundation. I certainly hold up the Swedish model as an alternative. We have seen the eye-watering costs that we must now all face for a generation, having closed down our economy for all those months as a consequence of the Government’s policy. We face the crushing of enterprises, the destruction of livelihoods, and unemployment among young people, all as a consequence of an overreaction. I understand that there is now some question as to whether students will be allowed to return from university at Christmas.”
House of Commons28 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Some of the orders that we are about to deal with are quite dated, but I assume that they have been debated in a Committee upstairs. They touch on very intimate parts of our liberty and our choice. Is there any protocol on the circumstances in which they could be debated on the Floor of the House, rather than upstairs in a Committee stitched up by the Committee of Selection?”
House of Commons22 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Some 1.4% of those 275,000 people who travelled and queued were positive. Will not even a modest number of false positives mislead us? Is the Office for National Statistics survey any less prone to false positives?”
House of Commons17 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope my right hon. and learned Friend keeps his balance, but will he address eye-watering costs such as the £456,000 clocked up by Andrew Harper’s killers? That cannot be right, can it?”
House of Commons16 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To what extent is there a possibility that it is the exponential increase in testing itself, in identifying genuine new cases, and the very significant possibility of false positives, that is giving a distorted impression of the trajectory of the disease?”
House of Commons15 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your guidance as to how those of us who sought to record our opposition to this motion as a matter of public record—because of the large number of people who have made representations to us—might actually record the fact that we opposed this motion?”
House of Commons15 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It has seen its infractions of the World Trade Organisation. It has seen what it has done over the European convention on human rights, and it knows what is going on. There are those who have said that there is somehow a comparison to be made between the powers that we envisage in this Bill and what China is doing in Hong Kong. That is such a grotesque comparison as to undermine any argument that they might have.”
House of Commons14 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I put it to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that breaking up the economic integrity of the United Kingdom is just such a circumstance. This Bill is a precaution. It is a deterrent. The best way to prevent ourselves from being in the position of needing these powers is to arm ourselves with them. There is a principle in international law, which is that no country can be bound by an obligation that it made when that obligation is interpreted in such a way as to undermine the very integrity of that country. That is a principle of international law, and there is only one court that can arbitrate in those circumstances. That is the court of international opinion, and the world can see exactly what is going on. The world has had its own dealings with the European Union and its negotiations.”
House of Commons14 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Prime Minister has warned us that a threat has been made to interpret the agreement in such a way as to exclude the possibility of the people of Northern Ireland having access to goods from the rest of the United Kingdom—a threat that clearly shows that those who have made it have abandoned any notion of their binding obligation to negotiate in good faith and make best endeavours to secure an agreement. The Government would be utterly negligent if they were not to take precautions to prevent that from arising; it would be outrageous. The Chairman of the Justice Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill), has said that the powers that the Government envisage arming themselves with should be used in only the most extreme circumstances.”
House of Commons14 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Notwithstanding the statement that will follow, may we have a debate on the Government’s orders, which will marshal us in our streets and have a profound impact on family and social life? Will the Minister hang his head in shame that such orders can be made in a democracy without even a debate in a free Parliament?”
House of Commons10 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is there no scintilla of doubt in my right hon. Friend’s mind, occasioned by the growing body of scientific opinion that questions the interpretation of the data and concludes that the policies of Governments—I use the plural—are having an impact worse than the disease itself?”
House of Commons10 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Had the Secretary of State for Health given notice of the Government’s intention to further restrict our liberty to meet one another in his statement yesterday, at least some of us would have been able to question him about it. What remedy is there for those of us who enthusiastically support the Prime Minister, but nevertheless want to restrain the Government’s ability to govern by order without debate?”
House of Commons9 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For the avoidance of any doubt, is it the case that if the EU negotiators, including those on the Joint Committee, are prepared to move forward to implement the existing agreement in a workable way, these provisions will not be necessary?”
House of Commons8 September 2020Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗