The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 7 July 2025.
Today, we honour those who lost their lives on 7th July, 20 years ago, and pay tribute to the responders who ran towards danger.
We stood together then. We stand together now.
Tag: Speeches
-
Lee Anderson – 2025 Statement on Suspension of James McMurdock
The statement made by Lee Anderson, the Chief Whip of Reform, on 5 July 2025.
I have today received a call from James McMurdock who has advised me, as Chief Whip, that he has removed the party whip from himself pending the outcome of an investigation into allegations that are likely to be published by a national newspaper.
The allegations relate to business propriety during the pandemic and before he became an MP.
At Reform UK we take these matters very seriously and James has agreed to cooperate in full with any investigation.
We will not be commenting further at this moment.
-
Dawn Butler – 2025 Speech on Mobile Phone Theft
The speech made by Dawn Butler, the Labour MP for Brent East, in the House of Commons on 3 July 2025.
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the matter of mobile phone theft.
I thank the Backbench Business Committee for ensuring that we could have this important debate today. I know that there are many MPs who would have loved to be here today and who have suffered mobile phone thefts.
Ten years ago my bag was stolen when I was at a conference in a Westminster hotel. I used geo tracking and saw it moving slowly over the bridge. I called the police, but they were not interested—as I say, it was 10 years ago. Somebody at the conference had a car, and in true “Starsky and Hutch” style we used it to chase down the thieves. We noticed as we were travelling alongside them that we were probably going to make them very suspicious, so we went ahead of them and stopped. This is probably a lot of detail, but we then pretended to kiss as the thieves walked towards us. I called the police again to tell them that we were about to apprehend the thieves and retrieve my phone. The police then arrived, and when they jumped out of the van we jumped out of the car. The thieves had about 20 mobile phones on them. I recovered my bag and, although they had dumped my stuff along the way, I got all my stuff back. But the thing is, that was 10 years ago, and things have moved on—people understand that there is “Find my phone”, as do the police, so we know that we can recover stolen phones—so now is the time to prioritise this type of theft, which is making our streets less safe. Tourists are being targeted.
I know that the Home Secretary has had a roundtable with mobile phone companies and with the Mayor of London, but if the companies will not take this problem as seriously as they should, we need to force them to do that by law. I went to a good briefing on the Metropolitan police’s Operation Reckoning, which shows its determination. This is a vital way of achieving the Government’s safer streets mission. In Westminster, a mobile phone is stolen every six minutes.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I commend the hon. Lady on bringing forward the debate. She is absolutely right, but it is about even more than mobile phones. I am not technically minded—I own up to that; I am of a different generation—but today’s young person carries on their mobile phone bank details, family things and personal things that allow access to accounts and whatever else. Sometimes, in the back of their phones they have their debit cards and their driving licence, so when someone gets their phone, they get almost their whole life. As the Minister acknowledged in a previous debate, perhaps today’s young person needs to understand that if they lose that, they lose almost everything financially.
Dawn Butler
I thank the hon. Member for that important intervention; he is absolutely right. A mobile phone is not just for making a phone call anymore; it is an integral part of most people’s lives. It holds data on it, as well as pictures that its owner will never be able to take again. It holds voicemails from loved ones. My friend who had her phone snatched in Egypt had a voicemail from her late mother on her phone. Mobile phones hold so much information that when someone snatches one, they are snatching a part of that person’s life.
Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab)
Further to the intervention from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), does my hon. Friend agree that public awareness is not where it should be? It worries me to see people with their phones sticking out of their back pockets or people standing and taking photographs around Westminster, knowing how high the incidence of theft is. Somehow the public need to be more aware and more careful with these precious things that hold so much of their lives on them.
Dawn Butler
I thank my hon. Friend for that important intervention. That is the thing: until we ensure that our streets are safe, we must ensure that people are acutely aware of what is happening. I find myself sometimes tapping people on the shoulder and saying, “Excuse me, can you move your phone from your back pocket? You might get pickpocketed.”
I feel that the manufacturers use this as part of their business model. They know that once a phone gets stolen, its owner will go and buy another phone, and phones currently operate on a monopoly. I do not know if anybody has ever tried to switch from an iPhone to a Samsung as I did—oh my goodness; it is like they do not want you to switch over. Even from Android to Android, it is difficult to move over the data. Mobile phone companies know exactly what they are doing. Thank God for USB-Cs, because iPhone chargers used to change with every upgrade, so people ended up forking out more and more money.
We need to hold the manufacturers to account because they make enough money and enough profit. We have to get to a stage where we are putting people and the safety of our citizens first.
London is one of the greatest cities on earth and we want Tories to come—not Tories, but tourists. [Laughter.] Tories are obviously welcome too, even though they are not here today. We want tourists to come to London to sample the art, the culture and the inclusion. We do not want to go around warning them about their mobile phones. Over 700 phones were also stolen from Departments, so the Government should have a vested interest in this because it will cost taxpayers money to replace those phones.
We can redesign mobile phones so that nobody wants to steal them. I do not know if people are old enough to remember—although there are a few in the Chamber today—when car radios used to be stolen out of cars. We combated and stopped that crime by building the radios into the cars so they could not easily be snatched out.
John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Ind)
I just want to throw something else at the debate around the insurance issue. Many say, “You should be covered by insurance.” My phone was stolen last November. It was classic: I got bumped into in a big crowd and did not realise. I then recognised the theft and did “find my phone”. It was in north London, so I contacted the police, but they do not investigate after an hour because they say it is gone. I said, “I have the personal numbers of the whole of the Cabinet there, so that might cause a bit of a problem.” I then claimed on the household insurance and was covered, but then the insurance company would not renew my cover. That just adds to the problems all the way through. Everyone seems to be making a profit out of it, apart from us.
Dawn Butler
I am impressed that my right hon. Friend has the all the Cabinet’s phone numbers. He is absolutely right; the knock-on effect of this crime is huge. Whether it is the house insurance, the personal stuff or the global crime syndicate, it is huge. I watched a documentary by Dave Fishwick, known through “Bank of Dave”. He spoke to one of the gang leaders and they talked about shoulder surfing, where they liked to watch people and get the details of their phones. They like to get phones when they are already open so that they can then scrape all the data and bank details. Within that hour, as my right hon. Friend said, they could empty out someone’s bank account. Around 30,000 people are also victims of identity theft in this country every single day. This crime, therefore, is not simply about nicking somebody’s phone; it goes a lot deeper than that.
One hundred million second-hand phones go to China and some go to Algeria too. Apple and Google say that they will reconnect phones that have been reported stolen. We should say to them that that admission, in itself, is unacceptable. China has become an illegal electronic recycling hub where, if they cannot get into a phone, they dismantle it and build a new phone using various parts from stolen ones. Those who do not disconnect their ID straightaway are sent threatening messages that talk about killing and raping family members, with some even sent videos of guns that say they are coming to kill them. That is terribly frightening and also why we need to stop this global crime now.
There is a link between neighbourhood crimes and organised criminality. Criminals think that the police do not care about mobile phone thefts because it is just a mobile phone and people can claim it back. I am glad that the Met police is taking this seriously, unlike 10 years ago. I doubt that many heads of criminal organisations will be watching this debate, but I note that 235 people were arrested in January 2024 through Operation Reckoning. On average, people are getting sentences of four to five years, which I think is right, because this is not a crime without consequences.
The Government have a huge role to play in making sure that we say to these criminals that we are serious about holding them to account. However, we must also say to the manufacturing companies that if they will not provide a kill switch for stolen mobile phones, we will force them to do it by law.
-
Danny Chambers – 2025 Speech on the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill
The speech made by Danny Chambers, the Liberal Democrat MP for Winchester, in the House of Commons on 4 July 2025.
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
I am delighted to present this Bill for its Third Reading. I begin by stating how grateful I am to all the Members from across the House who have engaged with this Bill, especially during the Public Bill Committee. It became quite clear very quickly how passionate every Committee member was about animal welfare, and we had a huge amount of contributions, with many taking the opportunity to name check their own pets from home. I thought I had heard every cat name during my years in clinical practice, but I have to say that I was really impressed by the imagination of the hon. Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter), who revealed that her cats were named Clement Catlee and Mo Meowlam.
My many years in veterinary practice, working both in Winchester and in Romsey—in your beautiful constituency, Madam Deputy Speaker—as well as around the rest of country, have shown me just how deeply the people of this nation care for their pets. They are companions, and they are sometimes sole companions to people who live alone. I have lost count of the number of times, especially during covid, that we were treating animals and someone would say, “I haven’t seen anyone else for months, and my dog or my cat is my only companion.” Pets are absolutely vital for many people’s mental health, especially when we have an epidemic of loneliness. Pets are sometimes part of the antidote to that.
Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)
My constituency is the home of Canine Partners, the organisation that provides canine companions for individuals with disabilities. I just wanted to reflect on the positive effect those dogs have on the people who care for them.
Dr Chambers
There are so many fantastic organisations like Canine Partners. Another one is the Cinnamon Trust. If a person ends up going into hospital for an extended period of time, the Cinnamon Trust will take care of their pet for them and give it back to them when they are discharged. That takes away so much of the worry.
My partner Emma and I have two dogs: Frank and Moose. Frank has been mentioned before in Parliament, because I managed to wish him a very happy 15th birthday recently. He is a pug cross border terrier. I think the best way to describe how he looks, with his undershot jaw and his big buggy eyes, is quirky. I admit that he gets a mixed reception; one Liberal Democrat Member saw a picture of him and called him ugly, which I was horrendously offended by. [Hon. Members: “Shame!”] It was awful—shame! We were at one of my friends’ houses for dinner recently, and one of their children looked at Frank and said, “Frank is really ugly.” The other child said, “You shouldn’t say that, because he might have been in an accident.” It was possibly a genetic accident, but I want to make clear on the record that beneath his appearance, he is a gentle and loving companion, and he brings a smile to the face of everyone who sees him.
I know that many other Members, as well as people across the country, will feel as strongly about protecting animal welfare as I and other vets do. Pets like Frank and Moose have such profound impacts on our everyday lives and happiness, and it is crucial that we do all we can to ensure dogs like them are protected from the cruel practices involved in pet smuggling. All of the pets who have been mentioned in this Chamber, and others who have not been, are close to our hearts and serve to remind us of the importance of this Bill. Although my pets and yours, Madam Deputy Speaker—Alfie and—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Alfie and Luna.
Dr Chambers
Alfie and Luna. They are cockapoos—I am sure they keep you very fit. Although our pets, and all the pets of the other hon. Members who are in the Chamber today, are well cared for and have loving homes, that is not the case for all cats and dogs in the UK.
As a vet, I have seen the devastating consequences of puppy smuggling. It is unimaginably cruel to separate puppies and kittens from their mothers at a very young age and then bring them across borders in substandard conditions, where they are sold for maximum profit by unscrupulous traders who prioritise profit over welfare.
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
I thank my hon. Friend for introducing this Bill, which I know means a lot to the great number of my constituents who have contacted me. They are particularly concerned about the conditions that puppies are smuggled in, but also that many animals coming into this country illegally bring conditions that we have eradicated here, or have cropped ears and tails. They are very keen to see my hon. Friend’s Bill pass, but can he assure us that more can be done in future to make sure, in particular, that we stamp out those illnesses?
Dr Chambers
I very much appreciate that intervention from my hon. Friend. Yes, one important part of this Bill—which I will come on to—is biosecurity. There are a lot of diseases that we do not see in the UK that can affect humans as well, such as rabies and Brucella canis. There are also diseases such as distemper that affect other dogs; we do not see those diseases in the UK, but there is a risk of them coming in and becoming endemic. My partner Emma, who is here today, is an epidemiologist at the University of Surrey, studying diseases such as rabies in dogs and the risk of them transferring across borders. It is a very live issue.
Those who purchase an animal are often completely unaware of the smuggling process, which is devastating. When people go to buy a puppy, they are completely unaware that there is a reasonable chance that it has been smuggled in from abroad.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
My hon. Friend is laying out clearly the need for change. A number of my constituents, including Ann from Bredbury, Shannon from Marple and Ashley from High Lane, have been in touch to ask me to support him in his endeavours. People are staggered that some of these practices are not yet outlawed. Does he agree that some of his proposals in the Bill are closing loopholes that people already expect to be closed?
Dr Chambers
That is an insightful intervention from my hon. Friend. Yes, most people are shocked at the sheer scale of puppy smuggling. The Dogs Trust did a study looking at one of the online platforms with puppy adverts, and up to 50% of those adverts turned out to be for puppies that had possibly been smuggled in from abroad. In the last 12 months, one in five vets said they had treated animals that they believed had been smuggled from abroad. This is not a niche issue; it is a systemic issue within the pet trade, and these loopholes need to be closed.
Sarah Russell (Congleton) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for introducing this fantastic Bill, which does important things for animal welfare. Sadly, my constituency has a problem with dog-on-dog attacks, which are truly distressing to their owners. The overwhelming majority of dog owners in my constituency are incredibly responsible and keep their dogs under control at all times, but a tiny minority are doing a great deal of damage. Does the hon. Member have any thoughts on what we could do about that?
Dr Chambers
Dog-on-dog attacks are a huge issue. It largely comes down to socialisation when they are puppies. It was made a lot worse during the covid pandemic when people could not attend normal puppy training classes, and puppies could not walk and meet other dogs or have normal training regimes.
I will also come on to the problem of dogs having illegally cropped ears—when their ears are cut off—because dogs communicate by body language, and part of their body language is ear position. If they cannot move their ears, they cannot communicate in normal ways to other dogs that they are not a threat, and they are more likely to get into fights and difficulties. It is the same if their tails are cut off and they cannot show whether they are happy, sad, angry or confident.
When owners buy a new puppy, often they do not realise that it has been smuggled and taken from its mother far too soon. That can cause a lot of medical issues and other diseases, such as parvo virus. It is not unusual for someone to buy a new puppy and, within the first week or two, have to go to the vet repeatedly with a very sick animal, whose problems are often quite hard to diagnose. Sometimes these diseases are fatal. There are few things more heartbreaking than a family who, within a few days of ownership, not only have an expensive veterinary bill but have lost their new puppy.
Aphra Brandreth (Chester South and Eddisbury) (Con)
I thank the hon. Member for introducing this important Bill, which I support. He talks about the impact of diseases that puppies might have when they are brought in. Does he agree that there are also diseases that have potential impacts on human health, often for the veterinary surgeons or nurses who are looking after them? For example, diseases such as Brucella canis could lead to miscarriage for a lady if she is looking after one of those puppies while pregnant.
Dr Chambers
I know that the hon. Lady speaks with authority as her husband is a vet. I thank her for sitting on the Committee and for pushing the Bill through. She also has a private Member’s Bill on animal welfare. She makes an important point that has been consuming the veterinary profession for the last couple of years. A lot of dogs brought in from abroad have a disease called Brucella canis, which can affect humans. It can cause infertility and miscarriages. Obviously, if a dog has been illegally smuggled in, owners might not be aware of the risk because they assume it has been born in the UK. It is a huge human health risk as well.
Just last night, I was still receiving messages from veterinary colleagues about treating animals that they strongly suspect have been smuggled in because of the type of illnesses that they are seeing. That is why we are striving to end those practices by delivering the measures in the Bill.
The Bill closes loopholes in our pet travel rules that are currently exploited. It does so by reducing the number of animals permitted per non-commercial movement from five per person to five per vehicle—including vehicles on board a train or ferry—and to three per person for foot or air passengers. Careful consideration has been given to setting these limits, balancing the need to disrupt illegal trade with minimising the impact on genuine pet owners. To underpin this, only an owner, not an authorised person, will be permitted to sign a declaration that the movement of a dog or cat is non-commercial.
Crucially, the Bill places a duty on the Government to use these regulation-making powers to deliver three key measures: a ban on the import of puppies and kittens under six months old; a ban on the import of heavily pregnant dogs and cats that are more than 42 days pregnant; and a ban on the import of dogs and cats that have been mutilated. Raising the minimum age at which dogs and cats can be imported will ensure that very young animals are not taken from their mothers too soon. Separating a puppy or kitten from its mother too young has huge implications for its health and welfare.
Matt Turmaine (Watford) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for bringing forward this very important Bill. The point about very young animals is really pertinent. In my family, we have two kittens. They were brought into our house at an appropriate age, and we can see the importance of their first relationships after birth.
One of my constituents owns ferrets, and I met both those ferrets at civic events in my constituency of Watford. They clearly have personalities, and it is really important that this Bill seeks to protect them.
Dr Chambers
Yes, ferrets are some of the most quirky and engaging creatures you can ever meet—great personalities. I have to say I hate them coming into the consult room, because you can smell that they have been there for several hours afterwards, but they bring a lot of joy and pleasure to the people who own them.
We anticipate that traders may respond to an increase in the minimum age for importing puppies and kittens by increasing the number of pregnant dogs and cats that they import. The evidence from stakeholders suggests that even at present, traders are importing very heavily pregnant dogs and cats in order to benefit from their trade as soon as the puppies and kittens are born, because it is much cheaper and easier to bring in an animal before it gives birth than to try to move a whole load of puppies. We know that some dogs are being taken back and forth; they get pregnant again, and then are brought back to give birth. It really is abuse of these bitches. They are basically puppy factories.
The transportation of heavily pregnant dogs and cats is dangerous to the health and welfare of both the mother and the offspring, especially in heatwaves, given the heat inside vans when they have a few pregnant dogs in the back, so it is paramount that we remain on the front foot and use the Bill to prevent this practice becoming commonplace.
The Bill will raise the minimum age at which cats and dogs can be imported to ensure that very young animals are not taken from their mothers too soon, and that we can age puppies and kittens more accurately. Currently, the minimum age is technically 15 weeks, but it is very hard even for vets to accurately age animals. By the time they get to six months old, they have lost all their deciduous teeth—their baby teeth—and have mostly adult teeth, so we can be much more confident about their age. Raising the minimum age will be much better for their welfare, but it will also help tackle the criminals’ business model, because the demand is for puppies, not dogs that are over six months. We hope that if people cannot bring in dogs at six months old, it will take away the incentive to try to get them across the border.
I come to mutilation, which includes ear cropping, the declawing of cats and tail docking. It is very cruel and should not be tolerated. For anyone who is not aware, ear cropping is when someone cuts a dog’s ears off to make it look more aggressive. It often happens to breeds such as XL bullies and Dobermanns. It has been illegal in the UK for more than a decade—since, I think, 2013. People are still performing the procedure in the UK, without veterinary supervision and probably with no anaesthetic, and then claiming that the dogs have been brought in from abroad, because it is still legal to bring them in from abroad.
I received messages last night from about a dozen vets, saying that just in the last couple of months, they have treated dogs that have clearly had their ears hacked off in the UK, and that now have infections and need the rest of the ear amputated. This is going on now. The great thing about closing that loophole is that there will be no excuse for owning a dog in the UK with cropped ears, and no one will be able to claim that such a dog has been brought in from abroad.
John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)
One of the great beauties of this Bill is that it applies to Scotland, too. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it will make the prosecution of ear cropping-related cases easier in Scotland, for the benefit of our wonderful dogs?
Dr Chambers
Clarity about the fact that there is no excuse for having a dog with cropped ears should make prosecution and enforcement of the law a lot more straightforward.
I will read out a message that I received from a veterinary colleague last night:
“Just saw for repeat meds check this week, 3yo cropped Doberman, imported but clearly was very young and Owner was not given any passport or papers. He had his ears cropped (supposedly done abroad before being imported, but was probably done in the UK). Lovely bright dog until anyone puts a hand towards his head when it will explode with aggression. Big enough dog to be life threatening if a child approached him. Now exists near permanently muzzled and dosed up on Prozac. It’s maddening, frustrating and pitiful all at the same time.”
Cutting a dog’s ears off with no anaesthetic is obviously physically harmful, but it can also affect the dog’s psychology for the rest of their life, so they will not let anyone go near their head. It is quite interesting; we know that dogs love to be stroked, particularly on their heads, and studies show that both a human’s and a dog’s cortisol levels go down when a human pets a dog. The relationship is mutual and symbiotic. Depriving an animal of that type of relationship for the rest of its life is really upsetting. What is the point in owning a dog if you cannot even stroke it? It is a real shame. There is no reason to mutilate an animal in this way. It is a cruel practice, only carried out for aesthetic reasons, and the Bill will help us to close that loophole for good.
The Bill was amended in Committee to allow the appropriate authority to exempt pet owners from the new requirements in articles 5 and 5A of the pet travel regulation in exceptional and compelling circumstances. This aims to ensure that the new measures will not disadvantage protected groups such as assistance dog users. It will also provide flexibility in emergency situations, such as cases where genuine owners can no longer travel within five days of their pets, for example because they have a medical emergency. I know that has caused some concern, and I reassure hon. Members that it is intended for use in limited circumstances, which must be exceptional or compelling. Exemptions sought will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis, and the Government have provided reassurances that no blanket exemptions will be granted.
Finally, in Committee the Bill was amended to remove the power that would have enabled the Secretary of State to make consequential changes that might have been required as a result of changes that the Bill makes to the pet travel rules and corresponding commercial import rules. Further consideration of the legislation has taken place since the Bill was introduced, and we have greater confidence that no further consequential amendments will be required. Should further changes to the pet travel schemes legal framework be needed, the Government may be able to make them using existing powers in other legislation.
The Bill will play a pivotal role in disrupting the cruel pet smuggling trade, a shared objective of Members from across the House. It has been a joy to see the House united on animal welfare, and to see the commitment to working together across parties to end puppy smuggling. I urge all Members to support these crucial measures.
-
Jeremy Corbyn – 2025 Statement on the New Political Party
The statement made by Jeremy Corbyn, the Independent MP for Islington North, on 4 July 2025.
Real change is coming.
One year on from the election, this Labour government has refused to deliver the change people expected and deserved. Poverty, inequality and war are not inevitable. Our country needs to change direction, now.
Congratulations to Zarah Sultana on her principled decision to leave the Labour Party. I am delighted that she will help us build a real alternative.
The democratic foundations of a new kind of political party will soon take shape. Discussions are ongoing – and I am excited to work alongside all communities to fight for the future people deserve.
Together, we can create something that is desperately missing from our broken political system: hope.
-
John McDonnell – 2025 Comments on Zarah Sultana Leaving the Labour Party
The comments made by John McDonnell, the MP for Hayes and Harlington, on social media on 4 July 2025.
I am dreadfully sorry to lose Zarah Sultana MP from the Labour Party. The people running Labour at the moment need to ask themselves why a young, articulate, talented, extremely dedicated socialist feels she now has no home in the Labour Party and has to leave.
-
Ed Miliband – 2025 Speech at Global Offshore Wind Conference
The speech made by Ed Miliband, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, at the ExCel Centre in London on 17 June 2025.
Thank you, Jane [Cooper]. I just want to say how brilliant it is to be here today, it’s a real privilege. I read my old speech from a year ago, about 15 days before the general election, and it holds up reasonably well to history.
I felt an incredible sense of excitement back then about having a chance to be Secretary of State, and today I feel an incredible sense of privilege. One of the reasons I feel that sense of privilege is because of all of you, because of the incredibly inspiring things you are doing for energy security, for jobs, around the country, and to tackle the climate crisis.
I also want to pay tribute to Jane, you are doing an absolutely brilliant job championing this industry – you and the RenewableUK team are truly outstanding.
Can I say at the same time we are delighted to have secured our superstar signing Dan McGrail as interim CEO of Great British Energy – it’s fantastic to have him and Juergen Maier both here, as well as my colleague Michael Shanks, Minister for Energy who many of you will have met and is doing an absolutely brilliant job, and it’s a privilege to work alongside.
As I walked into the conference today and saw the banner ‘Mission: Possible’, I felt a real sense of excitement.
Because when I look around the exhibition hall and this room, I feel that overwhelming sense of possibility, as the slogan suggests.
Huge economic and industrial opportunities for Britain, huge chances to transform our country. Challenges of course, but as I say I am incredibly proud of this industry, and for 5 years we have worked together on a shared agenda.
For energy security, lower bills, good jobs and climate.
I think it is an inspiring and exciting vision of a new era of clean energy abundance for Britain, getting off the rollercoaster of fossil fuels – and we’re reminded by geo-political events all the time how important that is.
And at the Spending Review last week we committed to the most significant programme of investment in homegrown clean energy in the UK’s history.
On Tuesday, we announced the biggest nuclear building programme in a generation, creating jobs in Suffolk, Nottinghamshire and across the UK.
On Thursday, investment in kickstarting carbon capture in Aberdeenshire and the Humber.
On Friday, half a billion pounds of funding for Britain’s first hydrogen network to help drive industrial renewal.
And today we go further with a genuinely transformative package of investment in offshore wind supply chains and jobs.
I truly believe we are witnessing the coming of age of Britain’s green industrial revolution as we build this new era.
I think it demonstrates above all what an active and strategic government working in the closest partnership with industry can achieve.
So I want to talk today about the clarity of mission we’re seeking to provide, the way we’re breaking down the barriers to success – barriers you talked a lot with us about when in opposition – the role of catalytic public investment – which is partly about the announcement I’m making today – and then a bit about what I would ask from you as an industry.
First, I know it has been a tough time for the industry.
Offshore wind is not immune from the global economic challenges we have seen in the last few years, many of which remain present today.
My response and my responsibility is to ensure that you have the clarity and certainty you need to make future investment decisions, because I know the biggest enemy of investment is uncertainty.
We want Britain to be a safe haven for investment.
That is why from day one we have offered a clear sense of direction, with our goals to deliver clean power by 2030 and accelerate to net zero across the economy.
Just 6 months after we came to office we published our 2030 Clean Power Action Plan.
Setting out for the first time the different pathways for deployment of different technologies.
Offshore wind, onshore wind, solar, nuclear, batteries, hydrogen, CCUS.
To give developers and investors clarity about the direction of travel.
When we came to office we also took decisions around AR6 to make it a record-breaking auction.
But we have also listened hard to the industry about how we can improve the auction process – particularly for fixed and floating offshore wind.
And we will shortly confirm key decisions for the AR7 auction. I want to say to you very clearly, as far as that decision is concerned and all other decisions, my overriding priority is to give you confidence and certainty because I know these are essential ingredients for you to make the long-term investments we need.
Second, for years clean energy projects have been held back by barriers and blockages.
You told us we needed to deal with them.
So over the last 11 months, that’s what we have gone about doing.
On planning, we lifted the onshore wind ban within 72 hours of coming to office.
We’ve introduced the Planning and Infrastructure Bill – the biggest reform of planning in a generation.
And we’ve sped up planning decisions, including consenting enough clean energy to power the equivalent of almost 2 million homes.
On grid, we’ve ended the first come first served connections queue which wasn’t serving our country well, prioritising the power projects we need.
And we’ve brought forward plans to ensure communities benefit from hosting clean energy infrastructure.
We’re also working with Defra on improving environmental consenting.
On radar, we’ve worked with the Ministry of Defence to resolve funding issues that have plagued this sector for years.
On skills, we’ve backed industry’s skills passport for oil and gas workers.
And set up the Office for Clean Energy Jobs to ensure we have the skilled workforce we need and to do that planning with our colleagues at the Department for Education.
In addressing these long-standing issues, we are trying to break down those barriers, which again get in the way of your investment and try to make progress step by step and demonstrating each day what a mission driven government means.
My observation from the first 11 months in office is having this as one of the Prime Minister’s 5 missions makes all the difference in driving through Whitehall and working with others.
Third, alongside clarity, certainty and breaking down the barriers we are delivering catalytic public investment to secure jobs and supply chains as part of our long-term industrial strategy.
This is the right choice for Britain because we want those jobs, it’s also the right choice for our energy security and resilience – and the right long-term way I believe to deal with some of the pressures the industry faces.
I think it’s fair to say we know that for too long governments have not focused enough on ensuring our success in offshore wind generation leads to the jobs our country needs.
This government is different.
There is a global race for these jobs, and we are determined to create them in Britain.
You told us public investment could unlock funding from the private sector – and you’re right.
With Great British Energy that is what we are committed to do.
And today we are announcing a truly historic partnership between public and private investors.
Hundreds of millions of public funding from Great British Energy crowding in many hundreds of millions more from the offshore wind industry and The Crown Estate.
Enabling us to today announce a total of £1 billion of supply chain funding to bring offshore wind jobs to Britain.
It’s designed, this fund, to turbocharge the brilliant work of the sector’s Industrial Growth Plan to invest in ports and factories, so we make turbine towers, blades, foundations and cables here in the UK.
Helping to drive the clean energy rollout at home and capture a growing export market abroad – including seizing the opportunities of being an early mover in floating offshore wind.
And this is just the start, with Great British Energy bringing together a wider group of public and private investors to build our offshore wind supply chains and I am incredibly excited about the work that Juergen and Dan are doing at GBE.
Today I can also confirm we have released the results of the first Clean Industry Bonus round.
Again here, you told us that the private sector would step up, if we showed the importance of building supply chains here in the UK, and again you were right.
We were delighted by the response of developers to this scheme.
Showing that when government leads with ambition, industry is ready to match it.
We calculate that every pound of public money could unlock up to £17 of private investment.
The Clean Industry Bonus unleashing the potential of billions of private investment in factories and ports from the North East to East Anglia to Scotland.
When we talk about catalytic investment, this is what we mean.
Public investment crowding in, not crowding out, the private capital we need.
And giving you the confidence to build a long-term industrial base for Britain.
So look, these are some of the steps we’re taking. Government doesn’t get everything right, but what we are seeking to do is deliver on the promises we made to you in opposition about how we can work together – a true partnership.
Now often the industry asks me, how can we help you to deliver this mission? Let me just give you a few thoughts on that.
On jobs, you have a crucial role in reversing decades of failure to invest in our industrial communities and creating a new generation of good jobs at decent wages.
You have shown your commitment to building supply chains in Britain.
And my ask of you is to ensure you deliver the 95,000 jobs this industry says it could support in the UK by the end of the decade.
On trade unions, there is important work on union recognition in some renewables companies.
But I want to be clear: this government considers trade unions as an essential part of a modern workplace and economy.
So I ask you to recognise the huge value of partnering with trade unions in all parts of the industry.
And finally, I would say this:
I am one of your biggest champions because I know that this mission is the route to building a more secure energy system that can bring down bills for good.
As we consider the multiple pathways to clean power, my mandate to Chris Stark as head of our 2030 Mission Control, is to deliver at least cost to billpayers and taxpayers and the most economic benefit to the country.
So in AR7, AR8, AR9 and beyond, value for money for billpayers is our priority, recognising that while the market needs to make a return, we also need to deliver a fair price for consumers.
Once again, this must be a partnership between us.
We are doing everything we can, as I have set out, to help the industry continue its strong record in bringing down costs.
And I urge you to continue to drive forward with innovation and competition to deliver for the country.
Let me end with this before we get into questions.
I think over the last 11 months we have shown that Britain is back in the race for the jobs and industries of the future.
And above all we have shown one thing fundamentally, which is we are serious about delivering. When we said it, we meant it. When we said becoming a clean energy superpower would become one of the Prime Minister’s 5 missions, we meant it. I have my regular meetings with the Prime Minister about this issue and he is incredibly inspired by what you are delivering.
What we’re seeking to do is have a plan to deliver.
Clear and consistent leadership.
Breaking down the barriers.
Catalytic public investment.
A true partnership between government, trade unions and industry.
We believe this is how we build the age of clean energy abundance.
This is how we boost our energy independence and bring down bills for families and businesses.
This is how we seize the economic and industrial opportunity of our time.
And this is how we face up to the greatest long-term challenge we face as a country and as a world, the climate crisis.
My final thought is this: of course, the industry faces challenges that I am aware of. Nobody believed this was going to be easy, the kind of transformation we are talking about in our economy and in our energy system.
The thing I feel above all, after 11 months in this role, is more of a sense of optimism about what we can achieve together, more of a sense of optimism that this is the right path for energy security, more of a sense of optimism that this can be the jobs driver of the 21st century for our country.
Going round the country, there’s nothing more inspiring than seeing those jobs being created and the opportunity for young people doing apprenticeships and being part of this industry.
I am more certain than ever this is the right path to tackle the biggest long-term threat to humanity, the climate crisis.
Thank you so much for what you do for our country, thank you so much for your partnership with government.
And I look forward to continuing to work together to do great things in the months and years ahead.
Thank you.
-
Zarah Sultana – 2025 Statement Regarding Forming New Party with Jeremy Corbyn
The statement made by Zarah Sultana, the MP for Coventry South, on 3 July 2025.
Today, after 14 years, I’m resigning from the Labour Party.
Jeremy Corbyn and I will co-lead the founding of a new party, with other Independent MPs, campaigners and activists across the country.
Westminster is broken but the real crisis is deeper. Just 50 families now own more wealth than half the UK population. Poverty is growing, inequality is obscene and the two-party system offers nothing but managed decline and broken promises.
A year ago, I was suspended by the Labour Party for voting to abolish the two-child benefit cap and lift 400,000 children out of poverty. I’d do it again. I voted against scrapping winter fuel payments for pensioners. I’d do it again.
Now, the government wants to make disabled people suffer; they just can’t decide how much.
Meanwhile, a billionaire-backed grifter is leading the polls, because Labour has completely failed to improve people’s lives. And across the political establishment, from Farage to Starmer, they smear people of conscience trying to stop a genocide in Gaza as terrorists.
But the truth is clear: this government is an active participant in genocide. And the British people oppose it.
We are not going to take this anymore.
We’re not an island of strangers; we’re an island that’s suffering. We need homes and lives we can actually afford, not rip-off bills we pay every month to a tiny elite bathing in cash. We need our money spent on public services, not forever wars.
In 2029, the choice will be stark: socialism or barbarism.
Billionaires already have three parties fighting for them. It’s time the rest of us had one.
Join us. The time is now.
ZARAH SULTANA MP
MP for Coventry South -
Justin Madders – 2025 Speech on the Parental Leave Review
The speech made by Justin Madders, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, in the House of Commons on 1 July 2025.
With permission, I will make a statement on the Government’s manifesto commitment to review the system of entitlements to parental leave.
This Government are dedicated to delivering more for working families, and our plan to make work pay is central to achieving that, with the mission to grow the economy, raise living standards across the country and create opportunities for all. It will help people to stay in work, improve job security and boost living standards, which includes helping working parents and supporting them to balance their work and home lives.
Parental leave and pay entitlements play a key role in that. We know that the arrival of a child, whether through birth or adoption, is a transformative time in a family’s life. We also know that the current parental leave system does not support modern, diverse working families as well as it could. Parents’ groups and campaigners have long argued that our paternity leave is too short and compares poorly with other countries. While shared parental leave is available to families where fathers and partners want to take a longer period of leave, evidence shows that take-up is very low, with the parental rights survey reporting that 1% of mothers and 4% of fathers use this entitlement. The survey also showed that 35% of fathers do not take paternity leave for financial reasons.
We are committed to improving the parental leave system and are already taking action. Improving the system will have the added benefit of increasing workforce participation by helping employers to fill vacancies and will contribute to increased productivity, benefiting the economy.
The Employment Rights Bill is one vehicle through which we are improving the parental leave system. The Bill makes paternity leave and parental leave day one rights, meaning that employees will be eligible to give notice of their intent to take leave from their first day of employment. It contains a number of other measures that will improve the support that working families receive. It will put in place legislation that makes it unlawful to dismiss pregnant women, mothers on maternity leave and mothers who come back to work for a six-month period after they return, except in specific circumstances. It will also make flexible working the default, except where it is not reasonably feasible, and requires that all large employers produce action plans that contribute to closing the gender pay gap.
I am pleased to announce that the Government are going further and taking another step forward in delivering improvements for working families. I am pleased to launch the parental leave review today, fulfilling our commitment in the plan to make work pay to review the parental leave system to ensure that it best supports working families. The review is part of delivering the plan for change, and links two of the Government’s missions: kick-starting economic growth and breaking down barriers to opportunity. The work of the review will support the Government’s commitments to raise living standards and give children the best start in life, and links to work being undertaken to alleviate child poverty. It presents a much-needed opportunity to consider our approach to the system of parental leave and pay, giving due consideration to balancing costs and benefits to both businesses and the Exchequer. I welcome the opportunity today to provide the House with more detail on the review.
The review will be co-led by the Department for Business and Trade and the Department for Work and Pensions, the two Departments with the main responsibility for the current parental leave framework. There will, however, be close working across Government to deliver this review to reflect the wide influence the parental leave system has on policies in other Departments.
The current system has grown up gradually over time. The first maternity arrangements were set out in the Factory and Workshop Act 1891, which introduced the idea that women who work in factories cannot work for four weeks after giving birth. Subsequent entitlements have been added to support specific groups as needs have emerged, which has created a framework that does not always work cohesively as a whole. This piecemeal approach to parental leave and pay means that the system has never had an overarching set of objectives that it should deliver. This review presents an opportunity to reset our approach to and understanding of parental leave and pay, and what we want the system to achieve.
We will use the review to establish what Britain needs from a parental leave and pay system to support our modern economy and deliver improvements for working families. We have set out four objectives as our starting point, which we intend to test as we progress the review to ensure we are truly reflecting the needs of the nation.
Our first objective is to support the physical and mental health of women during pregnancy and after giving birth to a child. Our second objective is to support economic growth by enabling more parents to stay in work and advance in their careers after starting a family. This will focus on improving both women’s labour market outcomes and tackling the gender pay gap.
Our third objective is to ensure that there are sufficient resources and time away from work to support new and expectant parents’ wellbeing. This will include facilitating the best start in life for babies and young children, and supporting health and development outcomes. Our fourth objective is to support parents to make balanced childcare choices that work for their family situation, including enabling co-parenting, and providing flexibility to reflect the realities of modern work and childcare needs.
Three cross-cutting considerations will also be factored into our review. The first is to build a fair parental leave system between parents within a family, different types of parents and parents with different employment statuses. The second consideration is to balance costs and benefits to businesses and the Exchequer, as well as to examine how the system can support economic opportunities for businesses and families. As part of this, the review will consider opportunities to make the process surrounding parental leave simpler for both businesses and parents. The final cross-cutting consideration focuses on improving our society—for example, by supporting the child poverty strategy, and by shifting social and gender norms, including around paternal childcare.
All current and upcoming parental leave and pay entitlements will be in the scope of the review. This will enable us to consider how the parental leave and pay system should operate as a complete system to improve the support available for working families. This broad scope means that the review will consider the individual existing entitlements, and how best to ensure improvements can be delivered for working families, as well as related wider issues and themes. For example, the review will consider whether the support available meets the needs of other working families who do not qualify for existing statutory leave and pay entitlements, such as kinship carers and self-employed parents. It will also consider how the pay system works more broadly.
This will be an evidence-based review that reflects and considers the perspectives and experiences of those who engage with the parental leave and pay system. We welcome views from, and intend to engage constructively with, a wide range of external stakeholders, including groups such as trade unions that represent both parents and families, and employers or employer representatives. There will be opportunities for stakeholders to contribute views and expertise throughout the review, including through a call for evidence, which launches today. This call for evidence seeks initial evidence specifically in relation to the objectives that will set the foundation for what we want our system to deliver.
The review launches today. We expect it to run for a period of 18 months. The Government will conclude the review with a set of findings and a road map, including next steps for taking any potential reforms forward to implementation. This is an important step forward to ensure that our workplaces are fit for the 21st century, and I commend this statement to the House.
-
Wes Streeting – 2025 Speech at RCOG World Congress
The speech made by Wes Streeting, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, at the ExCel centre on 23 June 2025.
Well thank you, Ranee, for your welcome, and thanks to the college for giving me this opportunity to address you today, and a warm welcome to those of you who’ve travelled from across the world to be here.
The National Health Service began with a literal birth. Aneira Thomas, named after my predecessor Aneurin Bevan, was born at one minute past midnight on the 5th of July 1948.
Since then, tens of millions of babies have been delivered by the NHS. Bringing new life into the world is a wonderful thing, and it’s great to be in a room full of the people who spend their professional lives supporting it. You know better than most that this is also a moment of risk and jeopardy for women and their babies, and that that risk is considerably higher than it should be because of the state of the crisis in our maternity and neonatal services here in the UK.
Within the past 15 years we’ve seen appalling scandals that blew the lid on issues ranging from care, safety, culture and oversight. Morecambe Bay, Shrewsbury and Telford, East Kent, Nottingham. The last government responded with initiatives like Better Births in 2016 and the Maternity Transformation Programme. But despite improvements on some metrics, inequalities in maternal and neonatal outcomes have become more visible, not less.
The rate of maternal deaths has been consistently rising. Babies of Black ethnicity are still more than twice as likely to be stillborn than babies of White ethnicity, and Black women are still 2 to 3 times more likely to die during pregnancy or shortly after birth than White women. Tragically, that gap is closing slightly, but partly because more White women are dying in childbirth. In September, the Care Quality Commission’s National Review of Maternity Services in England found that almost half of all trusts were rated as requiring improvement on safety. Another 18% were rated as inadequate.
There is a widespread lack of staff and in some places a lack of potentially life-saving equipment, and some services don’t even record incidents that have resulted in serious harm. Taxpayers who are footing the bill for our failure to get a grip with everything else I’ve just said. It’s no wonder clinical negligence payouts have reached an all-time high – £2.8 billion last year, with maternity accounting for 41% of all the money paid out.
These are the facts. But behind these alarming statistics are people and the lives that have been taken from them. I spent a lot of time with victims of NHS maternity and neonatal scandals and failures during the last year. Listening. Listening to them share with a total stranger the most personal, painful accounts of their experiences and the trauma that occurs when we fail them.
When I say ‘we’, I don’t just mean the maternity units that failed them. I mean NHS leaders and managers that put protecting their reputations over protecting patients. Or when we put legal advice that says do not admit liability over doing what is right by families. I mean the regulators who failed to hold them to account. And I mean politicians, including me, because the first step in putting this right is being honest about our own mistakes and failures.
And the truth is, we’re not making progress fast enough on the biggest patient safety challenge facing our country. And I know what that means. Because of the many hours I’ve spent with families left completely traumatised by our failure to get it right every time.
When I visit the Nottingham families, they arrange themselves around the horseshoe table in date order, with those whose experience goes furthest back sat to my left, and the most recent sat to my right. The most recent was just last year, and I honestly dread the prospect of going to another meeting with another family arriving at that end of the table with another story to tell. This time, one that has happened on my watch.
Across all of the meetings I’ve had every story is unique, but there are common themes. Some are there because their children died, some because their children suffered injuries that have left them with lifelong complications and disability. Others are women who suffered terrible life-changing injuries during childbirth, or fathers left traumatised and unsupported with severe mental health challenges.
I’ve seen photographs of their children. I’ve seen the ashes of their children in the tiniest little boxes, and I’ve also seen more courage than I could ever imagine mustering if I had to walk a day in their shoes. Carrying the weight of their trauma.
All of them have had to fight for truth and justice. They describe being ignored, gaslit, lied to, manipulated and damaged further by the inability for a trust to simply be honest with them that something has gone wrong. They talk to me about the trauma that they experience compounded time and time again. When a hospital trust or regulator simply turns their back on them, when all they’re searching for is answers.
It’s their bravery that has brought me to the place that I am today. I want to say publicly how sorry I am. Sorry for what the NHS has put them through. Sorry for the way they’ve been treated since by the state. And sorry that we haven’t put this right yet. Because these families are owed more than an apology. They’re owed change, they’re owed real accountability and they’re owed the truth.
So today I’m setting out a different approach to the one that’s failed before. We’re going to do it with rather than to these families. And we’re going to put the voices and experiences of mums, dads and children at the heart of our approach to improving quality, safety and accountability.
Maternity safety will become the litmus test for all safety in the NHS. I’m taking personal responsibility for it as Secretary of State and as the staff leading maternity and neonatal services. I need your help because we’re a team and I can’t do this without you. I know the majority of births in England are safe, and I urge all women to engage with their maternity service and raise any concerns they may have about themselves or their baby.
But for too long, those cases where things do go wrong have been swept under the carpet, and this cannot continue. I know I’m talking to an audience that will embrace this challenge. You will come to work every day to care for people. You are tired, tireless and dedicated in your work. I suspect you’re tired, too, with the pressures you’re under. You go to work to do the right thing, and every day there are healthy babies being delivered safely, with mums receiving great care.
But we also know that staff are being put in an impossible position far too often. It’s the moral dilemma I’ve heard from midwives, obstetricians and neonatologists across the country. They feel conflicted because they don’t feel their maternity ward or neonatal unit is delivering a safe service every time, and they don’t want to work in an unsafe environment. So they consider leaving. But they also tell me that if they walk away, they’d be letting it down even further.
This is not a choice any member of staff should have to face. And I’m aware that there’s a risk that we further demoralise a workforce that’s already been on its knees and felt battered working in an NHS in crisis. I also worry about the risk of causing unnecessary fear or anxiety among mums going into labour, and the dads and loved ones holding their hands through the experience is a dilemma I wrestle with all the time. But I won’t do any of us any favours if we’re not honest about the scale of the challenge, so that we can provide a response able to meet it.
Over the last year, I’ve been wrestling with how we tackle the problems in maternity and neonatal units. And I’ve come to the realisation that while there is action we can take now, we have to acknowledge that this has become systemic. It’s not just a few bad units up and down the country. Maternity units are failing. Hospitals are failing. Trusts are failing. Regulators are failing. There’s too much obfuscation, too much passing the buck and giving lip service, too much shrugging at a cultural problem that we fail to address.
Because of that, we have enormously wide race and class inequalities in maternity care. Women, especially Black, Asian and working class women, are not listened to or given the chance to be advocates for their own health. We have an implicit message from the system that tells women not to have a miscarriage at the weekend. We have women who are classed as having a normal birth still leaving traumatised and scarred. And most concerning of all, we have the normalisation of deaths of women and babies.
We must stop and stop now with the mindset that these things just happen. Our inability to deal with this goes wider than maternity, in fact wider than our health service. It goes to the very core of how Britain responds to state failure.
I should give a little context for my own outlook. I don’t have a conventional background for someone whose title is Right Honourable. I was born not far from here, actually, at the Mile End Hospital to teenage parents. I experienced poverty growing up and, beside a loving family, the reason I’m stood here today as a member of the British Cabinet is because the state got it right – in my case, council housing, a great state education, a welfare state that clothed and fed me.
But I also saw the way the state often treats people from backgrounds like mine. The way the DSS [Department of Social Security], the social security staff talked to my mum like she was dirt at the bottom of their shoes. The fights my grandmother used to have with Tower Hamlets Council when she ran the local tenants union. So I came into office with a healthy degree of cynicism and scepticism about the state. That doesn’t often come naturally to those of us with left-wing politics who fundamentally believe in an active state.
I’ll be honest with you, as I’ve listened to these family’s experiences of the state and NHS failure, that cynicism has boiled over into hot tears and real anger about what they’ve been put through and what they’re still living with. From the Horizon Post Office scandal to the infected blood scandal, the degradation of responsibility and trust in our institutions is compounding a cynicism and malaise at the ability of British politics, or even democracy, to deliver for people.
This is a dangerous place for a country to be. If we do not admit the scale of the failure in maternity services, we’re condemning ourselves to etching that mistrust deeper. If we cannot admit openly that we as institutions and as a state have got this wrong, we will never be able to fix it or rebuild that trust. Too many children have died because of state failure, and I will not allow this to continue under my watch.
So to face up to this, we have to change 2 fundamental things. First, we must ensure real accountability when things go wrong and give justice to those who’ve been wronged. Second, we must drive real improvements in maternity and neonatal care, which will require clear direction, a change of culture and for all of us to mobilise as a team to get this right.
Today I’m announcing a rapid national investigation of maternity and neonatal services, co-produced to include the families who have suffered the worst injustices of maternity care, modelled on the Darzi investigation into the state of the NHS. This will be an evidence-based investigation setting out what’s going wrong and priorities for action. It will look in detail at up to 10 maternity units that are giving us greatest cause for concern. And it will report directly to me by Christmas.
Crucially, the investigation team and terms of reference will be co-produced with the victims of maternity scandals. The investigation will also pull together the recommendations from the other reviews that have taken place to assess progress and provide clarity and direction for the future, so that everyone in the system knows what they’re working to.
I’m currently discussing with Leeds families the best way to grip the challenges brought to light in that trust by their campaigning reports in the media and the latest CQC report, and I’ll be ordering an investigation into 9 specific cases identified by families in Sussex who are owed a thorough account of what happened in those cases.
I’m also establishing a National Maternity and Neonatal Task Force, which I will chair, bringing together experts, staff, campaigners and representatives of families to help me drive improvement across the NHS.
We will call on international colleagues so that we understand what works and how to learn from the best and take to the rest, and the Royal College will have a really important role to play in that. I will also continue to meet families throughout the year, to give them a chance to hold me to account and provide them with a direct route to feedback.
To me, the taskforce will answer some of the most pressing issues the families have put at the top of the list. Namely, how can we ensure that women and their partners are always listened to when they raise concerns about their pregnancy or labour? What else should we be doing to save babies and women from dying or being severely harmed? How do we get better at spotting when things go wrong in units, and how do we tackle this before it grows?
We’ll also bring in a package of measures to start taking action now, increasing accountability across the board and bringing in the cultural change we need to see within the next month. The NHS Chief Executive, Jim Mackey, and Chief Nursing Officer, Duncan Burton, will meet the trusts of greatest concern including Leeds, Gloucester, Mid and South Essex, and Sussex to hold them to account for improvement working with the NHS leadership.
I will set strong and consistent expectations for trust chairs, chief executives and boards, with overhauled oversight and performance frameworks and a new performance dashboard. We’ll roll out the new MOSS digital system to flag potential safety concerns and trust much earlier, and support rapid action and roll out a national maternity and neonatal inequalities data dashboard.
Our 10 Year Plan and upcoming Dash review will look to tackle this safety crisis at its root, with an overhaul of the wider patient safety landscape. We will work to declutter this crowded landscape so that the patient experience works for patients again. I brought Mike Richards back to the CQC as chair to turn around that failing organisation, and I will work closely with him to make sure that the commission is working effectively on behalf of patients and the public.
Together, these measures will create real accountability, cut through the noise to prevent patterns spiralling and work towards tangible improvements for women and babies. I’m also going to do this with you, as well as the Royal College of Midwives and the other colleges and professional bodies.
The Royal College has a reach across the globe and there are maternity professionals from many, many countries here today. These challenges and maternity care are not just in our country. I want to learn from the best systems internationally, and then to showcase how we are taking on the challenge of tackling inequalities across pregnancy and birth head on. Strong clinical leadership really matters. I can’t do this without you. I’m committed to doing this with you, not to you.
So I know some of what I’ve said today will have been tough to hear, especially for people who give up their time early on a Monday morning to be here because you care about delivering safe and high quality care, and you take pride in your profession. Together, we’ll make sure that women and their partners feel heard and listened to, to make every birth a safe birth, to make high quality the hallmark of maternity services in this country and to banish avoidable maternity and baby deaths to the history books. So I’m looking forward to working with you in that endeavour.
Thank you very much.