YouSaid · the spoken record
Emily Thornberry
Lines from Political Thinking with Nick Robinson have been withdrawn from this page while we check who is speaking.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 2005–2026
hansard
This is everything the corpus holds for Emily Thornberry. 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
“The right hon. Gentleman tempts me down a path that I was not going to go down, although I have gone down it for quite some length in the Committee hearings. It seems to me that all these papers tend to show one thing: the Prime Minister was not particularly interested in the appointment of the ambassador to the United States. He was certainly not a good friend of his: there is no correspondence between them, there are no chatty messages and there is no attempt to get the Prime Minister to vote for Mandelson when he was standing for chancellor of the University of Oxford—I mean, there is not a friendship at all. The criticism that I make, and I make openly, is that I think the decision was subcontracted to others who were close to Mandelson.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We may be talking about the same thing. Another way of putting it is that the Prime Minister’s chief of staff had taken responsibility for it on his behalf and was pushing it, and the power that the chief of staff had was because he was the chief of staff to the Prime Minister. It is borderline one way or the other.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That obviously strikes members of the Committee as odd”— well, it certainly did— “but in all my years as a civil servant—many of them as a relatively senior one—I have never seen a UKSV document, other than the ones that I have filled in myself.” It is ridiculous. If he is putting down mitigations in order to deal with legitimate concerns and a security threat, he needs to know what that security threat is, and to understand that UKSV is saying that it is very serious and that Mandelson should not be given the job—yet he says, “I didn’t know. I just thought it was borderline, leaning the other way.” I mean, this is Alice in Wonderland.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I suspect that the latter bit is an interpretation—a way in which, it was hoped, the difficulty that Mandelson was essentially being refused vetting could be slid over into “He can be given the job, so long as there are robust mitigations.” But where are those mitigations? When Sir Olly gave evidence to our Committee, I said to him, “I do not really follow why you would not know the contents of the UKSV document and their concerns or even that they said that there was high concern about Peter Mandelson. I do not understand how you can not know that if you are considering what the mitigations are. You cannot have the mitigations without knowing what the problem is.” He said, “The risks were explained to me, but I have not seen the underlying documentation. That is what I am saying.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He accepts that UKSV’s statement was “‘this case presents as a high concern’ with a recommendation of ‘clearance denied or withdrawn’”, and he “noted that, as well as the tick boxes”— red tick-boxes, which were ticked— “UKSV stated in the final case assessment: ‘Overall, I believe that this is a very borderline case…If a clearance was awarded to the individual by the Department, it is recommended that a very robust risk management model is put in place’”. I do not know whether that is just Ian Collard’s memory of what he may or may not have read—well, I know that he did not read it, because he says that he did not read it at that stage. I do not understand how the UKSV paper can say, “Don’t give him the job”, and then it can also be believed to be a very borderline case with robust risk management recommended.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It may be that those behaving in this way did so because they felt under huge amounts of political pressure, but how does someone whose case was of high concern and for whom it was recommended that clearance be denied become interpreted as a borderline case, leaning against? How do we bridge that gap? The only way that gap is bridged is through mitigations, so I spend my time looking for mitigations, and I cannot find any. Ian Collard, who was one of the security men speaking to Olly Robbins—who, at the time, was the permanent under-secretary—mentioned the importance of mitigations 10 times in his written evidence to us, and Olly Robbins talked about it six times. It is at the forefront of their evidence. I have already referred to an aide-mémoire that Ian Collard made in September. He says that he looked again at the summary.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will move on, but before I do so, I will say something that I think any fair-minded person will know. Presumably the job of being Prime Minister means that there is so much on your desk, and if someone comes to you and says, “Don’t worry about this, I’ll take it and sort it”, there is a temptation to go, “Okay, you do that, because I have 7,000 other things that I have to deal with today.” I do not know—I have never been Prime Minister—but I would assume that that is the reality of the situation. The question is how somebody who is so manifestly inappropriate gets appointed.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not know whether anybody is in a position to be able to enlighten me one way or the other, or whether we will have to wait for the police to give us the document.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have that email, which is about as pathetic as it can be. There might be something in the nine-page summary that some Members sitting in this Chamber have seen. It might be that that summary showing the security concerns has a page or so at the end—it is a blank page—asking the Foreign Office for its response. UKSV is giving a recommendation saying, “Mandelson should not be given the job, he is a security risk.” The process might be that the Foreign Office has to write something on that form saying, “We have read this. We don’t agree with you. We think he should be appointed, and we’re going to put in the following mitigations”, and then list them. It might be that the Foreign Office did not fill that in properly, and it might be that that bit of the form remains blank.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It continues: “With regard to personal conduct”— I think that is hanging out with oligarchs, being friends with the Finance Minister, borrowing money and who knows what else— “I understand that Lord Mandelson has received a letter from Mervyn Thomas, informing him of his responsibilities as an FCDO employee, including under the Diplomatic Service Regulations.” Is that it? He got a letter from a man telling him to behave himself! We have not seen the letter, and I do not know what it is. The email continues: “Matters pertaining to his overseas contacts will certainly be reviewed by the STRAP authorities.” STRAP is another issue, and we should not be distracted by STRAP. Mandelson needed to follow the developed vetting before getting anywhere near the latest STRAP stuff. It is important that we take these things in order.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I really do not know. The Foreign Office got the UKSV clearance on 29 January 2025, and it says that it did something about it, but we cannot see what that is. An email on page 72 of part I is the nearest thing to mitigations I have been able to find, and Ian Collard referred to it in his evidence. It is an email he wrote on 30 January, and I think it is the mitigations, but I just do not think it is a robust set of mitigations to deal with serious security concerns. The email states: “As part of the usual clearance policy process, UKSV identified some areas in his application for ESND to review”— that is the security man. “I understand that Lord Mandelson’s private sector engagements are being managed by HRD”— that is human resources— “and the Legal Directorate through the conflict of interest process.” Who knows?”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I suspect that the ISC may have been entrusted with it—that is what I am trying to say. I am hoping that if the form is blank, it is not necessarily the case that anything of particular security interest was being disclosed, and it is just a process issue, where the Foreign Office did not follow process as it should have and at least put on that form, “Yes, we have done these things.” I am just trying to do my job, holding the Government to account. Why did Britain employ a man who was a security risk to this really important job? We did so because of the mitigations, but nobody will tell us the mitigations. After all these thousands of bits of paper, and after my poor right hon. Friend the Member for Bristol North West coming to the Chamber 11 times, we still cannot get to the root of it.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have been “mandarined”; we have been given partial answers; we have been given nonsense by people believing that it is not for us to know. Well, it is for us to know, and it is for us to know because we are trying to make our Government better, and it is our job as Back Benchers to do that.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is that it? Is that the action that they took, or is there something else? Surely there was a letter written to Peter Mandelson saying, “You have the job, but only if you do x, y and z.” This cannot be dealt with by way of a WhatsApp message or a phone call. This is very serious. This is about the security of our nation, and it should be in a letter. I certainly hope that the reason that I have not seen it is that it exists but the police have it, but I do not know one way or the other. I know that others will be dealing with this later, and I want to draw my remarks to a close, but the Foreign Affairs Committee has been trying to do its job to the best of its ability to try to ensure that such a mistake does not happen again, and we have been doing that in good faith. It has been difficult.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Well, that is very helpful; I thank the right hon. Gentleman very much. Let us move on. Is there a record of the decision? When Sir Oliver Robbins appeared before the Committee, and indeed when other people appeared before it, I kept coming back to the same question: “Where is the record of your decision? What was the process that you went through before doing this? Why are there no notes? Why is there no record? How can we hold you to account if you really, genuinely are not making any notes at all?” Given that a decision was made to give Peter Mandelson the job subject to mitigations, where is the record of the decision? Do the police have it? Is it in the papers and I have missed it? I do not think so. Was there never a written record of the decision? Surely someone would have made a record of the action taken—or is that the email?”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for giving way—I hope this is helpful. In the written evidence that Collard gave to us, on point 6 in answer to the question, “When was the report received by the department?” he said that they had “received an email from UKSV at 1.52pm on 29 January informing PST that the report was ready for the FCDO to review.” That was the date he heard about the developed vetting. The email, which is the nearest thing we have to anything that has any mitigations, is dated 30 January at 10.12 am.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I congratulate my hon. Friend on her thoughtful and important contribution. We need to ensure that if we use a Humble Address again, we use it as effectively as we can. We have talked about the amount of money, but will she also highlight the opportunity costs? We heard in the Committee from the Foreign Office and the Cabinet Office about the amount of time that civil servants were spending on this. One particular gentleman had come back from Iran and was an expert on that, but he was spending his time on this issue, rather than being able to give the right sort of assistance to the Foreign Office on what we should be doing on Iran.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is there not another argument? Certain people are thinking again about applying for jobs for which they may need to undergo developed vetting. Those people may well be women, people from ethnic minorities or people who are gay, for whom any disclosure would be so profoundly embarrassing that they would rather just not get the job.”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the Minister appreciate that there may be a difference between conflict of interest information and national security mitigations, and that he may be able to tell us about some of that information but not able to tell us whether or not there were mitigations to defend national security?”
House of Commons3 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for giving me access to the papers at 9.30 this morning. However, is it right that among the 1,500 pages of documents released, there is no written evidence of any mitigations being put in place either to minimise Peter Mandelson’s conflicts of interest or, more importantly, to reduce the risk to our national security that vetting had flagged, due to Peter Mandelson’s close connections with Russian oligarchs, senior Chinese officials, retired Israeli spymasters and a debt of £1 million to buy shares in a secretive Israeli start-up? Will the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister please tell us whether we will see such documents later because the police have got them, or whether they just do not exist?”
House of Commons1 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“524.] In March, the Minister again told us that the Government would update the House on their reaction to the ICJ’s advisory opinion. My question is: when will we stop hesitating and take action to ensure that international law is respected?”
House of Commons21 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the statement by the Minister, his reiteration of the Government’s commitment to international law, and that they are prepared to take further action—and will not hesitate to do so—when it comes to Palestine. It has been almost two years since the International Court of Justice issued its advisory opinion on Israel and the occupied territories, calling on the Government to take action. Since then, settler violence has exploded; just this week, the UN released a report stating in no uncertain terms that the far-right Israeli Government are weaponising settler violence to carry out their stated intention of annexing the west bank. In February, we were told that the Government wanted to respond to the advisory opinion with “the rigour and seriousness that it deserves.” —[ Official Report , 5 February 2026; Vol. 780, c.”
House of Commons21 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For that reason, I believe that the ISC should be allowed to look at the file, with proper redactions, to understand how mitigations could be put in place to make us safe when it came to the appointment of Peter Mandelson.”
House of Commons19 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to support the ISC in its carefully considered concerns, and I am disappointed at the answer that the Government have given. It seems to me that one of the questions on the Mandelson appointment is: why, when the United Kingdom Security Vetting document had two red boxes ticked, including “This man should not be appointed”, was that somehow or other translated into “He should be appointed”? It is very important that the public know and understand that we are learning from the mistakes that were clearly made, and we cannot know that lessons have been learned unless the documents are checked. My Committee and the ISC are trying our best to get to the truth, and we are having obstacles put in our way.”
House of Commons19 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The right hon. Lady seeks to lecture us on why everyone is so fed up with the political class, but she is using this opportunity not to lay out what the Conservatives would do, but to insult everyone on the Labour Benches. Surely that is not the way to proceed.”
House of Commons13 May 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It was 18 months ago, I remember, that my late friend Terry Etherton was sitting up in the Gallery beaming down at the Prime Minister because he had just announced the Government scheme to give compensation to those who had been wrongly sacked from the armed forces for simply being gay. I have a constituent who lost his job at MI6 in the 1980s for his sexuality, and he has no compensation. Those in the security services also put their life on the line for their country; it is just not fair. Will the Prime Minister find the time to sit down with my constituent and me, so that together we can work out how we can extend Terry’s scheme, so that those who were in the security services can also get justice?”
House of Commons29 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I associate myself with the comments of the Foreign Secretary with regard to the Foreign Office and the dedication and hard work of its officials? At a time like this, we are particularly in need of a Foreign Office that is absolutely at the top of its game, not just in this country but across the world. However, the Foreign Affairs Committee’s concerns remain about security more than anything else, and the impact of employing Peter Mandelson causes us great concern. During his time as the ambassador to the United States, he was given access to top secret information. How can we protect our country against his leaking any of that, given his record?”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When the confirmation of his appointment came forward, neither the offer letter to Peter Mandelson nor the Government’s press release made it clear that the appointment was subject to vetting. Does it not look as though, for certain members of the Prime Minister’s team, getting Peter Mandelson the job was a priority that overrode everything else, and security considerations were very much second order?”
House of Commons20 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The truth is that my Committee did ask. We asked on the record, and we got a partial truth that could hardly be the whole truth. We are on record as asking the very questions that hecklers on the Opposition Benches say should have been asked. The answers are there, on the record; people can see what we got when we did ask. A month before Mandelson’s appointment was announced, the then Cabinet Secretary advised that the necessary security clearance should be acquired before a political appointment was confirmed. That does not seem to have been the usual practice. I am glad that it has changed, because the process was clearly abused. Someone—probably Peter Mandelson himself—leaked his appointment as US ambassador to the press, which effectively bounced the Government into confirming it.”
House of Commons20 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Foreign Affairs Committee has just come from a meeting with some of the Gulf ambassadors, who are genuinely grateful for the help that Britain has given in defending their countries, and want to say how grateful they are that the Prime Minister visited the Gulf, in an act of true solidarity. But when people heard the Israeli Defence Minister say that his war aims in Lebanon would follow “the model in Gaza”, our blood ran cold. Could the Prime Minister tell the House what role the United Kingdom can play to ensure a ceasefire in Lebanon, and that Israel is prevented from taking over Lebanon south of the Litani river?”
House of Commons13 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I also pass on a message from one of my constituents, who is caught in Muscat at the moment? They moved from the UAE on the basis of Foreign Office advice. They went to the airport in Oman and all they say is this. When they got to the airport, they could see some representatives, particularly of Italy, who were wearing high-vis jackets. There may well be people from Britain there, but they were not as clearly identifiable as some from other countries. I am sure that there is a presence in the airports, but perhaps there could be high-vis jackets or some form of clearer identification, because there will be a lot of people at Muscat airport looking for help.”
House of Commons5 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Having spent some 10 years on the shadow Front Bench, I know that it is frustrating and that it can be difficult, but there is a responsibility, in my view, to always put the country’s interests first and to not use an opportunity for narrow political advantage and play party politics. As for throwing personal abuse across the Dispatch Box at a time like this, I have to say that I am profoundly shocked. May I move on to my question? Given that the Minister called in the Iranian ambassador to see him, I would be interested to hear what on earth the ambassador had to say and how he excused what Iran is doing at the moment by attacking many countries in the region, some of which have worked night and day to try to find a peaceful way through this.”
House of Commons5 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I would say, particularly if our presence in Africa is to be diminished—as it unfortunately will, given what is happening to our aid budget—“At least let those countries hear a bit of truth, and let it be promoted.” It is not as if we were nothing. I do not want to overstate this, but we are already communicating with 313 million people worldwide, which is pretty good. Let us make sure that they all have an opportunity to hear what it is that the BBC can do. The new fact-checking unit is second to none, and is especially important at times like this, when it is able to crack the lies so that people can see the truth.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When a war has been called, they say, “Let us hear what the BBC is saying,” because they want to hear the truth, not just the nonsense and the spin. What are we doing at this time when there is a new type of warfare that is not about guns and not about tanks rolling over the hills, but about the war for people’s minds? The war for people’s minds is about the promotion of lies: that is the new type of warfare, and we are so complacent about it. We are not sufficiently alive to the amount of manipulation that is going on. We are allowing this jewel, this gift that Britain could give the world, to diminish. Why are we doing that? I personally feel that it is not just a matter of ensuring that the funding for the World Service is not cut.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will now move on, given the time that I have left—I have promised myself to give myself full range until you stop me, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to talk about one of the most important things that we do as a country, which is supporting the BBC. Across the world, countries are using huge amounts of money every year—China and Russia are spending £8 billion on their global news platforms—to spread lies. We have, against that Goliath, the David that is the BBC. The advantage the BBC has is that it is a badge of truth, like no other organisation. Other countries would just die to have what we have. We have the BBC; we have the World Service. People change to the World Service from other channels.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is not the place for that, but I do not want us to do it again ourselves. Given the limited time, I will not go into any more details, but let me say this. I share the concern expressed by the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) about the British Council. He has great expertise. We have had private meetings; we have had public meetings; we have had the National Audit Office over; we have sent our own auditors in; we have spoken to the unions. We in the Foreign Affairs Committee are doing everything we can to help the Foreign Office to ensure that the British Council, when it is restructured, is restructured in a way that is for the benefit of our country, the benefit of our culture and the benefit of soft power. “We are watching you carefully”—that is all I am saying at this stage.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The directors are being shorn—there are fewer of them—and they in turn will be expected to cut their staffing by, we are told, about 25%. Let me warn the Minister, who should perhaps reflect on this, that restructuring of that kind is not particularly sensitive to Ministers’ priorities. It would appear that we are simply restructuring in order to restructure, while not looking first and foremost at what the Foreign Office is about, what we should be doing, and how we can ensure that we retain the expertise, the knowledge, the connections, the best people, in order to deliver those priorities. I fear that we will yet again undermine morale in the Foreign Office. I could go into one of some of the reasons why, under the last Government, Foreign Office morale was gravely undermined.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Those staff will be acutely aware that they are also charged with attempting to sow the seeds for peace in the future, and that will also rely on their relationships and their professionalism. They do that knowing that it is important that Britain continues to be a force for good—as we can be at our best. We expect them to work twice as hard, against a background of rumours and stories about cuts to their jobs—25% of them could lose their jobs. It is important for the House to remember the sacrifices that these civil servants make. They do a different job from our armed forces, but effectively through their work they are keeping us safe, and it is important for that to be understood. I fear that the strategy for the restructuring of the Foreign Office is not very clear. It seems that we are taking a top slice off.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“She was there by herself, and she was clearly really frightened, but the embassy will look after her and, I hope, it will get her home to her mother. It is our brave Foreign Office staff who have to step up at times like these. I am sure that they must also be terrified, but they will get this girl back. They will have to call in favours and rely on relationships that they have developed over years. They will rely on relationships and the credit that they have in the bank because of their professionalism and their work on behalf of our country. They cultivate relationships and use that strength, and hundreds of thousands of Brits in the Gulf will rely on that professionalism in the next few weeks and months.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I begin by paying tribute to the strength and bravery of FCDO staff in the middle east. They are giving support and guidance to hundreds of thousands of Brits who are stranded, scared and desperate to return home. There are so many lessons to learn from what is happening in the Gulf at the moment, but for the purposes of this debate, the lesson we should learn is the vital importance of the Foreign Office. It is not all about wearing linen and drinking gin under jacaranda trees— [ Laughter. ] I have done it. It is a great deal of hard work and it is very important that we recognise that. It has never been harder—look at what they are having to deal with now. I heard on the radio a few days ago an interview with a 21-year-old who went to Dubai to celebrate her birthday.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Sputnik took over the airwaves immediately afterwards. What are we doing? What is the matter with us? This must surely be a priority. I see your beady eye on me as I speak, Madam Deputy Speaker, so let me end by giving what I think is the best example. I have been told that BBC usage is growing in the fringes of China—in the countries around the edge of China—more than anywhere else, through TikTok accounts. What story does that tell us? It tells us that young people want the truth and are desperate to find it, and they are doing that in the way young people do, through TikTok—but they go to the good old BBC.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not think I need to repeat the points that the right hon. Gentleman has made, and made very well. Perhaps I could mention another specific service: BBC Persian, which is particularly important at this time. It is doing incredible work. It is sharing vital, lifesaving information with millions of Iranians who are suffering right now during internet blackouts. It is BBC Persian that is doing the fact-checking. It is a source of truth. It is an independent voice. It is not propaganda. If we want to understand its effectiveness, we need only bear in mind that the regime absolutely loathes it. If we require a badge of truth and a gold star, that alone must be sufficient. Why are we not supporting BBC Persian? And why did the Arab radio station that was broadcasting in Lebanon get cut? Guess what?”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman is making a really good speech and until a moment ago I agreed with everything he said. Does he not agree that our relationship with the United States goes far beyond any leadership? It goes very deep. During the visits the Foreign Affairs Committee has made, we have met people from many different aspects of the United States. They are good friends of ours and we need to ensure that we keep those relationships close.”
House of Commons4 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The British Government recognised Palestine last summer, and that was greatly welcomed around the world. The concern now is that Israel may be about to annex the west bank. If Israel does that, where is Palestine? The Minister spoke last week and said that they were considering concrete steps, and he has said that again today. I just wondered what they were.”
House of Commons3 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Although the attack on Iran by the US and Israel was ill-advised, ill-judged and illegal, it is absolutely no excuse for the Iranians to recklessly bombard its Gulf neighbours. Is the Prime Minister in a position to give us more details on what we are doing with our Ukrainian friends to support the collective self-defence of Arab nations against the Iranian Shahed drones that are causing so much damage in Ukraine and now in the Gulf?”
House of Commons2 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the alarm that people feel about the idea of cryptocurrency getting into our democracy? Is there a ban on it in the Bill? If not, why not?”
House of Commons2 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I take objection to what the right hon. Gentleman is saying, because surely if someone is a citizen, they should be able to vote. It should be as easy as possible—as easy as breathing—to vote, because a citizen has a right to vote. Every attempt should be made to make voting easier, not more difficult. If automatic enrolment helps people to vote, that is what we should do. Of course we need to be careful about it, though, and one of the reasons why this is a rolling programme, rather than putting it in place everywhere on the same day, is presumably to ensure that it is done properly. In the end, we should all want the same thing; British citizens should be able to vote in British elections, and nothing should get in their way.”
House of Commons2 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let me do the best I can. Is it seriously the right hon. Gentleman’s argument that a Labour Secretary of State might introduce auto-enrolment in areas where that will help Labour? Is he therefore saying that the more people who vote, the more Labour is helped? Is that his central argument?”
House of Commons2 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“One thing about giving votes to youngsters at 16 is that there will be an election in their last two years at school, and politicians will be beating their way to the doors of these schools to go in and speak. Those young people will have an opportunity to learn about what they are voting for and how the structures work in a way that, frankly, their elders often do not know.”
House of Commons2 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are very worried about that in the Foreign Affairs Committee, so we have taken the unusual step of asking domestic Ministers what they are doing about it. We are seeing patterns of behaviour and we are concerned that it is now happening in this country. It could blow up very quickly, not least in the next elections in May. The last thing we want is for those influencers to be there and then for us to somehow or other try to persuade the public, “Actually, you were unduly influenced.” Nobody will want to admit it once it has happened. We need to ensure we protect ourselves.”
House of Commons2 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗