UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Speeches

  • Hilary Benn – 2025 Speech to the British-Irish Association Conference in Oxford

    Hilary Benn – 2025 Speech to the British-Irish Association Conference in Oxford

    The speech made by Hilary Benn, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, in Oxford on 5 September 2025. The text is the Cabinet Office version which is politically redacted.

    It is a great pleasure to be back here at the BIA, and to have the opportunity to reflect upon the UK-Ireland relationship with all of you, and thank you, Dominic and Francesca, for the invitation and for all that you do to nurture this really important institution.

    It has certainly been an eventful 12 months since last we met.

    Continuing war in Ukraine. The unfolding disaster in Gaza. The climate continues to warm. A new partnership between the UK and the EU. And a new President of the United States of America.

    But one thing that hasn’t changed has been the growing warmth of the relationship between our two countries.

    Simon, I want to say how grateful I am for the friendship and enthusiasm with which you – and the whole Irish Government – have embraced not only the reset in the relationship between our two countries, but built on it with trust, honesty and ambition.

    And nowhere has this been more evident than on the issue of legacy, which you and I have discussed at length in all of its complexity, and to which I shall return later on.

    You know as well as anyone the Prime Minister’s personal commitment to our partnership – a commitment  shared by the Taoiseach – and it was a great pleasure to be at the first of the new UK-Ireland Summits in Liverpool in March.

    I was reminded then of the poetic words of President Higgins – whose extraordinary public service we applaud as he prepares to leave office – who said on his 2014 state visit to Britain that the UK-Ireland relationship had progressed from ”the doubting eyes of estrangement… to the trusting eyes of partnership and, in recent years, the welcoming eyes of friendship”.

    We are, indeed, today the closest of friends  as well as the closest of neighbours.

    The UK Government has also, of course,  been working to reset our relationship with our European partners.

    As part of this, we remain steadfastly committed to the full and faithful implementation of the Windsor Framework.

    Not because it is perfect, but given our departure from the EU, the open border, and two entities with two different sets of rules, we had to find together with the EU a means of  dealing with a unique challenge, and the Framework was the pragmatic result.

    And over the past year, we have continued to try together to ease the flow of goods within the UK internal market by:

    • removing unnecessary customs paperwork;
    • setting out our plans to safeguard the supply of veterinary medicines;
    • and working to protect consumer choice in the final phase of ‘Not for EU’ labelling.

    And of course the biggest prize from our commitment to rebuild trust and partnership has been the  Common Understanding announced in May between the UK and the EU – our largest and closest trading partner.

    What a contrast with the breaking of promises and the threatening to rip up international agreements of recent years.

    An SPS agreement in particular will make a big difference once it is implemented.

    It will remove the checks and procedures on animal and plant products moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland – as well as making it easier for businesses across the UK to export to the EU.

    This matters for practical economic reasons.

    But it also matters to the sense of Northern Ireland’s integral place in the United Kingdom.

    And following the publication yesterday of the independent review of the Windsor Framework carried out by Lord Murphy, the Government will of course now give full consideration to his findings and recommendations.

    We have also worked to try and reset relationships with the Northern Ireland Executive.

    I want to pay tribute to Michelle O’Neill and Emma Little-Pengelly, and to all of the Executive Ministers, for what they have achieved in the 19 or so months since power-sharing was restored.

    They have worked constructively together and agreed an ambitious Programme for Government, published a Fiscal Sustainability Plan, brought forward a strategy to end violence against women and girls and a childcare and early learning plan, allocated the first £129m of ringfenced funding from the UK Government for public services transformation, and announced a three-year strategic plan for health and social care, to start getting on top of the long-standing crisis in the health and care system.

    There is, of course, so much more to do, whether its on health waiting lists,  water quality in Lough Neagh, or the constraints on growth that come from an overloaded waste water system or slow planning decisions.

    But there have also been some depressing developments. The disorder and racist thuggery – let’s call it out for what it was –  we saw in Ballymena and other towns this summer was despicable, and has no place whatsoever in Northern Ireland or anywhere else in the United Kingdom. When people feel they have to put signs or flags in their windows in hope that this will stop them from being smashed then something is terribly wrong.

    We all have a duty to speak out and I greatly welcome the strong statement agreed at the Northern Ireland Executive meeting yesterday condemning racist and sectarian attacks.

    The Government is providing £137 million in continued funding to tackle terrorism, paramilitarism and organised crime. The threats are changing and more than ever we have to work together to meet them.

    Paramilitarism remains a scourge on Northern Ireland society, and following our agreement earlier this year, the Tánaiste and I will soon jointly appoint an Independent Expert to scope the prospects for paramilitary group transition to disbandment. I know that not everyone agrees with that decision – of course paramilitaries should have left the stage long ago – but the fact is they’re still here and still causing harm to communities.

    As demand for more and better public services continues to increase and pressures grow on the public finances of governments across the world, in these straitened times, all of us know that we need to raise revenue – and spend it as effectively as possible – if we are going to deliver on our commitments.

    This Government is clearly showing our support for Northern Ireland through continued and significant investment.

    At the Spending Review the Chancellor announced a record funding settlement of £19.3 billion per year through this Parliament – the biggest since devolution.

    This will ensure that Northern Ireland continues to be funded above its level of relative need. And it has ended the prospect of a financial cliff-edge in 2027, which had been left hanging over Northern Ireland by the previous government.

    With its unique strengths in cyber and AI, in green technologies, in the creative industries and in defence manufacturing, Northern Ireland has so much to offer.
    That is borne out in our modern industrial strategy, and the forthcoming defence industrial strategy.

    It is reflected in the £310 million the UK is investing in Northern Ireland’s City and Growth Deals, the deal announced by the Prime Minister in March to supply Ukraine with more than 5,000 air defence missiles from Thales, and in the £30m investment we announced last month for Northern Ireland’s science and tech sectors and Local Innovation Partnerships Fund, £2m for Queens University Belfast’s Cyber AI Hub and £46m a year to fund Local Growth.

    And at  the first meeting of the East West Council under this Government in June I announced the Connect Fund, which will award up to £1 million to strengthen collaboration between community groups in Northern Ireland – whose work is so important and so valuable – with their community organisations in Great Britain.

    These are all further examples of this Government’s commitment to Northern Ireland’s future.

    And I hope that  PM the £50m investment by the UK Government in the redevelopment of Casement Park, alongside the investments we continue to make in football, rugby and other sports in Northern Ireland will now enable progress to be made on both the GAA stadium and the sub-regional stadia programme for football. And of course we have the enticing prospect of Northern Ireland being part of the UK’s bid for the 2035 Women’s World Cup.

    In the same spirit of partnership, the new Irish Government has shown its continued commitment to infrastructure development and tourism in the border regions through the Shared Island Fund, with a welcome €50 million in new funding announced earlier this year.

    All of this means that the Executive has what I think is an unprecedented opportunity ahead of it to build on the positive start it has made and to do the hard work of reforming public services, generating further investment and improving the lives of all the people of Northern Ireland.

    Now, it shouldn’t need to be said, but [political content redacted] let me be absolutely clear that this Government’s commitment to the Good Friday Agreement – in its entirety – is unwavering and absolute, and I know that is shared by the Irish Government as co-guarantor with us.

    The Agreement on that miraculous Good Friday brought an end to three decades of appalling violence in Northern Ireland and across the United Kingdom.

    [Political content redacted]

    To try and unpick the Good Friday Agreement would not only be dangerously irresponsible but would also disrespect all those who sacrificed so much to help bring about the peace that the people of Northern Ireland – and across these shared islands – now enjoy.

    The GFA, as Nancy Pelosi once said in a speech to the Dáil, a “beacon to the world”.

    And it is with that in mind that I am greatly looking forward to welcoming foreign ministers from the Western Balkans, alongside other European friends and partners, not least yourself, Simon to Hillsborough Castle in October, as part of the UK’s hosting of the Berlin Process, which promotes prosperity, security and reconciliation in South-Eastern Europe, specifically the former Yugoslavia.

    At home and abroad, let us continue to talk about our countries’ shared experience and pass on the lessons we have learned to the next generation.

    Which brings me to the legacy of the Troubles.

    Helping bereaved families to get answers about the deaths of their loved ones ultimately proved to be beyond the architects of the Good Friday Agreement.

    But they knew it needed to be done.

    They said: ”The participants believe that it is essential to acknowledge and address the suffering of the victims of violence as a necessary element of reconciliation.” But they couldn’t quite get there, given everything else they had to deal with.

    Everyone in this room knows that there have been numerous attempts at fulfilling this promise but I’ve met a lot of people who are still waiting for those answers. Their voice above all needs to be heard in the current debate.

    The 2014 Stormont House Agreement, negotiated by the Conservative-led coalition government and the Irish Government, came close, with its commitment to an independent Historical Investigations Unit and a separate, joint information recovery body.

    But in the years that followed, the political courage required to deliver on that agreement dissipated.

    [Political content redacted]

    That legislation was rejected across Northern Ireland, a number of its provisions have been ruled against by the Northern Ireland courts, and this Government came into office committed to repeal and replace it.

    The independent Commission, that was created by the Act, now has a growing  caseload – including some of the most high profile terrorist murder cases from those awful times, like the Guildford pub bombing and the Warrenpoint ambush.

    But it is clear that the Commission in its current form does not command enough confidence in Northern Ireland. So, if it is to be successful, it urgently needs significant reform.

    I have always said that I want a legacy process that is capable of commanding support across all communities. And it has always been my view, and that of the Prime Minister, that – if at all possible – this should be a shared endeavour with the Irish Government, with reciprocal commitments from both sides.

    That remains the objective of the agreement with Ireland that we have been working on. And I would say we are now close to being in a position to announce that.

    I have already set out many of the things that we intend to do, building on the principles of the Stormont House Agreement and drawing on the lessons from Operation Kenova.
    A reformed, independent and human rights compliant Legacy Commission that gives families the best possible chance of finding answers, with investigations capable of referring cases for potential prosecution where evidence exists of criminality.

    A new oversight body for the Commission, a Victims Panel as in Kenova, public hearings and representation for families.

    The maximum possible disclosure of information, in line with the disclosure process for public inquiries.

    The potential for a separate information recovery body, as envisaged by Stormont House and the subsequent treaty between the two governments.

    The resumption of a number of inquests that were prematurely halted by the Legacy Act.

    And – for the UK Government’s part – protections to ensure that anyone who served the State in Northern Ireland to keep people safe and who is asked to participate in a legacy process as a witness is treated with dignity and respect.

    Most of us here lived through the Troubles, in my case at a distance but not for many of you. I remember watching the reporting on television and reading about  terrible events in the newspapers, and like you I despaired.

    But unless we went through the experience, none of us will ever fully be able to appreciate what was – and still is –  felt by those people who lost dearly loved family members, but who have never been able to find  answers about what happened to them.

    Answers that have been hidden for too long. Answers that some people may not like. Answers that are uncomfortable or shocking or a painful reminder of grim times and brutal deeds.

    Great Hatred Little Room, Jonathan Powell’s account of the Northern Ireland peace process, concludes with these words:
    “The burden of history remains, and before the two sides become truly reconciled they need to find a way to deal with the past…. If I have one wish, it is that the people of Northern Ireland find an acceptable way to lay the past to rest.”

    How right he was. But I am under no illusions. This is difficult. It remains highly contentious. Different views are understandably and  passionately held. And  the pain and the trauma still run deep.

    We all know that a perfect outcome is not attainable – not everyone is going to get everything they want – remembering that wonderful quote in the Ulster Museum Troubles exhibition.  ‘We have a shared past, but do not have a shared memory’.

    But I am also certain that, with trust in each other and with continued resolve, we can find a way forward to deliver on the unfinished business of the Good Friday Agreement and put in place our best chance to acknowledge and address the suffering of the victims of the violence as we seek to find answers for all.

    So as our two countries turn to face the future, let us neither be burdened by the past, nor turn our backs upon it.

    A way forward is now within our grasp and that is why we must find the courage to do this, and do it now.

  • Keir Starmer – 2025 Statement on the Death of Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Kent

    Keir Starmer – 2025 Statement on the Death of Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Kent

    The statement made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 5 September 2025.

    I wish to send my sincere condolences to His Majesty The King and the Royal Family on the death of Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Kent.

    For many years, she was one of our hardest working royals – supporting our late Queen Elizabeth II in her official duties at home and abroad.

    She brought compassion, dignity and a human touch to everything she did. Many will remember that moment at the Wimbledon Ladies Final, when she touchingly comforted the runner-up, Jana Novotna.

    Later, when it was discovered she had been giving her time and working anonymously as a music teacher at a school in Hull, it seemed typical of her unassuming nature.

    In so many ways, the Duchess sought to help. My thoughts are with her husband, His Royal Highness The Duke of Kent, her family and all those whose lives she touched.

  • Keir Starmer – 2025 Letter to Angela Rayner Accepting Her Resignation

    Keir Starmer – 2025 Letter to Angela Rayner Accepting Her Resignation

    The letter sent by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, to Angela Rayner, on 5 September 2025.

    Letter (in .pdf format)

  • Laurie Magnus – 2025 Letter to the Prime Minister on Angela Rayner’s Flat Purchase

    Laurie Magnus – 2025 Letter to the Prime Minister on Angela Rayner’s Flat Purchase

    The letter sent by Laurie Magnus, the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards, to Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 5 September 2025.

    Letter (in .pdf format)

  • Peter Kyle – 2025 Mansion House Speech

    Peter Kyle – 2025 Mansion House Speech

    The speech made by Peter Kyle, the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology at the Mansion House in London on 3 September 2025.

    I want to talk about a society and economy where AI benefits every person and community in the country.

    Where there is opportunity for anyone, no matter their background. Where our huge potential for wealth creation isn’t centred in the capital but is distributed where talent lies – which is everywhere people are.

    And where we finally become a country that celebrates entrepreneurial zeal, and those can who move from innovation to commercialisation, and thrive in a modern Britain.

    To get there, the question I’m seeking to answer in government isn’t ‘do we want to be a country that adopts AI or not’…because AI is going to happen. We know it is.

    That’s true for every country from Britain to North Korea.

    The better question is: do we want to use all the power and agency we have, as a government to shape how it unfolds?

    This will be my focus tonight.

    And what better setting than here, in Mansion House.

    The place where the future of this country has so often been debated, and yes, defined.

    Almost 70 years ago, in April 1956, this room was the setting of a major Cold War summit.

    Where Nikita Khrushchev came, after Stalin’s death, with a delegation from the USSR.

    On the way here he stopped by Claridge’s. Clearly nothing is too good for the workers.

    Before coming for dinner here, with Clement Attlee and Anthony Eden.

    Mansion House was done up, looking its finest.

    The Lord Mayor gave a speech.

    And the team put on a delicious spread, as always.

    It was a huge effort.

    But we know now, looking back at history…the charm offensive didn’t really work.

    Khrushchev returned to the USSR as resolved as he ever had been to lead, through technology.

    Racing to be first to the space rocket, the microchip, the bomb.

    Thankfully, those Cold War days are behind us.

    But on the world stage, the tech competition remains as fierce as ever.

    Only this time, the defining competitive advantage of this century – I believe…is going to be AI.

    Artificial intelligence will shape our economies, our security, and our place in the world.

    Those who wield it in their national interest – who invest in the right skills and hardware, while they have the chance…will be the economic superpowers of the future.

    Look at the US, and China.

    Or the Gulf states, vying to compete.

    Time and again, we see that a nation’s sovereign interest rests on its technological edge.

    It’s the lesson Khrushchev almost learned – but not quite.

    You see, in the years after his Mansion House visit, Khrushchev set about increasing the USSR’s tech capacity.

    As part of the plan, he wanted to have his own Soviet Silicon Valley.

    He ordered the creation of a new city, on the outskirts of Moscow: Zelenograd.

    The city had its own cinema, billboards, homes and offices. And a massive statue of Lenin.

    And the whole place was designed for engineers, racing to design microchips.

    The idea was simple: copy what worked in America, but do it faster.

    The Soviets got their hands on a prototype for a US microchip, the SN-51.

    Alexander Shokin, the official in charge, summoned the engineers of Zelenograd into his office, and he ordered them:

    “Copy it, one-for-one” – without a single deviation.

    This, ultimately, was their big mistake.

    The Soviets chose to imitate rather than innovate.

    At a time when the pace of change in chips was impossible to keep up with, without their own domestic research capacity.

    American speed proved too difficult for the Soviets to match.

    Individual US entrepreneurialism outpaced Soviet central control.

    And Silicon Valley won the chip race.

    Today, history is repeating itself in the development of AI and the new technological revolution.

    And the UK must think like the US, not act like the USSR.

    The computing power needed to train leading AI systems has doubled roughly every 6 months for the last decade.

    If we don’t keep up – with a domestic AI ecosystem of our own, on British shores, we’ll always be beholden to others, following where they point us.

    Buying off-the-shelf, from overseas.

    That’s a precedent I am not willing to set when it comes to our military tech, the integrity of our NHS, and data protection.

    Or when the prize is a huge competitive edge for our economy.

    Fortunately, we’re starting from a good place.

    We currently rank third for AI, after the US and China. We have 4 of the world’s top ten universities. The lowest corporation tax in the G7. And more venture capital investment than anywhere else in Europe.

    Only this year, the chief executive of NVIDIA, Jensen Huang, said the UK is in a ‘Goldilocks’ moment for AI.

    Because we are country not burdened by over-regulation, or a lack of ambition.

    Britain is striking the right balance.

    I remember, before this government came to office, I spent ages asking businesses what they needed from us.

    You certainly weren’t shy in telling us.

    Take AI seriously. Regulatory reform. Make sure we don’t fall short on talent.

    And ever since, we’ve been getting on with it.

    It started in January, with the AI Opportunities Action Plan.

    It outlined the 50 steps we are taking to grow the economy, and create scores of new jobs as part of the government’s modern industrial strategy.

    An early priority for me was skills.

    In June, we launched our TechFirst programme – backed by £187 million in funding which will bring digital and AI learning directly into the classroom and reach every secondary school pupil in the country.

    Next, we looked at the workforce. Forming a skills partnership with firms like Barclays, Amazon, BT, and Google.

    Together, committing to train 7.5 million people in AI – a fifth of the country’s workers.

    It’s fantastic to see how so many of you have risen to that challenge.

    After that, we looked at hardware.

    If we wanted to compete, we knew we had to improve our physical machinery.

    The raw processing power we have on offer, here in the UK, to churn through the mountains of data that will be required.

    The Compute Roadmap I set out in July charts that course.

    And I recently launched Isambard – our new supercomputer, the most powerful in the country.

    A machine that will be able to process an unthinkable amount of information, in seconds.

    We have another one, Dawn, in a lab in Cambridge.

    And I’ve announced the creation of a national supercomputer that will be based in Edinburgh.

    All told we’re on track to increase our compute capacity 20-fold between now and the end of the decade.

    We have our plan for the National Data Library.

    AI is pretty straightforward in its basic form. It is chips. It is data. It is software.

    We talk about chips a lot. We talk about software a lot. But we need to talk much, much more about the data that fuels it.

    AI is only as good as the data it uses, and Britain has the best data in the world.

    We will be safely harnessing it to power scientific and medical discovery, to drive our understanding of the human condition, and as potentially the biggest engine for the commercialisation of innovation in our country’s history.

    And we’re not slowing down any time soon.

    Our next big priority is our AI Growth Zones.

    These will be dedicated hubs of AI development.

    The first will be just 60 miles away, in Culham.

    And we’re getting spades in the ground for sites in Wales and in Scotland.

    Each has the potential for a full campus – bringing together companies, researchers, and investors.

    These efforts have been met by a wave of commitment from the private sector.

    With £14 billion in investment announced by firms like Vantage Data Centres, NScale, and Kyndryl.

    A brilliant British company, Synthesia, has announced they are expanding their London office just a few weeks ago.

    And global firms like Cohere, Open AI, and Anthropic have followed suit – choosing our capital as their home from home.

    That is a vote of confidence not just in our tech sector, but in the UK’s future.

    So this evening, I’m proud to publish the next 2 parts of our plan.

    The first is a roadmap for a new British AI assurance industry.

    Backed by a fund worth £11 million.

    In the next few years, AI assurance will bloom into a unique profession, worth up to £18.8 billion to our economy, based on a growing pool of independent experts with the skills to verify that new AI innovations are secure, and trustworthy.

    We hope it will give firms the tools they need to build trust with both customers and markets, especially smaller teams, who lack the in-house expertise to do this work themselves.

    Applications for that fund will be opening in the Spring – please do keep an eye out.

    Lastly, we’re looking very closely at regulation.

    I know this is a crucial issue for many of you. So I want to make it plain:

    British companies shouldn’t have to wait months for approvals, whilst competitors overseas race ahead. If AI can speed things up, even a little, then we will do everything we can to make that a reality.

    As part of this effort, today we announced our new AI regulator capability fund.

    Designed to support 5 UK regulators – from Ofgem, to the Civil Aviation Authority with up to £2.7 million in funding, to help them both use and regulate AI better.

    Whether it’s a new AI assistant. Analysing huge datasets. Or streamlining approvals.

    This is our challenge to regulators:

    Use every tool at your disposal to get new products to market quickly, without sacrificing safety.

    In aviation, for example, this might mean getting faster at clearing the skies for new drone technologies.

    Or, for the Office for Nuclear Regulation, we’re investing more than a quarter of a million pounds in a project that will enable the nuclear industry to test new AI tools in nuclear plants.

    Including things like making us more efficient at handling high risk nuclear waste.

    I want to personally thank the team at our Regulatory Innovation Office, set up last year, for being so forward-looking on this. I’m immensely proud of the work that it’s already doing.

    So that’s where we are today.

    A little over a year after I first set foot in the Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology, I don’t think a single person in this room could say, hand on heart, that we haven’t got stuck in.

    And it’s starting to pay off.

    In our first 12 months of in government we’ve attracted more than £44 billion worth of investment into the British AI sector. The average deal last year was worth £5.9 million.

    And we have doubled the number of AI firms in Yorkshire, Wales, the Midlands, and the North West compared to just 3 years ago.

    We have learned the lesson of history: countries can only prosper if they get the big calls right; if they decide to go beyond the expected and embrace the future; to innovate not imitate; refusing to be constrained by the problems of today by taking on the challenges of tomorrow.

    In these uncertain times, I am certain that’s what it takes to get a global competitive edge.

    So, if there is anyone here who still doubts our commitment.

    My message to you is simple:

    Britain is preparing for the challenge of the new technological revolution.

    We want you to keep investing here, keep building here. List here. Scale here.

    And if you invest in Britain, you will share in that competitive edge.

    I look forward to working with you all as, together, we create the security and opportunity society people are counting on us to deliver.

    Thank you.

  • Angela Rayner – 2025 Statement on Stamp Duty on Second Flat

    Angela Rayner – 2025 Statement on Stamp Duty on Second Flat

    The statement made by Angela Rayner on 3 September 2025.

    Following the substantial scrutiny surrounding my living arrangements, I wanted to set out the facts as openly and transparently as I can.

    Until now, an undertaking in a court order prevented me from disclosing information about certain aspects of my personal life. In the interests of public transparency, I applied to the court and I was last night released from this undertaking.

    Family life can be complicated, and it is no secret that, like many families across the country, my domestic arrangements reflect these complexities. Throughout my career, I have always tried to be the best mum to my children, while managing the demanding realities of public service.

    There has been a lot of speculation in recent days about my domestic arrangements and in particular the home I share with my ex-husband and my family. While I do not find it easy to publicly discuss personal and sometimes distressing family matters, I have always taken my responsibility as an MP and deputy prime minister seriously and tried to be as open as possible while protecting my family. To address the allegations made against me I have now taken the difficult decision to explain why my arrangements are as they are.

    In 2023 my ex-husband and I divorced. As parents who have been through divorce will understand, the top priority for both of us during that process was the wellbeing of our children and helping them navigate this change. To provide maximum stability during this transition, we agreed to a nesting arrangement where the children remain in the family home full-time while we alternate living there. We also wanted to ensure that our child, who has special educational needs, was provided for as part of the divorce settlement.

    A court-instructed trust was established in 2020 following a deeply personal and distressing incident involving my son as a premature baby. He was left with life-long disabilities, and the trust was established to manage the award on his behalf – a standard practice in circumstances like ours.

    To ensure he continued to have stability in the family home, which had been adapted for his needs, we agreed that our interest in the family home would be transferred to this court-instructed trust of which he is the sole beneficiary.

    Some of the interest in our family home was transferred to the trust in 2023. In January 2025, I sold the remaining interest in the property to my son’s trust. This will give him the security of knowing the home is his, allowing him to continue to live in the home he feels safe in and grew up in. We transferred the property because it was in the best interests of our child. I acted as any parent would.

    The sale of the property in Ashton-under-Lyne to the trust has not altered my family life. It remains my family home, as it has been for over a decade. It contains the majority of my possessions and it is where I am registered for most official and financial purposes ranging from credit cards to the dentist to the electoral roll. But most importantly, it is where my children live and have gone to school and now college, and where I regularly live while caring for them.

    After I sold my stake to the trust, I bought a property in Hove in May 2025. Like many people, I used the lump sum from selling my stake in my Ashton home, which was the only property I owned and where my savings were, for the deposit on my new one. I obtained a mortgage to finance the rest. When purchasing the property my understanding, on advice from lawyers,
    was that my circumstances meant I was liable for the standard rate of stamp duty.

    However, given the recent allegations in the press I have subsequently sought further advice from a leading tax counsel to review that position and to ensure I am fully compliant with all tax provisions. I have now been advised that although I did not own any other property at the time of the purchase, the application of complex deeming provisions which relate to my son’s trust gives rise to additional stamp duty liabilities. I acknowledge that due to my reliance on advice from lawyers which did not properly take account of these provisions, I did not pay the appropriate stamp duty at the time of the purchase. I am working with expert lawyers and with HMRC to resolve the matter and pay what is due.

    The arrangements I have set out reflect the reality that family life is rarely straightforward, particularly when dealing with disability, divorce and the complexities of ensuring your children’s long-term security. Every decision I have made has been guided by what I believe to be in my children’s best interests.

    I deeply regret the error that has been made. I am committed to resolving this matter fully and providing the transparency that public service demands. It is for that reason I have today referred myself to the independent adviser on ministerial standards, and will provide him with my fullest cooperation and access to all the information he requires.

  • Calum Miller – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    Calum Miller – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    The speech made by Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs spokesperson, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. I welcome the robust approach of the E3 in initiating the snapback mechanism in response to Iran’s nuclear ambitions and programme, which are in breach of its undertakings.

    The Foreign Secretary’s statement on 21 July shocked this House, and we had a long debate about the situation in Gaza, yet the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and the west bank has deteriorated even further since then, as he has acknowledged. We have seen hundreds more Palestinians killed while seeking aid; famine declared in the strip; a chronic lack of medical supplies, attested to by UK medics volunteering in Nasser hospital; the start of IDF operations in Gaza City; and the images of emaciated hostages still held in brutal captivity by Hamas terrorists.

    The human suffering is indeed beyond comprehension, yet the extremists are indifferent. Hamas terrorists publish videos intended to torment the families of hostages. Cabinet members Ben-Gvir and Smotrich advocate for the forced displacement of Palestinians. In Israel, the Hostages and Missing Families Forum and Opposition parties call for an end to the violence. In the UK, our constituents are desperate for the same. The bloodshed can be stopped only by decisive actions—actions that I regret the Government have so far failed to take.

    The Prime Minister was wrong in principle to condition the recognition of Palestine on the actions of the Netanyahu Government, and wrong in practice, as he has been ignored. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm today that the UK will recognise Palestine later this month at the UN? The Government must learn a lesson and now apply relentless pressure on the Netanyahu Government, so the Liberal Democrats call today on the Foreign Secretary to finally sanction Prime Minister Netanyahu for expanding his military campaign and pursuing the illegal expansion of the E1 settlements, and to take the steps necessary to ban the export of all UK arms to Israel, including F-35 components. Will he also make representations to the Qatari Government to demand that they exile Hamas from their political headquarters unless they agree to the release of all the hostages immediately and unconditionally?

    The Foreign Secretary bemoans that words are not enough to alleviate the suffering. He acknowledges that the Government have failed to move the combatants, yet there is one man who could unlock progress. Donald Trump has the power to secure peace in Gaza, if he chose to, by picking up the phone to Netanyahu. Will the Foreign Secretary tell the House how he will use his special relationship with Vice President Vance to help secure that goal, and will the Government commit to making a ceasefire in Gaza a priority during President Trump’s state visit?

    Mr Lammy

    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his remarks, particularly on Iran. He is absolutely right to place at the centre the 15,000 people who have been injured in Gaza while simply seeking aid, and the more than 2,000 who have died seeking aid. It is totally unacceptable, and he is right to remind the House about the position of the hostage families, who are crystal clear that they do not want to see further military endeavour and operation in Gaza City. What they want is a ceasefire, and they fear that further military endeavour will actually harm their loved ones further, not succeed in bringing them home.

    The hon. Gentleman criticises our position on recognition. I ask him to reflect on that, because it must be right that the Government continue to give diplomacy an opportunity as we head to the UN alongside other partners. Surely he would want us to be working with our French, Australian and Canadian partners as we head to that gathering at UNGA, and surely he would want to see the Israelis commit to a ceasefire, commit to a process and end the war. All of that is what we are seeking to do as we make an assessment of where we have got to in the coming weeks. I reassure him that of course I raise the issue of Gaza with all levels of the US Administration. I did raise the situation in Gaza with Vice President Vance earlier in the summer and with Secretary of State Rubio, and I have spoken to envoy Steve Witkoff in the last 24 hours to get an update on this fast-moving situation. Direct sales of F-35s to Israel are banned, and the hon. Gentleman knows that we ban arms that could go to the IDF for use in Gaza.

  • Emily Thornberry – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    Emily Thornberry – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    The speech made by Emily Thornberry, the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    I read with alarm yesterday’s report in The Washington Post detailing a plan for the future of Gaza that is circulating among the Trump Administration. They call it the “GREAT” plan. It proposes the total transformation of Gaza into a tourist region—a high-tech hub under temporary US administration. What is going to happen to the Gazans? Well, 2 million of them will be temporarily relocated to other countries, including Somaliland and South Sudan. Forced population transfer is contrary to, and a complete violation of, international humanitarian law.

    Serious thought must be given to the day after for Gaza, and my Committee recommended as much in our report that was published in July, but this unserious, illegal and deeply dystopian plan cannot be the sum of that thinking. What are the Government doing to dissuade Donald Trump from following this path? What, alongside regional and European allies, are we doing to put forward a serious plan for a peaceful future in Israel, Gaza and the west bank that is ready for the day after this terrible war finally comes to an end?

    Mr Lammy

    I am very grateful to my right hon. Friend —my dear friend—for her remarks, and I commend the work of her Committee on the day after and the thoroughness of approach that is required. I have read the reports, but it is speculative stuff that I have seen in different news articles; it is not a comprehensive approach. In my discussions with the US system, I have seen nothing confirmed along the lines of what she said. The day after requires the removal of Hamas; it cannot be about the further displacement of the Gazan people. It is going to require a degree of finance and stability, which I think will require other states, particularly Arab partners. They would set themselves against the sorts of reports I have seen in the papers.

  • Priti Patel – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    Priti Patel – 2025 Speech on the Middle East

    The speech made by Priti Patel, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. Let me also express my sympathy for the people of Afghanistan who are suffering as a result of last night’s major earthquake.

    Since the House last met, the awful conflict in the middle east has continued to see lives lost, with intolerable suffering. Hamas continues to refuse the release of all remaining hostages, despite the best efforts of those trying to broker peace. The hostages are now approaching 700 days in captivity, and the whole House will have been sickened by the harrowing clip of the emaciated hostage Evyatar David, which was released by Hamas over the summer. The humanitarian situation in Gaza is dire, and we are all familiar with the reports that we have seen daily on news channels. The inhumane suffering, the recent airstrikes and the inability to provide food for civilians simply cannot go on. We all want an urgent and sustainable end to this conflict. We want to see the release of the hostages from terrorist captivity, and to see aid for the people of Gaza.

    There are key questions for the British Government to answer. The British Government are in a position to help influence those outcomes, but are they actually fully leveraging their ability to do so? The Government’s frequent statements have so far not moved the dial closer to a sustainable end to the conflict, and, as the Foreign Secretary himself has said, we are not in a position to see any alleviation of this horrendous situation. Diplomacy is about putting in the hard yards to find solutions, not just about giving statements, and I therefore want to ask the Foreign Secretary three specific questions.

    First, are the Government taking any new specific action to tighten the screws on Hamas and pile more pressure on them to release the hostages? Should we expect more measures to further degrade Hamas’s ability to finance their campaign of terror? Why are the Government not leading international efforts to produce a credible plan to do exactly that, with an agreement from all the key regional partners and players with an interest in peace to see Hamas leave Gaza? Secondly, can the Foreign Secretary update the House on precisely where we stand and what Britain is contributing to the efforts of the United Nations and our regional allies to broker the release of hostages, and to an end of the conflict? Are we intimately involved, and are we sending in the UK expertise to help, given that we have great expertise when it comes to brokering negotiations of this kind? Thirdly, while we note the Foreign Secretary’s announcement yesterday about support for women and girls, the Government have yet to make essential breakthroughs on aid.

    Ministers must obviously work around the clock with everyone—with all our partners, including the Israelis and multinational institutions—to unblock the situation by coming up with practical solutions, even new solutions, on which all sides can focus when it comes to getting medical and food aid into Gaza. That must provide a significant increase in food and medical supplies reaching civilians while also addressing Israeli concerns about aid diversion, because those concerns are constant. Is the UK working with the multilateral bodies to try to mediate in the divisions and breakdowns of trust that have emerged with the Government of Israel? Is the Foreign Secretary considering schemes similar to those implemented by the Conservative Government, such as the floating piers that, working with the United States and Cyprus, we put in place off the coast of Gaza to get aid in? We need pragmatic and practical solutions to get food and medical supplies to innocent civilians in Gaza.

    Let me now turn to Labour’s decision to recognise a Palestinian state. The Government announced that huge shift in British policy just days after the House went into recess. We all support a two-state solution that guarantees security for both Israelis and Palestinians, but the Foreign Secretary must know that recognising a Palestinian state in September will not secure the lasting peace that we all want to see. Recognition is meaningful only if it is part of a formal peace process, and it should not happen while the hostages are still being held in terrorist captivity and while Hamas’s reign of terror continues. Can the Foreign Secretary explain his plan to go ahead with recognition while hostages are still being held, and while Hamas, who have predictably welcomed and been emboldened by this move, continue to hold on to power in Gaza? What practical measures are we proposing to remove Hamas from Gaza?

    The Foreign Secretary must realise that recognition will not secure the release of the hostages or get aid into Gaza immediately. We must always consider what tools of leverage we have in respect of future peace processes and negotiations that could actually help to establish a two-state solution and peace in the middle east. How will this unilateral action help to advance the best shot that we have at achieving a two-state solution, which is the expansion of the Abraham accords and Saudi normalisation, through which we could also calibrate our actions?

    As for the question of the middle east more broadly, the appalling behaviour of the Iranian regime has gone on for too long, and the regime has brought the initiation of the snapback process on itself. The Iranian people deserve much better. Tehran must never obtain a nuclear weapon, and Conservatives remain clear about the fact that the recent US strikes were necessary. Can the Foreign Secretary tell us whether he believes that Iran has the capability and the intention of recommencing its nuclear programme, and whether his assumption is that the snapback process will be seen through to completion? Can he tell us whether or not he welcomes Israel’s actions regarding the Houthi leadership in Yemen, and can he update the House on how the UK will use this moment to further degrade the Houthis’ ability to carry out the attacks and strikes that we have seen recently?

    Mr Lammy

    I am grateful to the shadow Foreign Secretary for the tone of her remarks. I am pleased that she agrees with me and, indeed, shares the sentiment of the entire House on the dire—as she described it— humanitarian situation in Gaza and the inhumanity that she also described. She will recognise that even before we came to power, the last Government were calling for the ceasefire that we all want to see.

    The right hon. Lady asked what the Government were doing in relation to Hamas. In New York, with our Arab partners, the French and others, we were doing just that—supporting the Prime Minister’s framework for peace, and working with colleagues to establish the circumstances of the day after. We have been crystal clear: there can be no role for Hamas. We need the demilitarisation of Gaza, and we are working with partners to try to set up the trusteeship, the new governance arrangement with Gaza. No Government are doing more than we are. We signed a memorandum of understanding with the Palestinian Authority, and we are working with it on reform in a deliberate, day-to-day action, because there must be a role for it subsequently.

    The right hon. Lady asked what new solutions on aid might be found. That is where I depart with her sentiments, because I am not sure that we need new solutions. We need the old ones: the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, the United Nations Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and the World Food Programme. They exist, so let us support them. It was this party that restored funding to UNRWA when it was opposed by the Opposition. Let me say gently to the right hon. Lady that that is not what feeds women and girls. The mechanisms are there, and they work all over the globe. This worked the last time we had a ceasefire, when as many as 600 trucks a day went in, and we can do it once more. That is the position of the UK Government.

    I spoke to Tom Fletcher at the United Nations this morning to get the latest. The moderately good news is that the number of truck movements in August was higher than it was when I last updated the House in July, as the House was going into recess, but he reminded me that 60 or 70 trucks a day was nowhere near the number needed. I found the extra resources today because we know that the medical situation is dire, and the work that we can do with UK-Med is so important and so valued even when we are up against this horrific situation.

    Let me be crystal clear: Hamas is a terrorist organisation. Our demands are unconditional and have not changed. The hostages must be released without delay, and there can be no role for Hamas. But equally, the right hon. Lady will have seen the situation in the west bank. She did not comment on the E1 development running a coach and horses through the idea of two states, which has been the united position of every single party in this Chamber. That is why we set out the plans for recognition. Unless we get the breakthrough that we need on the ceasefire and a full process, we will move to recognition when UNGA meets in New York.

    I am grateful for the right hon. Lady’s support on Iran and the snapback. My assessment is that no country needs the percentages of enriched uranium that we see in Iran. We do not have them in our country. We do not have them at sites like Sellafield and others, including the Urenco site. There is absolutely no need for them. We need a baseline, and that is why we need the inspectors back in. We need to know where the highly enriched uranium has gone, and that is why we have been very clear with the Iranians on the need to trigger snapback. We will see the sanctions come back unless we can reach a diplomatic solution in the next 30 days.

  • David Lammy – 2025 Statement on the Middle East

    David Lammy – 2025 Statement on the Middle East

    The statement made by David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 1 September 2025.

    With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I shall make a statement on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Iran.

    In Gaza, the situation on the ground is unimaginably bleak. Horrifying images and accounts will be seared into the minds of colleagues across this House. They are almost impossible to put into words, but we can and must be precise with our language, because on 22 August the United Nations-backed IPC mechanism confirmed what we are witnessing: famine—famine in Gaza city; famine in its surrounding neighbourhoods now spreading across the wider territory; famine which, if unchecked, will spiral into widespread starvation.

    This was foreseen: it is the terrible conclusion of the obstacles we have warned about for over six months. Since 1 July, over 300 people have died from malnutrition, including 119 children. More than 132,000 children under the age of five are at risk of dying from hunger by June next year. This is not a natural disaster; it is a man-made famine in the 21st century, and I am outraged by the Israeli Government’s refusal to allow in sufficient aid. We need a massive humanitarian response to prevent more deaths, crucial non-governmental organisations, humanitarians and health workers to be allowed to operate, and stockpiles of aid on Gaza’s borders to be released. In the past three months, more than 2,000 Gazans have been killed trying to feed their families, and Hamas themselves are exploiting the chaos and deliberately starving Israeli hostages for abhorrent political purposes.

    I know that these words of condemnation, echoed across legislatures all over the world, are not enough, but be in no doubt: we have acted as a country where we can. We restored funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. We suspended arms exports that could be used in Gaza. We signed a landmark agreement with the Palestinian Authority. We stood up for the independence of international courts. We have delivered three sanctions packages on violent settlers and far-right Israeli Ministers for incitement. We have suspended trade negotiations with the Israeli Government. We are at the forefront of the international community’s work to plan for a stable, post-conflict peace. We have now provided more than £250 million in development assistance over the past two years.

    Today, we are going further. I can announce an additional £15 million of aid and medical care for Gaza and the region. We continue to work alongside regional partners, including Egypt and Jordan, to enable the United Nations and non-governmental organisations to ensure that aid reaches those most in need. Brave medics in Gaza tell us that essential medicines are running out and they cannot operate safely. That is why we are funding UK-Med, whose field hospitals have treated more than 600,000 Gazans. It is also why we are funding the World Health Organisation in Egypt to treat thousands of evacuated Gazan people.

    Meanwhile, as my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary said earlier, we are working with the World Health Organisation to get critically ill and injured children into the UK, where they will receive specialist NHS treatment. The first patients are expected to arrive in the UK in the coming weeks. Extracting people from a war zone is, of course, complex and dangerous, and it relies entirely on Israeli permissions. I am pressing the Israeli Government for that to happen as quickly as possible. We are also supporting brilliant students granted Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Chevening scholarships and other scholarships to escape Gaza, so that they can take up their places for the coming academic year.

    I recognise that those things only touch the edges of this catastrophe. We all know that there is only one way out: an immediate ceasefire that would see the unconditional release by Hamas of all hostages and a transformation in the delivery of aid. We know it, our US and European allies know it, and our Gulf partners know it, too. I am working night and day with them to deliver a ceasefire and a wider political process to deliver long-term peace. To make a ceasefire last, we need a monitoring mechanism, the disarmament of Hamas and a new governance framework for Gaza. That is the focus of our intense diplomacy in the region.

    In contrast, further military operations in Gaza City will only prolong and deepen the crisis. Together with our partners, we demand an immediate halt to the operation. Each week brings new horrors. Last week’s double strike on Nasser hospital—one of Gaza’s last remaining major health facilities—killed 20 people, including five journalists. I remind Israel once again that international law requires the protection of healthcare workers, journalists and civilians. These actions will not end the war, and they will not bring the hostages home, let alone make them safer, as hostage families have recognised. Such actions will sow despair and anger across the region for generations.

    In the west bank, the Israeli Government are tightening their stranglehold on the Palestinian economy and continue to approve illegal settlement construction, including just recently in the E1 area east of Jerusalem. That would erect a physical barrier to the contiguous Palestinian state, and it must not happen.

    In July, I described before the UN General Assembly our intention to recognise the state of Palestine later this month, unless the Israeli Government take substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza and commit to a long-term sustainable peace. That commitment responds to the current crisis, but stems from our historic responsibility to the region’s security, reaching back over a century to the Balfour declaration. As I said last month in New York, I am deeply proud that it was a British Foreign Secretary who helped establish a homeland for the Jewish people, but the same declaration promised that

    “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights”

    of the Palestinian people. Those rights are more under threat than at any point in the past century.

    To those who say recognition rewards Hamas or threatens Israeli security, it does neither. Recognition is rooted in the principle of a two-state solution, which Hamas rejects. We have been clear that any Palestinian state should be demilitarised. Indeed, President Abbas has confirmed that in writing. We see no contradiction between the two-state solution and our deep commitment to Israeli security, because security comes from stable borders, not indefinite occupation.

    Before I finish, I would also like to update the House on Iran. On 28 August, the UK, along with France and Germany, triggered the snapback mechanism under UN Security Council resolution 2231. That means that if no new agreement is reached within 30 days, the sanctions that were lifted under the Iran nuclear deal—the joint comprehensive plan of action—will come back into force. Those wide-ranging sanctions include a full arms embargo and restrictions on Iran’s nuclear, missile and drone programme. It was not a decision we took lightly. For years, we have worked with international partners to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. The 2015 deal was meant to do just that, but Iran has repeatedly undermined the agreement. Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium is now 40 times over the limit set by the JCPOA. Despite that clear escalation, we have made every effort over years of negotiations to bring Iran back to compliance. Those efforts have continued in recent months. I have urged Foreign Minister Araghchi to de-escalate and choose diplomacy.

    In July, we offered Iran more time if it agreed to return to negotiations with the US and restore full access to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Last month, I warned Iran that time was short and we would have little choice but to trigger snapback. I regret to inform the House that Iran has not complied with its legal obligations, nor chosen the path of diplomacy, so we have had no choice but to act. I have long been clear that I will not allow snapback to expire without a durable and comprehensive deal. It would be unacceptable to allow this issue to fall off the UN Security Council agenda, despite the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear programme. Snapback is not the end of diplomacy, as Secretary Rubio has also recently underlined. Iran can still meet our conditions. It can restore full IAEA access and address our concerns about its stockpile and enrichment, and it can return to negotiations. Alongside our partners, I will continue to urge Iran to choose that path.

    In the worst of times, this Government will continue to take all the steps that we can to alleviate suffering, to help bring regional conflict to an end and to create the conditions for long-term peace and security. We will not rest until there is a ceasefire in Gaza, the hostages are returned, and a flood of aid reaches those in desperate need. Despite the obstacles before us, we will work with partners to preserve the two-state solution. I commend this statement to the House.