YouSaid · the spoken record
Darren Jones
Lines from Political Thinking with Nick Robinson have been withdrawn from this page while we check who is speaking. See the correction.
On the record 2017–2026
hansard
This is everything the corpus holds for Darren Jones. It is not everything they have said on the record.
Every line below is reproduced as it was said and credited to the record it came from, and links to that record wherever it can be linked. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections
“I am convening relevant Secretaries of State twice a week, with their permanent secretaries, to scrutinise plans and ensure that we are prepared for different outcomes across major and relevant UK supply chains. The conflict in the middle east is not our war, and while we do not know how long it will last, we are acting now to protect the British people. I look forward to keeping the House updated on this work in the coming weeks and months.”
House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I begin by wishing the Parliamentary Secretary at the Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (Mr Frith), a happy birthday, and noting the generosity and co-ordination of the House in not submitting a single question for him to answer today? I encourage Members to submit particularly difficult questions for him in future. I will update the House on some of the work that I am leading in response to the war in the middle east. As part of our work with the new middle east response committee, I am chairing a new contingency planning ministerial group. It will focus on preparing for and mitigating, where possible, any impact on our economy and domestic security as a result of the conflict.”
House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I confirmed to the House, I think, a day or so ago, a leak inquiry has begun. When further facts are established, we reserve the right to do so.”
House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I can confirm that we take this matter deeply seriously and, as I say, we reserve the right to do so once the facts have been established through the inquiry.”
House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are working in co-operation with the Metropolitan police. As the hon. Member would expect, and as I am sure the House would agree, we do not want to do anything that would interfere with the police process.”
House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I have said from the Dispatch Box, the victims of Jeffrey Epstein want to see justice. A criminal investigation by the police is under way, and it is right that the House does not interfere with that process and works with the Metropolitan police to allow them to undertake their work.”
House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for her excellent question. I can confirm that the Foreign Office is part of our contingency planning work at the centre of Government. On all issues, we look at the international data available to us, and the Foreign Office will keep that in consideration when trying to support allies and partners, as well as ensuring security and resilience for the UK.”
House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think any constituency MP would find those circumstances utterly unacceptable. If the hon. Member writes to me, I will ensure that I pass the information to colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to see what we can do.”
House of Commons23 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Those women and girls have been subjected to intolerable cruelty and disgusting abuse, and are to date without justice. Their experiences should be taken seriously and they should be listened to. I do not come to the House today to defend that decision—it was the wrong one. I am here to account for the Government’s accountability to this House on the process that followed. I take the Government’s responsibility to this House seriously, so I will not take the opportunity this evening to try to score party political points, or to defend a decision that the Prime Minister has said is wrong and for which he apologises. I do, however, commit to returning to this House as often as required.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Today’s motion asks this House to consider the Government’s accountability to this place for Peter Mandelson’s appointment. The Government have been, and remain, fully committed to keeping the House informed of all relevant information related to Peter Mandelson’s appointment and subsequent dismissal as ambassador to the United States. Ministers have addressed the House on a number of occasions on this matter. The Prime Minister has set out to the House that, while much of the debate on this issue has focused on process, at the heart of it all is the decision to appoint Peter Mandelson in the first place. The Prime Minister has been up front about that and takes responsibility for it. He knows that he should not have made the appointment. He regrets the decision, and he apologises for it, in particular to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will be clear: redactions are visible on the documents by the black marking out of information. If there is no marking out, it is not a redaction. All redactions are agreed via the Intelligence and Security Committee before they come to the House.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Prime Minister followed the process that was in place, and I will turn to some of the details of that in the remainder of my speech. On 11 March, I addressed the House in response to the Humble Address, as we released the first tranche of documents relating to Peter Mandelson’s appointment and subsequent dismissal. I committed to keep the House updated as we worked to publish documents relevant to that Humble Address, and I recommit to doing so today. I reassure the House that we are proceeding at pace to process the outstanding documents, a number of which are currently being reviewed by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament, with the aim of publishing the next tranche of documents as a matter of urgency. In the debate, I was asked specifically about redactions in documents published in relation to the Humble Address.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I can confirm to the House, based on advice that I have received, that a question was asked by the Foreign Office of the Cabinet Office team whether, on the basis that Peter Mandelson was already a Member of the House of Lords and a Privy Counsellor, further developed vetting status was required. That then subsequently took place, as Members of the House know. The Foreign Office officials who made the decision to overrule the recommendation of UKSV then failed to notify the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary or her predecessor, the Deputy Prime Minister, or any other Minister, including myself, or the former Cabinet Secretary, Sir Chris Wormald. That has been confirmed today in evidence given by Sir Olly Robbins to the Foreign Affairs Committee.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I refer the hon. Gentleman to the Prime Minister’s words, and I reiterate his apology for having made that wrong decision in the first place. I will now move to the specific matter of security vetting. As the House heard from the Prime Minister yesterday, on the evening of 14 April he was told for the first time that last year, before Peter Mandelson took up his position as ambassador, the Foreign Office had granted Peter Mandelson developed vetting clearance against the recommendation of the United Kingdom Security Vetting authority, UKSV. In today’s debate there have been accusations that the Cabinet Office had suggested that developed vetted status or the process to seek that was not necessary. Those accusations are inaccurate.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There were multiple opportunities for this issue to have been raised, not just when the decision to grant Peter Mandelson developed vetting status was initially made, but subsequently when the Prime Minister asked the former Cabinet Secretary to assure him that all due process had been followed—and he had been assured of that—and then subsequently again when the Foreign Secretary and the then permanent secretary to the Foreign Office provided a signed statement to the Foreign Affairs Committee confirming: “Peter Mandelson’s security vetting was conducted to the usual standard set for developed vetting in line with established Cabinet Office policy.””
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the Prime Minister has made clear to the House and via the publication of a minute of the meeting in which he was informed of this information, the Prime Minister made it immediately clear to his officials that he intended to come to this House to inform Members of Parliament of the situation about which he had just been told, but that he urgently needed a set of information about who had made what decision and when, in order to be able to provide the full facts to Parliament. On Tuesday 14 April, the Prime Minister instructed officials to establish the facts urgently. I agree with the Prime Minister that he should have been informed of this a long time ago, as should this House.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When I became aware of the details of Peter Mandelson’s case following the publication of reporting in The Guardian last Thursday, I was briefed on the matter that evening at the Cabinet Office by officials in respect of both the case of Peter Mandelson and the existing policy on UKSV recommendations and the Foreign Office’s decisions. I immediately suspended the right for the Foreign Office to overrule UKSV recommendations pending further investigation. In reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger), I can confirm that the review that Adrian Fulford will conduct for the Government should be completed in around four weeks, so that we can take a quick decision on the proper functioning of the process.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is testimony from the official himself in front of the Foreign Affairs Committee. On 28 January 2025, UKSV recommended to the Foreign Office that developed vetting clearance should not be granted to Peter Mandelson. The following day, on 29 January 2025, Foreign Office officials made the decision to grant developed vetting clearance for Peter Mandelson none the less. This was an established process for the Foreign Office, which had the authority to be able to make those decisions. It is worth reiterating for the sake of clarity, as the Prime Minister did yesterday, that UKSV makes decisions for many Government Departments, but not for the Foreign Office. The final decision on developed vetting clearance is made by Foreign Office officials, not by UKSV.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The right hon. Lady will know that I am not at liberty to comment in respect of any potential claim to the employment tribunal. Peter Mandelson’s security vetting was carried out by UKSV between 23 December 2024 and 28 January 2025. That included collecting relevant information and interviewing the applicant, in this case on two occasions. One issue has been raised in the debate about that time period; there is a suggestion that No. 10 applied pressure on officials at the Foreign Office in relation to the security vetting process. It was confirmed in testimony today before the Foreign Affairs Committee that no such pressure was applied beyond asking for the process to be completed as quickly as possible, and confirmed by Sir Olly Robbins that there was no personal contact by telephone or message.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I recognise that the House will want to know about the next steps in respect of the publication of the remainder of the information relevant to the Humble Address that was not included in the first tranche. I commit to the House that we will release that further material shortly, subject to the processes ongoing with the Metropolitan police and the Intelligence and Security Committee, and we will continue to keep Members updated as we make progress. I commend this statement to the House.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We will publish terms of reference, and the Government commit to return to the House on their findings and recommendations. On two other questions that were raised during the debate, accusations have been made of the Prime Minister both in this House of misleading and outside this House of lying. Those have been shown today by evidence in the Foreign Affairs Committee not to be true in any way. I am sure the House will be as concerned as I am that while officials felt unable to provide this information to Ministers, it was made available to The Guardian . As a consequence, I can confirm that a leak inquiry is now under way. I thank right hon. and hon. Members for their contributions to today’s debate. This is my sixth address to this House on the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States of America.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What clearly came to light about Peter Mandelson following the release of files by the United States Department of Justice was clearly deeply disturbing. In February this year, the Prime Minister instructed officials to carry out a review of the national security vetting process to ensure that it is fit for purpose. I can confirm that the terms of reference for that review have been updated to include the means by which all decisions are made in relation to national security vetting. The Government have appointed Sir Adrian Fulford to lead that review and, for completeness, have separately asked the Government Security Group in the Cabinet Office to look at any security concerns raised during Peter Mandelson’s tenure as ambassador to the United States, in answer to the question raised by the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas).”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The civil service code on this issue is clear, not just in normal practice but especially in relation to when Ministers are giving evidence to Parliament, as was the case via correspondence from the current Foreign Secretary to the Foreign Affairs Committee. There is no law that stops civil servants sensibly flagging UKSV recommendations while protecting detailed, sensitive vetting information in order to allow Ministers to make judgments on appointments or to explain matters to Parliament. The Government have also changed the direct ministerial appointments process so that due diligence is now required as standard. The Prime Minister has also changed the process so that public announcements about direct ministerial appointments can now not be made until security vetting has been completed.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I repeat my words and refer back to them. Much has been said about the ability of officials to disclose sensitive vetting information. As the Prime Minister has set out, I accept that the sensitive personal information provided by an individual being vetted must be protected from disclosure. If that were not the case, the integrity of the whole process would be compromised. However, neither the Prime Minister nor I accept that the appointing Minister cannot be told of the recommendation made by UKSV. Nor do the Government accept that Foreign Office officials could not have informed the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary or the Cabinet Secretary of UKSV’s recommendation while maintaining the necessary confidentiality that vetting requires.”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I refer him to the answer I gave last week in respect of that question, and to further comments from the Foreign Office.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is why there is cross-party consensus across the House for transparency and accountability and why the Government are committed to publishing all material relevant to the Humble Address. I will continue to keep the House updated as a matter of priority, as I have done to date, and I commend this statement to the House.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart), has requested, but as the Prime Minister set out this morning, the inherited process itself was not strong enough. That is why the Prime Minister has already strengthened the process and is committed to strengthening it further in the future. This forms part of wider changes that the Government are bringing forward to improve the system, including a review by the Ethics and Integrity Commission relating to financial disclosures, transparency around lobbying, and the business appointment rules, alongside a review of the national security vetting system. As I have said, and I know Members across the House will agree, Jeffrey Epstein was a disgusting individual, and Peter Mandelson’s decision to put their relationship before his victims and the vulnerable was reprehensible.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Given the breadth of the motion agreed by the House and the large number of materials and Departments involved, this process will take time and necessarily requires careful consideration. Where relevant documents are held, they are being prepared for release through an established process, including the appropriate checks relating to national security, international relations, legal privilege and the protection of personal data. The Government have acknowledged that the documents published reveal that the appointment process fell short of what is required. As previously set out, the independent adviser looked last week at the process and concluded that he saw no grounds for the investigation that the shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, the hon.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the House understands, the Government must carefully assess the risk of prejudicing UK national security or international relations posed by the release of any official documents. Again, this process is subject to parliamentary oversight. Any such material will be and is in the process of being referred to the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. I thank the Committee for its assistance and can confirm that this process was also followed regarding the first tranche of material published last week. Outside of this arrangement, the important and well-established constitutional principle that national security and international relations judgments are ultimately for the Government has not changed. We are continuing the disclosure process for other documents across Government within the scope of the address.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the Government have said previously, there are specific documents that we would like to disclose but which the Metropolitan police has asked us not to in order to avoid prejudicing the ongoing criminal investigation into Peter Mandelson. The Government have agreed to that request. We will publish those documents in the future once the Metropolitan police has confirmed that it will no longer prejudice its investigation. As a consequence of that, and as I set out to the House on 11 March, the Government have therefore taken the extraordinary step, as agreed with Mr Speaker, of briefing the Chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, the hon. Member for North Dorset (Simon Hoare), on terms agreed by the Metropolitan police to ensure that there is as much transparency to the House as possible.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I updated the House last Wednesday on the Government’s response to the Humble Address motion of 4 February, after the first tranche of documents were laid in both Houses in response to that motion. The Government have been clear that they are committed to publishing all documents relevant to the Humble Address, and that further material will be published in due course as officials work through its full scope. The first tranche, as the title of the document made clear, represented, “Part of a Return to an Address of the Honourable the House of Commons dated 4 February 2026”. It responded directly to a number of specific elements contained in that motion, namely papers relating to Lord Mandelson’s appointment as His Majesty’s ambassador and the discussions that subsequently led to his dismissal.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I informed the House last week, the documents that pertain to tranche 1 are the documents the Government own, and they have been published in line with the Humble Address. The shadow Minister asks about the process followed for the appointment of Peter Mandelson. As the Prime Minister and the Government have said, the process that was followed was the process that was inherited; however, this has shown that that process is not sufficient, which is why it is being strengthened. The shadow Minister made reference to questions about WhatsApps and other messages. I can confirm that those types of documents will be subject to a further tranche being published in due course. He also asked me about security clearance for Peter Mandelson.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I can confirm that any documents that are within the scope of the Humble Address and refer to communications between Ministers and others and Peter Mandelson are part of the disclosure process currently being undertaken by the Government.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Member for his questions; I just wanted to clarify whether he felt that I should refer myself to the independent adviser. I refer the hon. Member to the letter from the independent adviser, which came out on Friday of last week and concluded that there were no grounds for an investigation into the Prime Minister’s conduct, because the process that the Government inherited for these types of appointments had been followed appropriately. The process itself, as the Prime Minister said again this morning, is clearly not sufficient, which is why it needs to be changed for the future.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I refer my hon. Friend to the part of my statement in relation to the work of the Ethics and Integrity Commission and the work that the Prime Minister has set it in reviewing the rules around transparency and lobbying, business accounting rules and other such related processes.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman and Members across the House would not want to do anything to prejudice a criminal investigation that might finally result in justice for the victims of Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. As I have said to the House repeatedly, where the Metropolitan police has asked for documents to be held back, we have consented to that. However, recognising the points the right hon. Gentleman makes, we have agreed a process with the Chair of the relevant Select Committee—a Member on the right hon. Gentleman’s side of the House—so that the Chair is able to see those documents and so that any accusations of any cover-up by the Government can be shown to be inaccurate.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Where the Government have the ability to take action to ensure transparency and accountability on this matter, they are making sure that they do so. For organisations that are outside of Government, it is for those organisations to consider such requests.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a reflection of the depth and extent of the work being undertaken by Government to comply with the Humble Address that it is taking some time to be able to process the documents. We moved at pace to publish the first tranche of documents last week and, as I have said to the House, we are going to publish the second tranche as soon as possible.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I know that Baroness Anderson in the other place will be listening with great intent to my hon. Friend’s question. I was pleased to get the Prime Minister’s support to appoint Baroness Anderson as an additional Minister in the Cabinet Office to take on this additional work, given the seriousness with which we take the need for modernisation and reform. I look forward to the proposals that she will bring forward in due course.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the Prime Minister has already said, the length of time it takes between an ambassador’s appointment and agreement from the host country, and for certain vetting to take place, meant that in the past there had been an established process to allow for ambassadors to start work and to be announced before the vetting was completed. We are reviewing that process to make sure that there are not such gaps in the future.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend will know that there are legal proceedings under way, with actions by the Metropolitan police and others. The Government agree that there should be justice for victims, and anyone who has any insight, knowledge or experience of Jeffrey Epstein, his associates or the events involved should come forward and share it.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think there is cross-party agreement that we should introduce legislation that removes life peerages from those in the other place who bring the House into disrepute or suffer a criminal penalty for their behaviour. That is why the Government are working to introduce legislation that not only deals with Peter Mandelson but is available as a sanction for others who behave in that way in the future. We are getting towards the end of this Session, but we are committed to bringing forward that legislation. We look forward to presenting it shortly.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the second half of the hon. Member’s question, the public are looking to the Prime Minister and seeing the important leadership role that he is playing in the world, given the events in the middle east, Ukraine and elsewhere. That is important for domestic conditions for families struggling with living standards and worried about the future. On the first part of the question, the Prime Minister has apologised for appointing Peter Mandelson, which he regrets—it was a mistake. If he had had information on the depth and extent of the relationship, which became available after the publication of documents at the point of the appointment, he would not have appointed him in the first place.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Of course, the Government take the Humble Address with the utmost seriousness, and respect the sovereignty of Parliament in exercising its own powers, but my hon. Friend is right to remind the House that justice for victims will be delivered only as a consequence of criminal investigation and criminal prosecution, not by motions of this House. It is important that none of us seeks to undermine those criminal investigations so that victims may, for once, see justice come in their direction.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The right hon. Gentleman invites me to itemise the documents that have been held back by the Metropolitan police. I am advised that I am not at liberty to do that from the Dispatch Box, but I say again to him and the House that all documents that the Government have and are able to publish at this time have been published.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I refer my hon. Friend to the content of my statement, and the very wide-ranging review by the Ethics and Integrity Commission into the process not just for appointments but for vetting, as well as into transparency on lobbying, declarations of interests and business appointment rules. The Government hope that the work of the commission will allow us to have a process that avoids these problems in future.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I repeat for the House that, in line with the Humble Address, all documents that the Government have were published. The hon. Lady’s reference to 56 documents is a reference to 56 documents that the Opposition like to think exist, as opposed to those that have been published by the Government. On severance payments, the documents were published in a bundle last week, and they speak for themselves.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I have said from the Dispatch Box, there are documents that the Government would have wished to have been able to publish as part of the response to the Humble Address, but the Metropolitan police asked us not to do so. It is right that we have honoured that request, given the ongoing criminal investigation. As soon as the Metropolitan police have informed us that they have discharged their duties, we will publish those documents for the House.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The documents that were published in the tranche last week in relation to the Humble Address show the process that was followed, which was the proper process at the time.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think all Members across the House would recognise the primacy of the criminal investigations that are under way as the best route for justice for the victims of Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. With that in mind, the Government have committed to comply with the Humble Address and their transparency obligations to Parliament while holding back the documents that the Metropolitan police have asked us to hold back.”
House of Commons16 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗