Author: admin

Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Speech on Security Vetting

The speech made by Kemi Badenoch, the Leader of the Opposition, in the House of Commons on 20 April 2026.

I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement. His reputation is at stake, and everyone is watching, so it is finally time for the truth.

Earlier today, Downing Street admitted that the Prime Minister inadvertently misled the House. The Prime Minister has chosen not to repeat that from the Dispatch Box. I remind him that, under the ministerial code, he has a duty to correct the record at the earliest opportunity. The Prime Minister says he only found out on Tuesday that Peter Mandelson failed the security vetting. The earliest opportunity to correct the record was Prime Minister’s questions on Wednesday, almost a week ago. This is a breach of the ministerial code. Under that code, he is bound to be as open as possible with Parliament and the public in answering questions today, so let me start with what we do know.

We know the Prime Minister personally appointed Peter Mandelson to be our ambassador to the United States. We know that Mandelson had a close relationship with a convicted paedophile. We know that he had concerning links with Russia and China—links that had already raised red flags. We know that the Prime Minister announced the appointment before vetting was complete—an extraordinary and unprecedented step for the role of US ambassador.

The Prime Minister says that it was “usual” because it was a political appointment, so I remind him, and the rest of the Labour Front Bench who are heckling, that Peter Mandelson was a politician who had been sacked twice from Government for lying. That meant he should have gone through the full security process. We also know that when Peter Mandelson failed the security vetting, he was allowed to continue in the role with access to top secret intelligence and security information. This goes beyond propriety and ethics; this is a matter of national security.

Let me turn to what we do not know. We still do not know exactly why Peter Mandelson failed that vetting. We do not know what risks our country was exposed to. We do not know how it is possible that the Prime Minister said repeatedly that this was a failure of vetting, went on television and said things that were blatantly incorrect, and not a single adviser or official told him that what he was saying was not true. At every turn, with every explanation, the Government story has become murkier and more contradictory. It is time for the truth.

There are too many questions to ask in the allotted time, so I will ask the Prime Minister just six. I have taken the unprecedented step of providing these questions to the Prime Minister in advance, so he has them in front of him. I have asked for these questions to be put online for the public. They and I expect him to answer.

The Prime Minister appointed a national security risk to our most sensitive diplomatic post. Let us look at how this happened. The right hon. and learned Gentleman told me at PMQs in September 2025 that

“full due process was followed”—[Official Report, 10 September 2025; Vol. 772, c. 859.]

in this appointment. We now know that in November 2024, Lord Case, the then Cabinet Secretary, told him that this process required security vetting to be done before the appointment. He did not mention any of what Lord Case said in his statement earlier. First, does the Prime Minister accept that when he said on the Floor of the House that “full due process was followed”, that was not true?

Secondly, on 11 September last year, journalists asked his director of communications if it was true that Mandelson had failed security vetting. These allegations were on the front page of a national newspaper, and yet No. 10 did not deny the story—why?

Thirdly, will the Prime Minister repeat at the Dispatch Box his words from last week: that no one in No. 10 was aware before Tuesday that Mandelson had failed his vetting?

Fourthly, the Prime Minister says he is furious that he was not told the recommendations of the vetting, yet on 16 September, a Foreign Office Minister told Parliament that

“the national security vetting process is rightly independent of Ministers, who are not informed of any findings other than the final outcome.”—[Official Report, 16 September 2025; Vol. 772, c. 1387.]

That was the Government’s stated process, so why is the Prime Minister so furious that it was followed?

Fifthly, on 4 February 2026, the Prime Minister told me from the Dispatch Box that the security vetting that Mandelson had received had revealed his relationship with Epstein. How could the Prime Minister say that if he had not seen the security vetting?

Finally, Sistema is a Russian defence company that is closely linked to the Kremlin and Vladimir Putin’s war machine. Was the Prime Minister aware before the appointment that Peter Mandelson had remained a director of that company long after Russia’s invasion of Crimea?

Everyone makes mistakes. It is how a leader faces up to those mistakes that shows their character. Instead of taking responsibility for the decisions he made, the Prime Minister has thrown his staff and his officials under the bus. This is a man who once said,

“I will carry the can for mistakes of any organisation I lead.”

Instead, he has sacked his Cabinet Secretary, he has sacked his director of communications, he has sacked his chief of staff, and he has now sacked the permanent secretary of the Foreign Office. All those people were fired for a decision that he made.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman’s defence is that he, a former Director of Public Prosecutions, is so lacking in curiosity that he chose to ask no questions about the vetting process, no questions about Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein and no questions about the security risk that Mandelson posed. Apparently, he did not even speak to Peter Mandelson before his appointment. It does not appear that he asked any questions at all. Why? Because he did not want to know. He had taken the risk and chosen his man, and Whitehall had to follow.

It is the duty of the Prime Minister to ensure that he is telling the truth—or does the ministerial code not apply to him? I am only holding the Prime Minister to the same standard to which he held others. On 26 January 2022, he said from this Dispatch Box to a previous Prime Minister:

“If he misled Parliament, he must resign.”—[Official Report, 26 January 2022; Vol. 707, c. 994.]

Does he stand by those words, or is there one rule for him and another for everyone else?

April 20, 2026
Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Security Vetting

The statement made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 20 April 2026.

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to provide the House with information that I now have about the appointment of Peter Mandelson as our ambassador to the United States.

Before I go into the details, I want to be very clear with this House that while this statement will focus on the process surrounding Peter Mandelson’s vetting and appointment, at the heart of this there is also a judgment I made that was wrong. I should not have appointed Peter Mandelson. I take responsibility for that decision, and I apologise again to the victims of the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who were clearly failed by my decision.

Last Tuesday evening, 14 April, I found out for the first time that on 29 January 2025, before Peter Mandelson took up his position as ambassador, Foreign Office officials granted him developed vetting clearance, against the specific recommendation of the United Kingdom Security Vetting that developed vetting clearance should be denied. Not only that, but the Foreign Office officials who made that decision did not pass this information to me, to the Foreign Secretary, to her predecessor, now the Deputy Prime Minister, to any other Minister, or even to the former Cabinet Secretary, Sir Chris Wormald.

I found this staggering. Therefore, last Tuesday I immediately instructed officials in Downing Street and the Cabinet Office to urgently establish the facts on my authority. I wanted to know who made the decision, on what basis, and who knew. I wanted that information for the precise and explicit purpose of updating this House, because this is information I should have had a long time ago, and that this House should have had a long time ago. It is information that I and the House had a right to know.

I will now set out a full timeline of the events in the Peter Mandelson process, including from the fact-finding exercise that I instructed last Tuesday. Before doing so, I want to remind and reassure the House that the Government will comply fully with the Humble Address motion of 4 February.

In December 2024, I was in the process of appointing a new ambassador for Washington. A due diligence exercise was conducted by the Cabinet Office into Peter Mandelson’s suitability, including questions put to him by my staff in No. 10. Peter Mandelson answered those questions on 10 December, and I received final advice on the due diligence process on 11 December. I made the decision to appoint him on 18 December. The appointment was announced on 20 December. The security vetting process began on 23 December 2024.

I want to make it clear to the House that, for a direct ministerial appointment, it was usual for security vetting to happen after the appointment but before the individual starting in post. That was the process in place at the time. This was confirmed by the former Cabinet Secretary, Sir Chris Wormald, when he gave evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 3 November 2025. Sir Chris made it clear that

“when we are making appointments from outside the civil service…the normal thing is for the security clearance to happen after appointment but before the person signs a contract and takes up post.”

At the same hearing of the same Select Committee, the former permanent secretary to the Foreign Office, Sir Olly Robbins, said that Peter Mandelson

“did not hold national security vetting when he was appointed, but, as is normally the case with external appointments to my Department and the wider civil service, the appointment was made subject to obtaining security clearance.”

After I sacked Peter Mandelson, I changed that process so that an appointment now cannot be announced until after security vetting is passed.

The security vetting was carried out by UK Security Vetting—UKSV—between 23 December 2024 and 28 January 2025. UKSV conducted vetting in the normal way, collecting relevant information, as well as interviewing the applicant, in this case on two occasions. Then, on 28 January 2025, UKSV recommended to the Foreign Office that developed vetting clearance should be denied to Peter Mandelson. The following day, 29 January 2025, notwithstanding the UKSV recommendation that developed vetting clearance should be denied, Foreign Office officials made the decision to grant developed vetting clearance for Peter Mandelson.

To be clear, for many Departments a decision from UKSV is binding, but for the Foreign Office the final decision on developed vetting clearance is made by Foreign Office officials, not UKSV. However, once the decision in this case came to light, the Foreign Office’s power to make the final decision on developed vetting clearance was immediately suspended by my Chief Secretary last week.

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. What I do not accept is that the appointing Minister cannot be told of the recommendation by UKSV. Indeed, given the seriousness of these issues and the significance of the appointment, I simply do not accept that Foreign Office officials could not have informed me of UKSV’s recommendations while maintaining the necessary confidentiality that vetting requires.

There is no law that stops civil servants from sensibly flagging UKSV recommendations while protecting detailed, sensitive vetting information, to allow Ministers to make judgments on appointments or on explaining matters to Parliament. Let me be very clear: the recommendation in the Peter Mandelson case could and should have been shared with me before he took up his post. Let me make a second point: if I had known before Peter Mandelson took up his post that the UKSV recommendation was that developed vetting clearance should be denied, I would not have gone ahead with the appointment.

Let me now move to September 2025, because events then, and subsequently, show with even starker clarity the opportunities missed by Foreign Office officials to make the position clear. On 10 September, Bloomberg reported fresh details of Mandelson’s history with Epstein. It was then clear to me that Peter Mandelson’s answers to my staff in the due diligence exercise were not truthful, and I sacked him. I also changed the direct ministerial appointments process so that full due diligence is now required as standard. Where risks are identified, an interview must be taken pre-appointment to discuss any risks and conflicts of interest. A summary of that should be provided to the appointing Minister. I also made it clear that public announcements should not now be made until security vetting has been completed.

In the light of the revelations in September last year, I also agreed with the then Cabinet Secretary, Sir Chris Wormald, that he would carry out a review of the appointment process in the Peter Madelson case, including the vetting. He set out his findings and conclusions in a letter to me on 16 September. In that letter, he advised me:

“The evidence I have reviewed leads me to conclude that appropriate processes were followed in both the appointment and withdrawal of the former HMA Washington”.

When the then Cabinet Secretary was asked about that last week, he was clear that when he carried out his review, the Foreign Office did not tell him about the UKSV recommendation that developed vetting clearance should be denied for Peter Mandelson. I find that astonishing. As I set out earlier, I do not accept that I could not have been told about the recommendation before Peter Mandelson took up his post. I absolutely do not accept that the then Cabinet Secretary—an official, not a politician—when carrying out his review could not have been told that UKSV recommended that Peter Mandelson should be denied developed vetting clearance. It was a vital part of the process that I had asked him to review. Clearly, he could have been told, and he should have been told.

On the same day that the then Cabinet Secretary wrote to me, 16 September 2025, the Foreign Secretary and the then permanent secretary of the Foreign Office, Sir Olly Robbins, provided a signed statement to the Foreign Affairs Committee. The statement says:

“The vetting process was undertaken by UK Security Vetting on behalf of the FCDO and concluded with DV clearance being granted by the FCDO in advance of Lord Mandelson taking up post in February.”

It went on to say:

“Peter Mandelson’s security vetting was conducted to the usual standard set for Developed Vetting in line with established Cabinet Office policy”.

Let me be very clear to the House. This was in response to questions that included whether concerns were raised, what the Foreign Office’s response was and whether they were dismissed. That the Foreign Secretary was advised on, and allowed to sign, this statement by Foreign Office officials without being told that UKSV had recommended Peter Mandelson be denied developed vetting clearance is absolutely unforgivable. This is a senior Cabinet Member giving evidence to Parliament on the very issue in question.

In the light of further revelations about Peter Mandelson in February of this year, I was very concerned about the fact that developed vetting clearance had been granted to him. Not knowing that, in fact, UKSV had recommended denial of developed vetting clearance, I instructed my officials to carry out a review of the national security vetting process. But, as I have set out, I do not accept that I could not have been told about UKSV’s denial of security vetting before Peter Mandelson took up his post in January 2025, I do not accept that the then Cabinet Secretary could not have been told in September 2025 when he carried out his review of the process, and I do not accept that the Foreign Secretary could not have been told when making statements to the Select Committee, again in 2025.

On top of that, the fact that I was also not told, even when I ordered a review of the UKSV process, is frankly staggering. I can tell the House that I have now updated the terms of reference for the review into security vetting to make sure it covers the means by which all decisions are made in relation to national security vetting. I have appointed Sir Adrian Fulford to lead the review. Separately, I have asked the Government Security Group in the Cabinet Office to look at any security concerns raised during Peter Mandelson’s tenure.

I know that many Members across this House will find these facts to be incredible. To that, I can only say that they are right. It beggars belief that throughout this whole timeline of events, officials in the Foreign Office saw fit to withhold this information from the most senior Ministers in our system of government. That is not how the vast majority of people in this country expect politics, government or accountability to work, and I do not think it is how most public servants think it should work either.

I work with hundreds of civil servants—thousands, even—all of whom act with the utmost integrity, dedication and pride to serve this country, including officials from the Foreign Office who, as we speak, are doing a phenomenal job representing our national interest in a dangerous world—in Ukraine, the middle east and all around the world. This is not about them, yet it is surely beyond doubt that the recommendation from UKSV that Peter Mandelson should be denied developed vetting clearance was information that could and should have been shared with me on repeated occasions and, therefore, should have been available to this House and ultimately to the British people. I commend this statement to the House.

April 20, 2026
PRESS RELEASE : Firefighters to benefit from bespoke health support [April 2026]
The press release issued by the Department of Health and Social Care on 16 April 2026.

Government to back firefighters with tailor-made, research-backed health support during and after service.
- Government announces a Firefighters Concordat, focused on health and wellbeing and built in partnership with the profession – to drive improvements in prevention, early diagnosis and support
- Firefighters will receive consistent, regular health checks for every single firefighter in the country, recognising the unique risks they’re exposed to
- Government will back and fund research into the hazards they face to improve our physical and mental health support offer to all firefighters
Recognising the extraordinary bravery of firefighters, this government is backing them with tailor‑made, research‑backed health monitoring to better support their health and wellbeing during and after service.

The potential dangers associated with tackling burning buildings, mounting rescues and attending road traffic incidents are well documented, but there is little research in the UK into the long-term effects of working within the service.

Speaking at the Fire Brigades Union, Health and Social Care Secretary Wes Streeting announced today (16 April 2026) that this government will establish a Firefighters Concordat on Health and Wellbeing – an agreement among key organisations to work together to improve firefighters’ health and wellbeing.

Rather than waiting until firefighters become ill, the government is committing to prevention first – this agreement aims to keep firefighters healthier for longer, reduce NHS costs and ensure the fire and rescue service can retain experienced, fit and skilled workers.

Health and Social Care Secretary, Wes Streeting, said:

Firefighters run towards danger knowing full well the risks they face during an emergency, but we know very little about how the speed and courage of their work impacts their health.

That is because for too long their concerns have been ignored – but this new agreement promises to change things: to boost funding for research that is well overdue, and work in partnership with firefighters and their unions, alongside employers and fire chiefs, to better protect and support them in the long term.

We cannot continue to ask people to give everything in service of others and then fail them when they need help themselves.

Despite the unique hazards of their profession, the evidence base on firefighter health and wellbeing remains limited. That is why the government is directing new funding for research through the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) to build the evidence base and better support understanding of how best to tackle firefighters’ health risks – from mental health to musculoskeletal health, and from cancer to cardiovascular disease.

There will be a specific focus on underrepresented groups in the profession, including women, who have too often had to do their jobs in kit and protective equipment that was not designed for them.

This agreement – a Firefighters Concordat on Health and Wellbeing – builds on commitments made in the 10 Year Health Plan, which will also raise awareness of the NHS services that could most benefit and support firefighters as well as better information on how they can access them at times that work best for them.

The agreement is part of our work with the Ministerial Advisory Group on Fire and Rescue Reform.

National Fire Chiefs Council Chair, Phil Garrigan, said:

Firefighter health and wellbeing is a long‑standing priority for the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC), and we welcome continued recognition of the unique risks firefighters face through their work.

Firefighters’ work sees them encounter hazardous environments and harmful contaminants, often with long‑term consequences that may only become apparent years down the line. A shared, co-ordinated approach across employers, representative bodies, health services and partners is essential if those risks are to be understood, reduced and properly monitored.

We have been clear that prevention, early intervention and consistent standards are key. Work to strengthen contamination controls, improve facilities and enhance health monitoring must be informed by the best available evidence and applied consistently across all fire and rescue services.

Supporting further research and building a stronger evidence base will be vital to improving understanding of occupational risk and ensuring firefighters receive appropriate, timely support throughout their careers. NFCC will continue to work constructively with partners across the sector, including through the ministerial advisory group, to advance firefighter health and wellbeing.

Those who protect our communities deserve the highest possible standards of care and protection in return.

Significant progress has already been made to reduce risks on the job, including improvements to health and safety practices, protective equipment, breathing apparatus and decontamination standards.

But prevention must go further – supporting firefighters’ long-term health and wellbeing, including:
- cardiovascular health
- musculoskeletal conditions
- mental wellbeing
- awareness of cancer risks
The concordat will send a clear message that firefighter health matters, both during service and beyond. By setting out shared expectations, building on best practice and evidence, it will provide a mechanism for working in partnership to improve health and wellbeing outcomes.

Building on commitments in our 10 Year Health Plan, the agreement will raise awareness of the NHS services that could most benefit and support firefighters – like mental health support, cancer screening and musculoskeletal care – and how they can access them at times that work best for them. Firefighter occupation will be recorded in NHS records so doctors can make better-informed decisions.

Building Safety Minister, Samantha Dixon, said:

Behind every emergency response is a person who puts themselves in harm’s way to protect the lives of others time and time again. This partnership is our commitment to them.

It’s a serious, long-term promise to understand the risks they take and make sure every firefighter gets the health support they deserve – during their career and beyond.

I’ll be working closely with firefighters, unions, employers, chief fire officers and health partners to make that a reality.

Steve Wright, General Secretary, Fire Brigades Union, said:

The commitment from the Health Secretary to increase health monitoring for firefighters is a very welcome and important step forward.

It reflects the constructive work that has taken place between the union and government, and shows what can be achieved when firefighters’ voices are properly represented.

Our members put themselves in harm’s way to protect the public, often in extremely challenging and dangerous conditions. It is right that their health and safety is recognised and taken seriously.

Today’s commitment is an important milestone, and we are pleased to see this progress being made.

The Firefighters Concordat on Health and Wellbeing will be delivered through a working group established under the Ministerial Advisory Group on Fire and Rescue Reform, bringing together the government, fire and rescue services, employers and representative bodies to deliver a comprehensive programme of improvements, including working to establish monitoring to better assess firefighter health and better spot risks.
April 19, 2026
PRESS RELEASE : Urgent action to rapidly improve HMP Woodhill [April 2026]
The press release issued by the Ministry of Justice on 16 April 2026.

Specialist staff, tougher disciplinary action and bolstered security measures will be deployed at HMP Woodhill to reduce violence, combat drugs and improve safety.
- Action plan to target violence, drugs and poor conditions at Buckinghamshire jail.
- Extra staff support, training and security measures to help stabilise the prison
- Education, rehabilitation and preparation for release to be strengthened
The Government has launched a comprehensive action plan to address serious failings at the jail after His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) issued an Urgent Notification in March.

Inspectors found high levels of violence, with drugs far too easily available and some of the highest rates of self-harm in the estate.

In response, Ministers have acted to roll out a comprehensive plan to improve safety and conditions, strengthen staff capability and deliver better outcomes for prisoners.

This includes a new safety strategy to better spot and support those at risk of self-harm, while stronger security measures including new physical barriers such as wires and window grilles will be installed to stop the flow of illicit items using drones.

Minister for Prisons, Probation and Reducing Reoffending, Lord James Timpson, said:

The prison crisis we inherited has left too many jails struggling with violence, drugs and poor conditions.

This action plan sets out the decisive steps we are taking to improve safety, tackle drugs and drones, and get more prisoners into the education and training they need to leave crime behind.

We are putting more staff on the ground and backing HMP Woodhill with the investment it needs to improve, as we continue to fix the broken prison system we inherited to deliver punishment that works to cut crime.

A new living unit will also be introduced – where offenders are incentivised to keep off substances – helping reduce the demand for drugs. This is in addition to recruitment of specialist staff dedicated to supporting prisoners dealing with addiction.

The action plan also sets out refurbishments and a renewed focus on cleanliness to improve conditions. Meanwhile rehabilitation efforts will be strengthened through greater access to the education and work opportunities offenders rely on to turn their lives around.

A new governor appointed in 2025 has already begun work to stabilise HMP Woodhill, supported by regional and national teams, including a dedicated taskforce focused on improving performance across the Long Term and High Security Estate.

More widely, the Government is building 14,000 extra prison places – with more than 3100 already delivered – and reforming sentencing to ensure punishment cuts crime and dangerous can always be locked up to keep streets safe.

Notes to editors
- The Urgent Notification process was introduced in 2017 to ensure immediate action is taken to address the most serious concerns identified by inspectors.
April 19, 2026
NEWS STORY : UK announces new £20.5 million aid package for Lebanon

STORY

Britain has announced a new £20.5 million humanitarian package for displaced people in Lebanon, as Middle East minister Hamish Falconer visited Beirut and urged all sides to end hostilities. The Foreign Office said the funding would support the Lebanese Government’s crisis response, with the minister using the first UK ministerial visit since the latest regional escalation to reaffirm British backing for Lebanon and for direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel.

During the visit, Falconer also met political leaders and viewed humanitarian projects backed by the UK, with ministers presenting the aid package as part of a wider effort to stabilise Lebanon amid a deepening regional crisis. The Government said security and stability in the Middle East would be a major issue at the Antalya Diplomatic Forum, while the announcement comes against a backdrop of mass displacement and mounting international pressure for an end to the fighting.

April 19, 2026
NEWS STORY : Labour Party makes Allegations against Green Candidate Sue Hagley

STORY

Ipswich Labour Party have made allegations about the conduct of Green party candidate Sue Hagley. The party stated that Hagley was involved in the vandalism of Ipswich Borough Council’s Grafton House and was found guilty of criminal damage.

The council confirmed that there was a cost of £273.57 incurred in fixing the vandalism, which the courts later ordered Hagley to contribute to. The Green Party confirmed that Hagley was standing for them at the May local elections.

April 19, 2026
Hamish Falconer – 2026 Comments on Support for People in Lebanon

The comments made by Hamish Falconer, the Minister for the Middle East, on 16 April 2026.

Conflict in the Middle East benefits no one. The UK is working with partners to de-escalate and pursue a political solution.

People in Lebanon are again suffering a conflict they did not choose, with displacement robbing families of security and dignity. The UK is increasing support for those most in need, reflecting our commitment to regional stability.

In Beirut I met leaders and welcomed direct Israel–Lebanon talks. We need an end to hostilities. This government will work with Lebanon and international partners to deliver vital aid and support a durable resolution. In Antalya, I will reinforce de-escalation efforts regionally.

April 19, 2026
PRESS RELEASE : New UK Aid for displaced people in Lebanon as Minister visits Beirut [April 2026]
The press release issued by the Foreign Office on 16 April 2026.

Minister for the Middle East in Lebanon on first visit since regional escalation and pledges new humanitarian funding.
- Minister calls on all parties to end hostilities in Lebanon.
- UK reaffirms support for direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel.
- Stability and security in the Middle East will be critical for Antalya Diplomatic Forum.
On the first UK ministerial visit to Lebanon since regional escalation, Minister for the Middle East Hamish Falconer has today (16 April) reaffirmed UK support for the country and announced over £20m in fresh humanitarian funding.

During the one-day visit to Beirut, the Minister met with Lebanese leaders to discuss efforts to deliver regional stability and security.

He reiterated the urgent need for the ceasefire to extend to Lebanon and expressed support for recent direct negotiations with Israel as the best path to enduring stability and security for both sides.

In a major increase in aid to the country, Minister Falconer announced new support for the Government of Lebanon’s crisis response and saw the humanitarian projects the UK will be funding. The projects are delivering life-saving aid and support to some of the most vulnerable families affected by conflict, including those who have been forced to leave their homes as a result of missile strikes.

The Minister also expressed thanks to healthcare workers and first responders during a meeting with them. He reiterated that both must be protected by all sides and that attacks on staff doing these vital roles are unacceptable.

The £20.5m package includes vital assistance to displaced people and those in hard-to-reach areas. It includes funding for the Lebanese Red Cross’ rescue and medical teams, ensures shelters support women and girls and provides a boost to critical national crisis response systems. It forms part of a wider package for support to Lebanon and follows the £9.5m the UK government announced earlier this year to respond to the humanitarian crisis.

Minister for the Middle East Hamish Falconer said:

Conflict in the Middle East benefits no one. The UK is working with partners to de-escalate and pursue a political solution.

People in Lebanon are again suffering a conflict they did not choose, with displacement robbing families of security and dignity. The UK is increasing support for those most in need, reflecting our commitment to regional stability.

In Beirut I met leaders and welcomed direct Israel–Lebanon talks. We need an end to hostilities. This government will work with Lebanon and international partners to deliver vital aid and support a durable resolution. In Antalya, I will reinforce de-escalation efforts regionally.

The visit came as the country continues to face the impact of conflict between Hizballah and Israel, which has displaced over a million civilians in Lebanon and caused widespread death and destruction.

The Minister met with Lebanon’s President, Speaker of Parliament, Prime Minister, and Foreign Minister to emphasise the UK’s support for an urgent end to hostilities in Lebanon. He welcomed the Government of Lebanon’s leadership during the humanitarian crisis, as well as direct talks with Israel and their decision to ban all Hizballah’s military activities.

Following his visit to Lebanon, the Minister will represent the UK at the Antalya Diplomatic Forum, with a focus on shaping diplomacy and foreign policy for the future.

He will take part in a panel session outlining the importance of stability in Syria and will meet with several Middle Eastern counterparts to discuss the need for immediate de-escalation in the region and the freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.

The UK remains committed to supporting efforts to deliver peace and stability across the region, including calling for the immediate and unconditional reopening of the Strait and respect for the fundamental principles of freedom of navigation and the law of the sea to be upheld.

Notes to Editors:

The funding announced today includes:
- £12.3m for the Government of Lebanon’s Shock Responsive Safety Net and World Food Programme to ensure civilians can meet their basic needs.
- £2.9m for the Lebanese Red Cross to provide key relief items (food, hygiene kits, mattresses, blankets, etc), equipment including ambulances and critical capacity to the Government of Lebanon’s Disaster Risk Management Unit.
- £3.1m via UNICEF to support to children and vulnerable families in shelters and non-formal education spaces. Depending on location and individuals, support includes education, psychosocial support, and different levels of child protection & GBV services. Also includes technical assistance to Government of Lebanon on integrated & specialised services.
April 19, 2026
PRESS RELEASE : RAAC hit court reopens in boost for London justice [April 2026]
The press release issued by the Ministry of Justice on 16 April 2026.

Victims across London will see justice delivered faster and fairer as Harrow Crown Court reopens in a major Government drive to cut court backlogs.
- £26m cash boost brings Harrow Crown Court back after three‑year RAAC shutdown
- Eight courtrooms set to hear cases as Government looks to cut criminal backlogs
- Part of the Government’s plan to deliver faster and fairer justice for victims across London
Thousands of victims across London will see justice delivered faster and fairer as the RAAC‑hit Harrow Crown Court reopens in a major Government drive to cut court backlogs.

Eight courtrooms, with some newly refurbished, are back in action following a £26 million safety overhaul, after the building was forced to shut in August 2023 amid fears over crumbling concrete.

Before it was forced to shut, the court was handling hundreds of cases a year. Bringing it back at full strength will supercharge capacity for criminal trials, easing pressure on neighbouring courts and helping to get dangerous criminals locked up sooner.

This week the Courts Minister, Sarah Sackman, visited the newly reopened site — a modernised court building fitted with the latest technology and designed to deliver faster, fairer and more transparent justice.

The move comes against a stark backdrop, with the latest figures showing some London victims — particularly in rape cases — are waiting until 2030 for their day in court, while more than 19,000 cases are currently awaiting trial across the capital.

Minister for Courts and Legal Services Sarah Sackman KC said: 

We inherited a justice system in crisis — backlogs at record levels, courts left to crumble, and victims waiting far too long for justice.

Reopening Harrow Crown Court is a major boost to London’s overstretched court system, cutting delays and getting justice moving again for Londoners.

Built in 1991, the court was closed after RAAC was uncovered and the building deemed unsafe. Its reopening marks a key milestone in the Government’s drive to modernise courts and bring cases to court faster in the capital.

Wheelchair accessible and equipped with the latest courtroom technology, the hearing rooms are greener, more efficient and flexible enough to handle a wide range of cases — maximising the number of hearings that can take place each day.

London Victims Commissioner Andrea Simon said:

Victims are waiting years for their day in court, and even when they get there are often faced with a difficult and trauma-inducing experience.

The re-opening of Harrow Crown Court not only brings some capacity back into the system, but the investment in modernising the court will I hope lead to a better and more supportive experience for victims.

The Government also invested £148.5 million in court maintenance funding last year, with a further £287 million this year to repair and modernise courts across England and Wales, alongside recruiting up to 1,000 new judges and tribunal members to speed up cases and deliver fairer, faster justice for victims.
April 17, 2026
PRESS RELEASE : New practical advice for families to get children school ready [April 2026]

The press release issued by the Department for Education on 16 April 2026.

New government guidance and practical advice launched on primary school offer day to help families get children ready for school, backed by language support.

Families will receive new support from today to help children prepare for school, as the government rolls out a package of measures from primary school offer day through to the first day in September.

The move comes as over a third (37%) of children are starting school without the basic skills they need for the classroom, with teachers and charities finding many children arriving in Reception unable to use the toilet independently, communicate clearly or follow simple instructions.

As part of the government’s mission to get a record number of children school ready, the guidance published today – on primary school offer day – will provide parents with a clear idea of what good support looks like from schools and early years settings to help their child transition into Reception.

For the first time, new guidance sets out how schools, nurseries, and childminders should work together as one system around families to get children ready for Reception – making clear that Offer Day is the starting gun for children beginning their school education.

It sets three key building blocks for a smooth start: strong relationships with families, close partnership working between schools, nurseries and childminders, and early identification of children’s needs, including SEND. It includes practical examples to follow, like home visits and stay and play sessions, giving families the opportunity to visit their new school, or for teachers to visit children in their early years setting.

The package is backed by continued investment in the Nuffield Early Language Intervention (NELI) programme until 2029, and comes as a new national campaign, fronted by award-winning teacher and rapper MC Grammar, gives parents simple ways to practise key skills at home.

Minister for Early Education Olivia Bailey MP said:

Starting school is a huge milestone – for children and parents. I remember getting my own children ready for their first day, excited and hoping they’d walk through the door feeling confident.

From the moment families receive their school place, they should feel supported with simple, practical ways to help their child build confidence, independence and the skills they need for the classroom.

By bringing schools, nurseries, childminders, and families closer together, we can make sure every child gets off to a strong start – arriving at school feeling settled and ready to learn.

The NELI programme helps children who need extra support with speech and language to catch up during Reception. It has already been shown to deliver strong results, with an evaluation finding that it boosts language skills by an additional four months for children on the programme compared to those that aren’t, or up to seven months for children from more deprived backgrounds.

The new campaign shows that school readiness is about everyday skills like communication, independence and confidence – not just uniforms or academic ability. It features a new ‘Steps for School’ song by MC Grammar highlighting key skills from getting dressed and using the toilet to listening, speaking and following instructions.

Jacob Mitchell, known as MC Grammar, said:

As a former teacher and a dad with children already at school – and one starting next year – I know how much practicing simple skills early can boost confidence when it’s time to start Reception.

With our new ‘Steps for School’ song, we’re giving families a fun, memorable way to build those everyday skills that will help set children up for a smooth start in September.

Lee Parkinson, primary school teacher and education content creator Mr P, said:

Preparation for school is about those small, meaningful interactions that begin at home.

I’ve seen first-hand the difference these everyday routines can make alongside the care and learning children get in childcare and early years settings, giving them the reassurance they need to thrive.

I always remind parents it’s never too early to start. Even families with 2–3-year-olds can build confidence and independence through everyday chatting, playing and reading.

With family life getting more challenging for many, this work forms part of a wider push to make life easier for parents and give children the best start.

This government is bringing together support from pregnancy through to starting school, including through the rollout of Best Start Family Hubs in every local authority, offering parenting advice, health services and help with children’s development, alongside the first ever guidance to help families manage screen time at home.

April 17, 2026