UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Chris Evans – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    Chris Evans – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    The speech made by Chris Evans, the Labour MP for Caerphilly, in Westminster Hall on 7 January 2026.

    I beg to move,

    That this House has considered patient access to tissue freezing for advanced brain cancer treatment, diagnostics and research.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western—you look remarkably like the man I had breakfast with 45 minutes ago.

    I am pleased that this topic is getting the attention it deserves, and I am grateful to open this important debate, especially ahead of Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week, which begins on 13 January. I must confess I knew relatively little about the effects of brain cancer until I met my constituent, Ellie James. Ellie has travelled from Wales today and is in the Gallery. I admire how tirelessly she has campaigned in memory of her late husband, Owain, who has brought us all here today.

    Owain passed away from glioblastoma, the most common type of malignant brain tumour in adults, in June 2024. He was just 34 years of age. Since then Ellie has been campaigning for what she calls Owain’s law to be implemented in this country. Owain was young, fit and healthy, and he had his whole life ahead of him. He leaves behind a family, including a young daughter. Owain’s story highlights the importance of informed consent from patients and their families regarding treatment and the storage of their brain tissue.

    Owain was diagnosed with a brain tumour in September 2022. Half of Owain’s 14 cm tumour was surgically removed, but only 1 cm of the removed tissue was stored fresh or flash frozen. The 1 cm was used to treat Owain with a form of immunotherapy treatment that requires the patient’s frozen tissue. Owain received three rounds of the vaccine before the frozen tissue ran out, at which point further surgery was not considered possible. The remaining 6 cm of tissue was stored in paraffin, making it unsuitable for additional vaccines.

    Owain died a few months later, despite his cancer showing signs of regression during the treatment. If all the removed tissue had been fresh frozen, around 30 vaccines could have been created. If Owain and his family had been more informed about the practices surrounding brain tissue freezing and storage, and if the hospital had chosen the flash-freezing method for all the removed tissue instead of keeping it in paraffin, Owain could still be with us. His story is truly devastating, but what most stood out to me was that there was a real, achievable potential to extend, if not save, his life.

    The amount of grief that Ellie and Owain’s family face must be tremendous and unimaginable. However, out of grief great change can take place, and I pay tribute to Ellie for her determination to turn her unimaginable grief into something positive that can help others. There is currently no consistent national guidance or sufficient infrastructure to ensure that brain tumour tissue removed during surgery can be stored in the fresh frozen state required for advanced therapies such as immunotherapy and cancer research. It is fundamentally wrong that Owain and his family learned of the small proportion of tissue initially frozen only once the vaccines ran out. I am sure they are not the only people that that will have happened to.

    For every patient diagnosed with a less survivable cancer, the average one-year survival rate is 42%. That is compared with a one-year survival rate of 70% for all cancers. Those statistics need to improve. There are procedures surrounding brain tissue freezing that can be changed, which would have an undeniably positive impact on survival rates. There are already groups doing research and drawing attention to what can be done to improve outcomes for people with cancer, such as the all-party parliamentary group on the less survivable cancers. There are also charities such as Cancer Research UK and Macmillan that conduct valuable research and support cancer patients and their families. Again, I pay tribute to them.

    There are, however, specific recommendations that I would like to mention, which link specifically to Owain and many others who face similar situations. The NHS needs an appropriate number of medical freezers to store fresh frozen tissue. In many cases, there is not enough freezer space to facilitate this type of brain tissue freezing. That must change. That long-term investment would save lives.

    Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)

    Brain cancer is one of the deadliest cancers, and it disproportionately affects young adults: it is the big cancer killer of people under 40. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this proposal not only would save lives at a relatively small cost but has an economic benefit? The Brain Tumour Charity points out that most people diagnosed have to give up work, and so do their carers: 70% of carers also have to give up work to look after those afflicted. There is an economic benefit to doing this, at a relatively low cost, and of course it would save lives.

    Chris Evans

    The hon. Lady is absolutely right. We have to remember that a cancer diagnosis affects not just the person, but their family and loved ones. A lot of people have to leave work to care for those people, and they have to deal with the emotional impact too. Her economic point is absolutely right. The wider point is that we lead the world in life sciences. If we did what I am suggesting, we could be a world leader in brain cancer care and we could save lives too, so it is a win-win for everybody.

    As the hon. Lady said, the change is cost effective. It is estimated that it would cost £250,000 to £400,000 to ensure that all NHS trusts have the necessary capacity and capabilities for flash freezing. Every brain cancer patient should be able to access the latest treatment and research and the most accurate genome-sequencing techniques.

    In Owain’s case, there was enough freezer space, so storing his tissue in paraffin was a conscious decision not made out of necessity. That is why attitudes and established guidance protocols within the NHS about brain tissue freezing need to change. It should not be the norm to store removed brain tissue in something that makes it unusable for further research or treatment. I hope the Minister will commit to establishing national standards so that every suitable brain tumour sample is routinely frozen.

    A brain tumour can happen to anyone. It could affect us or any of our loved ones. This change needs to happen now to save lives in the future. It needs to happen for people such as Owain who are no longer with us, for people who are currently unwell with brain cancer and for people who will unfortunately become ill in the future. This Labour Government have a real opportunity to enact meaningful, positive and feasible change. We must seize that, especially if it is achievable and affordable.

    As I said earlier, we lead the world in life sciences, and brain cancer care is something that we can proudly be world leaders in. The national cancer plan, which will be published next month, must address the storage of brain tissue. Specifically, it must outline exactly how it will improve outcomes for patients with less survivable cancers. If we are serious about putting patients at the heart of cancer care, improving their awareness of the storage of their own tissue is one of the simplest places to start.

    The way that treatment is allocated is deeply unfair. The postcode lottery of cancer treatment must end. It is wrong that a person’s ability to access cancer treatment is dependent on where they live: 40% of people with cancer in the UK have struggled to access treatment or care because of where they live. That is ineffective, unfair and discriminatory. Those are not the values that a Labour Government should uphold. For the cost of a few hundred thousand pounds, we could eliminate the postcode lottery that affects brain cancer patients. We need to ensure that all types of treatment, including experimental ones involving freezers and vaccines, can succeed in all areas, not only some. That exceptionally small investment could have a lifesaving impact.

    It is not only treatment that is affected by current protocol, but research. Owain’s tissue was no longer suitable for research because it was stored in paraffin. It is also incredibly difficult for a person to have control over their own tissue post extraction. The confusion about who technically owns it makes it challenging for people such as Ellie to retrieve the remaining tissue for further testing or research. We need to stop putting unnecessary barriers in place. We are making things harder than they need to be, and these practices have a direct impact on people’s everyday lives.

    It is just as alarming that all this is done without informed consent from the patient or their families. The importance of the storage method for brain tissue cannot be overstated when someone’s life relies upon it. Brain cancer patients and their families should have an absolute right to be consulted on and to give informed consent on how their tumour is stored. While we have the opportunity to make these changes in the national cancer plan for England, we must do so. It is a small, affordable change that could have a huge impact and improve cancer treatment nationwide.

    This issue was debated in the Welsh Senedd in July, and I wonder if the Minister could liaise with the Welsh Government about introducing a similar plan. I understand that the Minister there said he was not minded to introduce legislation. Could she raise this topic with him in bilateral meetings at some point? I was also hoping to get a commitment from the Minister today to meet me and my constituent Ellie, so that Ellie can explain in detail her husband Owain’s experience and we can discuss how to prevent the same thing happening to current and future patients.

    In matters of great importance like this, patients must be aware of what is happening to their tissue during treatment and afterwards. Families should be able to access their tissue if needed for future testing and research. I urge the Minister to think of real people like Owain, Ellie and their young daughter, whose lives could be so different now if patients were consulted, if the tissue was stored differently and if there were more medical freezers. I would specifically like to know the Government’s plans regarding brain tissue freezing, given the impact it would have on diagnostics, treatment and research. Do the Government plan to invest in freezer capacity, and do they intend to make flash freezing the norm?

    While brain tumours will continue to happen to people like Owain or anyone in this room, diagnostics, treatment and research can get better. The Government can lead the way and begin to change the attitudes and practices surrounding brain tissue freezing—in fact, we must do so. I do not wish to hear another story like Owain and Ellie’s, which is absolutely tragic, and I want Ellie’s campaign to succeed; it can and must. The most devastating thing is that Owain’s outcomes could have been different if the established guidance protocol had been different. Perhaps if these things had happened, Owain could have been sitting with Ellie in the Public Gallery today.

  • John McDonnell – 2026 Comments on Alaa Abd el-Fattah

    John McDonnell – 2026 Comments on Alaa Abd el-Fattah

    The comments made by John McDonnell, the Labour MP for Hayes and Harlington, in the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    I was one of those MPs who campaigned hard for the release of Alaa Abd el-Fattah, so it is important, when we consider the overall process, that there is an accurate narrative. The narrative is partly this: yes, there were vile social media interventions by this person, which we all condemn, but which he apologised for. More than that, he became a campaigner in his country of Egypt—he is a joint citizen—for civil rights, civil liberties and religious freedom, and against antisemitism. For that, he served 10 years in prison. Not many in this Chamber have gone anywhere near that record of campaigning for civil liberties, so maybe that narrative could be taken into account when this individual is considered.

  • Calum Miller – 2026 Speech on Middle East and North Africa

    Calum Miller – 2026 Speech on Middle East and North Africa

    The speech made by Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, in the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement. I regret that the Government have presented developments in four significant states in one statement, but I will do my best to respond in the time afforded to me.

    While the attention of the world is seized by the illegal actions of the US President, it is crucial that the UK works closely with our allies to support just, lawful and humanitarian action in the middle east. After two years of widespread destruction, people in Gaza are already facing severe shortages of food, clean water and medical supplies in the midst of winter. What immediate action are the Government taking to persuade Israel to reverse its decision to bar reputable international aid agencies from Gaza and the west bank? The continued expansion of settlements on Palestinian land by Netanyahu’s extremist Cabinet since the House last met is explicitly intended to undermine any prospect of a two-state solution, so will the Government implement immediate sanctions on members of the Israeli Cabinet, and a full ban on the import of settlement goods? Will they finally publish their response to the 2024 International Court of Justice ruling that Israel’s occupation is illegal under international law?

    The Liberal Democrats condemn the violent repression of public demonstrations in Iran. The US President’s casual threats to take unilateral military action there merely serve to escalate tensions. How are our Government working with European and regional partners to co-ordinate lawful external pressure on Iran, and when will the Government commit to proscribing the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in UK law?

    The people of Yemen desperately need peace, yet regional powers continue to intervene to support the armed factions. Will the Government review all arms export licences to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to ensure that UK weapons are not enabling them to sustain the conflict? The UN estimates that around 24 million Yemenis desperately need food and protection. How is Toggle showing location of the UK ensuring that humanitarian aid reaches those most in need, particularly in areas where access is restricted or contested?

    The Liberal Democrats support limited multilateral strikes against Daesh in Syria to ensure the eradication of its infrastructure, and to counter its dangerous and violent ideology in the middle east. Can the Minister confirm that the Government are confident that the recent strikes were fully compliant with international law and proportionate to the threat, and what steps are the Government taking to ensure that the new Syrian Government are protecting the rights of all, including minorities and women?

    Mr Falconer

    I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for the spirit in which he asked his questions. I put so many developments into the statement because there were so many developments that I wished to update the House on at the earliest opportunity, and I wanted to provide Members with an opportunity to ask questions on any element of the statement.

    We will continue to voice our position on the vital importance of the right to assembly in Iran, and indeed the right to communication as well. We will continue to do that alongside our partners, as well as in our own voice. I am confident and can assure the House that the strikes on Syria were consistent with and compliant with international law. As I said to the shadow Foreign Secretary, we continue to raise with the Syrian Government the importance of accountability in relation to violence in Syria.

    On developments in Yemen, particularly relating to aid, there is, I am afraid, a very significant divergence between the ability of the UK to deliver aid in the areas controlled by the Houthis and the areas not controlled by the Houthis. The Houthis have continued to seize aid workers and aid premises. It is simply not possible under those circumstances to have an aid operation that operates at the scale of the needs of the Yemeni people. I again call on the Houthis, as I have done repeatedly, to release all those whom they have detained, leave those offices, and abide by humanitarian principles. If they do not, it is simply not possible for the UK, or indeed any other humanitarian actor, to ensure that the Yemenis get the support that they require.

    On arms sales, as I know the Liberal Democrat spokesperson is aware, we have the most robust arrangements in the world. I am confident that they have been followed in this case, but of course, as ever, we keep these matters under close review.

  • Priti Patel – 2026 Speech on Middle East and North Africa

    Priti Patel – 2026 Speech on Middle East and North Africa

    The speech made by Priti Patel, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    Britain’s place in the world matters, and the Opposition are clear about the fact that our influence should be used to its fullest effect to support efforts to combat the complex and dangerous conflicts and tensions in the middle east about which we speak all too often in the House. From Israel to Gaza, Iran, Syria and Yemen, the UK can and should be able to make a difference.

    The Opposition stand with the brave Iranians in their fight for freedom against their terrorist-supporting, despotic and oppressive Government. Their fight for freedom must prevail. What discussions are taking place with our partners in the region about the actions that can be taken to stop the regime’s cruel and barbaric acts against those who are campaigning for freedom? Iran threatens our domestic security by continuing its nuclear weapons programme, supplying weapons and drones to Russia, and backing China and its repression in Hong Kong. Britain must send it a clear signal by imposing more sanctions on it, and take action to stop the sanctions-busting that is taking place through cryptocurrencies and other methods that facilitate and bankroll this tyrannical regime. Why have the Government, and the Minister in his statement today, been silent on those specific issues, and where is the plan to keep Britain safe from Iran?

    What is being done to secure the immediate release from Iran’s cruel captivity of Lindsay and Craig Foreman, the two British nationals who, tragically, are still in captivity? I appreciate that the Minister referred to the call that took place on 19 December, but what practical measures are being taken?

    In Gaza, Hamas continue to breach the ceasefire. They have refused to release the body of the remaining Israeli hostage, Ran Gvili, which has been in terrorist captivity for more than 820 days. What pressure has been put on Hamas to adhere to the terms of the ceasefire, to disarm and to bring Ran back to his family?

    The Minister mentioned aid. Will he confirm that 4,200 trucks are delivering aid to Gaza each week in accordance with the 20-point peace plan, and that that is being overseen by the Co-ordination of Government Activities in the Territories and the Civil-Military Co-ordination Centre? Is he meeting representatives of the CMCC and COGAT to observe the operational delivery of this aid and the role that the United States is playing in securing aid delivery?

    As for the licensing of non-governmental organisations, can the Minister tell us how many agencies have undergone the licensing process and the contribution that they are making? We have heard a great deal in recent weeks and months about terrorists infiltrating aid agencies and diverting aid. What discussions has the Minister had with his Israeli counterparts about working with them to find practical solutions that will address the serious concerns that have been raised, so that more aid can get through and not be compromised by terrorists? On reforms to the Palestinian Authority, why are the Government still backing them with taxpayers’ money while they continue with the pay-to-slay programme? When will this practice stop?

    I agree with the Minister’s comments about Yemen, the conflict there, and the humanitarian suffering. Every single successive Government have worked tirelessly to secure more aid and to support global efforts to address the suffering in Yemen, but what direct discussions has the Minister had with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which are both long-standing partners and players, particularly on the recent dispute and tensions? Is there a bridging role that Britain can play? What planning is under way with our partners in the region to respond to further threats from the Houthis?

    On Syria, the actions targeted at Daesh were absolutely essential, but there are still many concerns about stability in Syria. When will progress be made on tackling sectarian violence, protecting minority rights and delivering democratic transition? What quantity of chemical weapons has been disposed of? What measures are being taken to stop the criminality, the gangs, the drugs and the weapons?

    Finally, on the el-Fattah case, I welcome the way in which the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has instigated its inquiry. When will the inquiry into what has happened be completed? Were the Government informed by any other Departments about the views that were expressed? I recognise what the Minister has said thus far. Will Ministers—probably now in the Home Office—pick up the case and work fast to strip Alaa Abd el-Fattah of his citizenship, as the Opposition have been requesting over the recess?

    Mr Falconer

    I can confirm that I have been in touch with my counterparts in both the UAE and Saudi Arabia, and indeed that I spoke to the Yemeni Foreign Minister this morning. We are in intensive discussions with all our partners in the region on the questions on Yemen, which are very significant. I did not speak about the Houthis, but they remain a very significant threat; I saw some of that threat during my visit to Yemen in November.

    In relation to Syria, I thank the shadow Foreign Secretary for her spirit of cross-party co-operation on the strikes that we conducted. There remain very significant outstanding questions about the security of Syria, which I am sure she and other Members of the House will have been tracking. The violence at the end of December is indeed concerning. There has been progress on a range of questions. We need follow-through on the independent reviews that were conducted into the violence, both in the coastal areas and in the south, including on accountability measures. I have made those points, as has the Foreign Secretary, directly to our Syrian counterparts.

    The shadow Foreign Secretary asks the important questions about chemical weapons. I am very pleased that an Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons programme is now engaged to ensure the destruction of chemical weapons. That will be of real interest to this House, given the extent to which chemical weapons in Syria have been discussed here, even before I was elected. That is welcome progress, and it is important for regional security.

    On Iran, the shadow Foreign Secretary is right to highlight the bravery of the protesters. I am sure that she will have seen our spokesperson’s statement over the past few days, as well as having heard the remarks that I have just made. We are, of course, speaking to our partners in the region. We are careful in the way we discuss matters in Iran. It is absolutely obvious that some in the leadership of Iran wish to portray these protests as externally animated. Of course they are not. This is a response from the Iranian people themselves.

    In relation to Mr el-Fattah and the next steps, he was—as the shadow Foreign Secretary knows well—provided with citizenship by the previous Government. That is not something that is stripped lightly. She will have heard the remarks of the Home Secretary during Home Office oral questions earlier today. As for the timeline of the review, we intend it to be swift. We want to draw a line under this matter as quickly as we can and ensure that, in all other cases, appropriate lessons are being learned.

    On aid in Gaza, I would like to be clear. We are talking about charities such as Oxfam and Save the Children—credible charities supported by the British public, who have donated generously over Christmas. There have, of course, been concerns in relation to aid in Gaza. We have ensured that wherever they have been raised, they have been investigated, but we should not let that take away from the credibility of the organisations involved. It is vital that those aid agencies be able to work; 30% of Gazans cannot afford basic food.

    The shadow Foreign Secretary is right to say that there has been an increase in aid going into Gaza, but the amount is not yet in line with what is in the 20-point plan. Fewer UN truck shipments are going in than was agreed; I think it was agreed that 250 aid trucks from the UN would go in per day, but only 147 are going in. It is welcome that commercial goods are getting into Gaza, but as I said in my statement, it is vital that lifesaving humanitarian aid—particularly tents and medicines—get in.

  • Hamish Falconer – 2026 Statement on Middle East and North Africa

    Hamish Falconer – 2026 Statement on Middle East and North Africa

    The statement made by Hamish Falconer, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, in the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    Madam Deputy Speaker, there have been a number of developments in the middle east that I would like to update the House on, including in Gaza, Iran, Yemen and Syria. I would also like to take the opportunity to provide an update on the case of Alaa Abd el-Fattah, which has been a subject of debate during the parliamentary recess.

    To begin with Gaza, the humanitarian situation there remains desperate. Even with the ceasefire, half a million people are struggling to find enough food, and 100,000 people are in catastrophic conditions. The peace plan was clear: the Israeli Government agreed to let aid in, without interference, through the UN and other international organisations. At the same time, Hamas must disarm, their weapons must be decommissioned, and they must allow a path to lasting security for Palestinians. More trucks are entering Gaza, which is very welcome, but right now key crossings remain closed, convoys are being turned back, medical and shelter supplies are blocked, and non-governmental organisations are being banned. Over the recess, we joined nine other countries in stating that this is not acceptable. The peace plan cannot work if NGOs are shut out, and Israel’s decision to ban 37 of them is unjustifiable.

    Furthermore, many trucks entering Gaza carry commercial goods, which face fewer barriers than humanitarian aid. This means that, perversely, it is currently easier to get cigarettes and luxury goods into Gaza than the basic medicines and shelter that people so desperately need. Too much aid is still stuck at Gaza’s borders—thousands of tents and shelter supplies, funded by the UK, are waiting to get in. Families are sheltering from winter floods and storms under rubble, and are suffering from hypothermia and sewage running in the streets. This is unforgivable.

    We have not wavered in our commitment to help. This financial year, we are providing £116 million for humanitarian and other aid, including healthcare, food, clean water and sanitation. That includes treatment for 800,000 Palestinians through UK-Med. The UK formally recognised Palestine last autumn to protect the viability of a two-state solution and to create a path towards lasting peace for the Israeli and Palestinian people. We welcome the establishment of full diplomatic relations with the state of Palestine, and I can confirm the establishment of a Palestinian embassy in London today.

    Let me turn to Iran, where we have seen protests enter a ninth day following the rapid depreciation of the currency. We are disturbed by reports of violence against those who are courageously exercising their right to peaceful protest. We are monitoring developments closely, and we urge Iran to protect fundamental freedoms, including access to information and communications. The UK was integral to delivery of the Iran human rights resolution adopted by the UN Third Committee in November. It called on Iran to halt its human rights violations, including in relation to women and girls and ethnic and religious minorities, and to stop the use of the death penalty. We will continue to work with partners to hold Iran to account for its rights record.

    I know that many in the House will be thinking about Craig and Lindsay Foreman, who spent Christmas in detention in Iran. We are deeply concerned that they have been charged with espionage. We are focused on supporting them and their family and we remain in regular contact with the Iranian authorities. The Foreign Secretary raised their case with the Iranian Foreign Minister on 19 December.

    I wish to provide the House with an update on another consular case that has been in the spotlight for many years: Alaa Abd el-Fattah. Supporting British nationals overseas is at the heart of the work of the Foreign Office, and the provision of that consular support is based on the circumstances of the case. Following Mr el-Fattah’s registration as a British citizen in 2021, successive Governments gave him consular support and made it a priority to argue for his release. That is why it was welcomed by Ministers across the Government, and many others in this House, when he was released from detention in September and reunited with his family in the UK on Boxing day. However, we recognise and share the deep concern felt across the country following the subsequent emergence of extremely disturbing historical social media posts by Mr el-Fattah. Let me emphasise once again that the historical posts were abhorrent, and I join my colleagues in condemning them wholeheartedly. It is right that Mr el-Fattah has apologised.

    I fully recognise the profound distress that the posts have caused, in particular to the Jewish community in this country, and especially in the context of rising antisemitism and recent horrific attacks against Jewish people in this country and around the world, and I very much regret that. The Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and I were all unaware of those historical posts, as were the civil servants working on the case. The Foreign Secretary has therefore asked the permanent under-secretary to urgently review the Department’s systems for conducting due diligence on high-profile consular and human rights cases to ensure that all necessary lessons are learned. The Foreign Secretary has undertaken to update the Foreign Affairs Committee on the changes that the Department will put in place.

    I turn now to the dramatic developments in Yemen, which we are monitoring closely. I welcome calls by Yemen’s President for dialogue in the south. I also welcome Saudi Arabia’s offer to host a conference and the United Arab Emirates’ calls for de-escalation. A swift diplomatic resolution will best serve the Yemeni people. The United Kingdom remains committed to supporting Yemen’s unity, including the Yemeni Presidential Leadership Council and the Government of Yemen, as we set out in the recent UK-led UN Security Council statement. I, the Foreign Secretary and the National Security Adviser have all been in regular contact with our partners in Yemen, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates about the situation, and we will continue to work closely with them.

    We must not forget that Yemen already faces one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises: 18.1 million people face acute food insecurity, as I saw for myself in November when I visited a clinic supported by the UK in Aden. Responding to this crisis is a priority for the UK. We are the largest donor to the Yemen humanitarian needs and response plan, maintaining our commitment to provide £139 million in humanitarian aid in the current financial year.

    In Syria, the past year has seen remarkable change. The Syrian Government have shown commitment to tackling security threats, joining the Global Coalition Against Daesh and committing themselves to dismantling Assad’s chemical weapons stockpiles. In my engagements with the Syrian Government, I have heard directly a commitment to build a Syria for all Syrians. Despite that progress, the challenges remain immense. There have been outbreaks of sectarian violence in the last year, most recently in Latakia at the end of December. The recent attack on US soldiers in Palmyra is a reminder of the enduring Daesh threat.

    A stable Syria is firmly in the UK’s interest, as it reduces the risk of irregular migration, terrorism and other threats to our national security. That is why we have stepped up our engagement and our support for Syria over the last year. The UK remains an active partner in the Global Coalition Against Daesh, and on 3 January the Royal Air Force conducted a joint strike with France on an underground Daesh facility north of Palmyra. The UK will continue to do what is necessary to prevent a Daesh resurgence, support Syria’s stability and protect UK national security.

    I hope that that update on the developments that have taken place in the middle east over the recess has been helpful to the House. His Majesty’s Government remain committed to playing their full role in the region.

  • Emma Reynolds – 2026 Statement on the Government’s Animal Welfare Strategy

    Emma Reynolds – 2026 Statement on the Government’s Animal Welfare Strategy

    The statement made by Emma Reynolds, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on 6 January 2026.

    We are a nation of animal lovers. People across the country care deeply for animals, and the UK has a proud history of being pioneers when it comes to ensuring the very best for them. This Government are committed to safeguarding the welfare of animals for the long term, and we are changing how we will deliver the improvements needed to achieve the most ambitious reforms to animal welfare in a generation.

    On 22 December, the Government published our new animal welfare strategy. This strategy sets out the UK Government’s priorities for England, focusing on the changes and improvements we aim to achieve by 2030.

    The strategy is a comprehensive package of reforms that will improve the lives of millions of animals across the UK at home, on farm and in the wild.

    We set out how we will deliver our manifesto pledges to ban trail hunting and the use of snare traps, and to end puppy farming and puppy smuggling. We are giving farm animals greater freedom and dignity and protecting our wildlife.

    By improving animal welfare standards, we are supporting healthier, more productive livestock that delivers better outcomes for farmers, farm profitability, food security and the high welfare standards that British consumers expect.

    The animal welfare strategy builds on this Government’s proven track record in delivering reforms for animals. This includes introducing new world-leading standards for zoos earlier this year and supporting the passage of the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025 and the Dogs (Protection of Livestock) (Amendment) Act 2025.

    In November last year, we published a strategy on replacing animals in science, which set out how we would partner with scientists, industry, and civil society as we work towards the phasing out of animal testing.

    Rather than piecemeal legislation, we will take a more strategic approach—one that targets intervention where it is most needed. This means tighter regulation where standards are weakest, effective enforcement, and working with the sector to provide animal keepers and owners with additional support where they need it.

    This animal welfare strategy has been developed in conjunction with key stakeholders including representatives of the companion, wild companion, wild animal, and farming sectors along with non-governmental organisations, and those involved in enforcement. We have held roundtable discussions on priorities while working to understand the underlying issues that lead to poor welfare. We also received input from other interested parties.

    The Government recognise that each sector and species of animal has its own needs and challenges that must be considered to ensure good welfare. As such, different approaches are required, balancing priorities, interventions, legislation and roles for different organisations.

    Key commitments in the strategy include:

    We are ending puppy farming by consulting on reforming dog breeding practices to improve health and welfare and move away from practices that lead to poor welfare and unwell animals.

    We will consider the introduction of new licences for domestic rescue and rehoming organisations to ensure rescues have the right checks in place.

    We are promoting responsible dog ownership to protect public safety, and are looking forward to seeing the recommendations from the responsible dog ownership taskforce in due course.

    We will consult on a ban on the use of electric shock collars due to the possible harm these devices cause to our pets.

    As set out in our manifesto, we will ban trail hunting and will consult shortly on how to deliver this ban.

    We will end the use of snare traps because they cause suffering to animals and can catch animals that they were not meant to, including pets and protected wildlife.

    We will consider how to introduce a close season for hares which should reduce the number of adult hares being shot in the breeding season, meaning that fewer young hares are left motherless and vulnerable to starvation and predation.

    We will consult on moving away from confinement systems such as colony cages for laying hens and farrowing crates for pigs so that animals can express their normal behaviours.

    We will improve welfare for pigs at the time of killing by phasing out the use of CO2 gas stunning for pigs, which causes pain and distress, subject to a consultation.

    We will introduce humane slaughter requirements for farmed fish.

    We will work with industry to promote the use of slow growing meat chicken breeds.

    We will form a fur working group of both industry experts and stakeholders who support restrictions on the trade in fur to help us explore options for addressing concerns in this area.

    We will begin by launching two public consultations in January, on the use of cages for laying hens, pullets and breeder layers, and on lamb castration and tail docking, as the first step toward advancing these ambitious animal welfare reforms.

    Our vision is simple: we want as many animals as possible to have the highest welfare standards at every stage of their life. Together with industry, non-governmental organisations and individuals, this Government will deliver the most ambitious reforms for animal welfare in a generation, creating a legacy we can all be proud of.

  • Dan Tomlinson – 2026 Statement on the Inheritance Tax Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief

    Dan Tomlinson – 2026 Statement on the Inheritance Tax Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief

    The statement made by Dan Tomlinson, the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, in the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    The Government have announced changes to the forthcoming inheritance tax reforms to agricultural property relief and business property relief. The Government announced on 23 December 2025 that the allowance for 100% rate of relief will be increased from £1 million to £2.5 million when it is introduced on 6 April 2026. This means a couple will now be able to pass on up to £5 million of agricultural or business assets tax-free between them, on top of the existing allowances such as the nil-rate band.

    Taken together with the reform announced at Budget 2025, which made any unused allowance transferable between spouses or civil partners, it is now the case that widows and widowers will benefit from up to £2.5 million of their spouse’s allowance, even if their spouse passed away many years ago.

    This increase in the allowance comes after listening carefully to feedback from the farming community and family businesses. The change means the Government are going further to protect more farms and businesses, while maintaining the core principle that more valuable agricultural and business assets should not receive unlimited relief.

    This further reduces the number of estates forecast to pay more inheritance tax and further reduces the liability for many of the remaining estates.

    Compared with Budget 2025, the expected number of estates claiming agricultural property relief, including those also claiming business property relief, affected by the reforms in 2026-27 halves from 375 to 185. Around 85% of estates claiming agricultural property relief in 2026-27, including those that also claim for business property relief, are forecast to pay no more inheritance tax on their estates under these changes.

    Excluding estates only holding shares designated as “not listed” on the markets of recognised stock exchanges, the reforms are also now expected to result in up to 220 estates across the UK only claiming business property relief paying more inheritance tax in 2026-27. This is a reduction from up to 325 such estates forecast to pay more at Budget 2025. This means that just over 80% of such estates making claims are forecast to not pay any more inheritance tax.

    The increase to the allowance will be reflected in a Government amendment to the Finance (No. 2) Bill, and this was tabled on 2 January. This will be debated in Committee of the whole House next week, on 12 January.

    There is, as the Government have set out, a need to reform agricultural property relief and business property relief. As such, after the increase in the allowance, and subject to certification by the Office for Budget Responsibility, the Government expect the reforms to raise around £300 million in 2029-30.

  • Rachel Reeves – 2026 Statement on the OBR and the Spring 2026 Economic and Fiscal Forecast

    Rachel Reeves – 2026 Statement on the OBR and the Spring 2026 Economic and Fiscal Forecast

    The statement made by Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    I have asked the Office for Budget Responsibility to prepare an economic and fiscal forecast for publication on 3 March 2026.

    This forecast, in addition to the forecast that was published in November 2025, will fulfil the obligation required by the Budget Responsibility and National Audit Act 2011 for the OBR to produce at least two forecasts in a financial year.

    As set out at the Budget, the spring forecast will not make an assessment of the Government’s performance against the fiscal mandate and will provide an interim update on the economy and public finances.

    The Government intend to respond to this with a statement to Parliament. This is in line with my commitment to deliver one major fiscal event a year at the Budget. This approach gives families and businesses the stability and certainty they need and, in turn, will support the Government’s growth mission.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2026 Comments on the Government’s Road Strategy

    Lilian Greenwood – 2026 Comments on the Government’s Road Strategy

    The comments made by Lilian Greenwood, the Local Transport Minister, on 6 January 2026.

    Our vision with this ambitious road safety strategy is clear: to ensure that people can travel safely on our roads however they choose.

    One of the hardest parts of my job is speaking to families who have lost loved ones on our roads and this is something we as a government are taking action to prevent. No family should have to endure that loss, and this strategy sets out how we will work to ensure fewer do.

    Experts and campaigners have long called for a comprehensive strategy that treats road safety as a shared responsibility – from car manufacturers and town planners to drivers and legislators.

    This strategy, the first in over a decade, shows a government that is not just listening, but leading and together, we can build a safer future for all road users.

  • Mary Creagh – 2026 Speech on Clearing Illegal Waste from the River Cherwell

    Mary Creagh – 2026 Speech on Clearing Illegal Waste from the River Cherwell

    The speech made by Mary Creagh, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on 6 January 2026.

    It is lovely to be here with you again to celebrate the new year, Madam Deputy Speaker. I wish you and all colleagues in the House a very happy new year. What a shame it is that we are starting it with the trash from last year.

    As we have just celebrated Christmas and the holiday period, we will have seen our bins and recycling facilities overflowing with the Christmas excesses. We have faith in our systems that when that is taken away, it is responsibly dealt with. I therefore thank the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) for raising this important issue. I share his anger and the public’s anger about this serious crime and its impact.

    Waste crime blights our communities, as I know from my work as a constituency MP in Coventry. Waste criminals damage the environment and, in the worst cases, directly threaten our health, life and limb. These criminals also undermine legitimate businesses and deprive the Exchequer of tax income. That is why the Government are committed to tackling waste crime. We will crack down on the waste criminals and the organised crime groups who have moved into this lucrative space, and we will ensure that they are brought to justice.

    I confirm that the criminal investigation into the Kidlington site is moving forward apace. Environment Agency officials, working closely with the police, have taken samples of the waste materials on site for forensic examination. There is a lot we can divine from some of these materials as to where they originated from. Those forensic results will be available by the end of January.

    The Environment Agency is working closely alongside partners including Oxfordshire county council, the police and fire and rescue services as part of the site’s strategic co-ordinating group and tactical co-ordinating group. The strategic group has set the overall goals for this major incident, supporting the gold commander with advice, analysis and community links, while the tactical group implements those goals at the scene. The strategic group has local and operational expertise, and it has determined that the scale of the fire risk sets this case apart from the other illegal waste dumps in England.

    This location presents an overriding public imperative. That is why the Environment Agency took the exceptional decision to clear the waste and why it is working rapidly to implement a safe, systematic and focused clearance plan. It is important to stress that only two other sites have been cleared by the Environment Agency in the past five years: Hoad’s Wood, via a ministerial direction; and Twyford House in Stoke-on-Trent, where lots of flammable liquids were stored close to the west coast main line. The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock will see some of the similarities there.

    The Environment Agency will continue to closely monitor the site while preparatory work takes place. It has informed me today that prep work will begin shortly and clearance of the waste is expected to start in February. Further timeline updates will follow from the Environment Agency. It is important that the site’s vast amount of waste is handled correctly and moved to the right facilities without causing damage to the environment. The Environment Agency is monitoring risks at the site and will respond promptly to any change in situation.

    It is important that people, whether members of the public or well-meaning journalists, do not enter the site. It is an environmental crime scene and climbing on the waste is dangerous. In doing so, people are putting themselves at risk and compromising the criminal investigation, which is a criminal offence in itself. We do not need to add extra problems to the very big one already there. There is now 24-hour surveillance in place.

    The Environment Agency’s approach and actions are always based on evidence, and with the containment and clearance, actions were taken in response to a changing risk level and the potential for a rise in the water levels. The Environment Agency was on site within days of receiving photographic evidence from a member of the public and immediately visited the site with the local authority and confirmed it as a high-risk illegal waste site. Over 80% of the waste on site was there before the Environment Agency visited on 2 July, so the vast majority happened before it was alerted. When further waste movements were reported in September, the EA swiftly obtained a restriction order in October.

    The current risk of waste entering the river is very low. A barrier has been installed at the site to prevent the waste from entering the river, to safeguard both the environment and public safety in the event of river levels rising or flooding. The Environment Agency has carried out water quality sampling of the River Cherwell to check for potential impacts of run-off or leaching from the waste. Having sampled upstream and downstream of the site, it has found no indication of pollution entering the Cherwell as a result of the waste.

    The clear-up of illegal waste sites by the Environment Agency should only be a last resort, undertaken in exceptional circumstances to protect the public and the environment. In accordance with the “polluter pays” principle, criminals who disregard the law, undercut legitimate businesses and blight communities and the environment must pay the penalty—not us as taxpayers. We do not wish to create a perverse incentive for some people to dump, or facilitate the dumping of, waste. It should be for polluters, not taxpayers, to pay the costs of clean-up.

    I acknowledge the huge frustrations about the time such an approach takes—I know that from my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee). In some cases, that can undermine public confidence or create a perception somehow that the matter is not taken seriously or tackled swiftly. As with any police investigation, there is no running commentary provided either by police, law enforcement or Ministers. I can confirm, though, that I am vigorously pursuing all avenues on this and other waste crime sites. We are committed to bearing down on the cynical waste criminals who damage our environment, harm businesses and blight our communities.

    I will go through each of the hon. Member’s questions. I request the patience of the House—Madam Deputy Speaker, feel free to cough if I go on too long. I believe we have until 7.30 pm, so strap in! The hon. Member asked how we are tackling the blight on the country caused by waste crime. We are pursuing a series of reforms that will have a lasting impact on reducing waste crime. We are bringing in reforms to the carrier, broker and dealer regimes, which will shrink the number of people who can handle waste. That is the first thing. We are changing the waste permit exemption regimes. At the moment, certain activities do not need a permit and we are shutting down those exemptions. We are also introducing digital waste tracking, which is coming in this year. These are things that I have done as a Minister that have been consulted on as far back as 2018 but have not been enacted by successive Governments. We think these three actions—this pincer movement, if you like—will be the most effective way to drive criminality away from the waste sector, because this is all about knowing the chain of custody for these materials.

    Alongside this, we have increased the Environment Agency’s budget for waste crime enforcement by over 50% this year to £15.6 million. This is the investigatory part of what the EA does, and it includes issues involving misdescribed waste, waste shipments and all the difficult business. This work is very time consuming and painstaking because it has to be done to a criminal standard of proof that will stand up in a court of law. I want to go into a bit more detail about this. These reforms were deprioritised and stalled, but under this Government they are being accelerated.

    Mandatory digital waste tracking will replace outdated methods for monitoring waste movements and unify fragmented processes. It will provide a single comprehensive view of waste types, waste quantities and waste destinations. The lack of digital record keeping in the waste industry is frequently exploited by organised criminals, who undercut legitimate businesses through mishandling waste, illegal exports and simple fly-tipping. Data in the new system will help regulators to check that waste is ending up at legitimate, licensed sites and enable the quicker investigation of illegal activity. This digital waste tracking system is being phased in this year, beginning with the introduction of a system for waste receiving sites—for example, landfills—and with planned expansion to other waste operators such as waste carriers in 2027, subject to further funding.

    Adam Jogee

    I am grateful to the Minister for sharing with the House this important step forward. We are talking about these issues going back to 2018, and it just worries me that if this had been done before, some of the issues that I have hassled her about in relation to Walleys Quarry since I was elected to this place in July 2024 could have been dealt with a lot sooner. This raises many questions about the impact on my constituents back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme under the previous Government, who were clearly missing in action. We can discuss this further outside this House.

    Mary Creagh

    I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s assiduousness on the issue of Walleys Quarry. That site is also now being run by the Environment Agency, and the risk of odour that his constituents were really grievously suffering is now extremely low, but that has come at a cost, as he rightly says.

    This is nothing new. When there is a problem and no action is taken and no new policy is created, these illegal businesses think, “Well, it’s a victimless crime, so I can carry on making money.” Then they tell their friends and, guess what, soon many flowers are blooming. But they are the wrong sort of flowers, and this creates incentives. Then of course, the legitimate businesses are like, “Hang on, why am I paying all these fees if all I need to do is buy a field, dig it up and dump stuff in it?” This creates disincentives for legitimate operators as well. I am only too aware of this. It was starting post-2016 when the then Government were focused on leaving the EU and the large international issues. I was chairing the Environmental Audit Committee at the time and I was always worried about what was going to happen to waste, including chemical waste, once we put up a border with our nearest neighbours.

    Secondly, we will reform waste management and transport. Instead of the current light-touch registration system, it will now be a permitted system. We will move on from a system that was so lax that people were able to sign up Oscar the dead dog to be a waste carrier. Activists were doing that back in 2018-19, so we have known about these problems. Anyone can falsify a bit of paper. We will introduce tougher background checks for operators and tougher penalties for those who break the law.

    We will also require vehicles that transport waste—the man with the van—to display their permit numbers on their vehicles and on their advertising, so service users can be reassured that their waste is being handled by an accredited business rather than criminals. The reform will introduce mandatory technical competence for all permit holders, meaning that anyone transporting or making decisions about waste will have to demonstrate that they are competent to do so, rather than simply just going on a register. Waste will be managed by authorised persons only and in a safe manner.

    Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)

    I am fascinated and happy to hear what is being proposed. Will it be possible for members of the public to check an online database for that permit? When somebody picks something up from a house and shows their permit, people can feel quite vulnerable. Being able to go online and check the permit against the local authority or central database would give people a lot more confidence.

    Mary Creagh

    I will get back to the hon. Member on that, if I may. The point of a digital waste tracking system is that everything is digitised. The problem has been that it is a paper-based register, so how can people check it at the moment? My understanding is that the move is to a digital system, but I will get back to her. I do not want to mislead her or the House. Perhaps Box officials can enlighten us while I go through the third reform of the waste permit exemptions.

    Thirdly, there are exemptions for three high-risk areas: end of life vehicles—that is, car scrappage—end of life tyres and scrap metal. Those exemptions have long caused problems and have been abused. We will replace them with a requirement for a full environmental permit for all those activities. We will introduce greater record keeping requirements for all waste exemption holders and impose controls on how exemptions can be managed at one site.

    At the moment, there are seven waste exemptions: construction waste, preparatory treatments, treatment of waste wood, manual treatment, burning vegetation at the place of production only—that is essentially for farmers—storage in containers and storage in a safe place. As I have mentioned, we have increased the waste crime investigation unit budget. It now has 43 full-time staff.

    People have often asked me about enabling the Environment Agency to use environmental permit income to tackle waste crime. Rules are set out by the Treasury in “Managing Public Money” about how the income raised by public bodies may be used. These rules ensure transparency to us as parliamentarians and ensure that fees and charges are not set higher than necessary to cover activity that should be properly funded from taxation. We instead look to innovative ideas, and the EA has consulted on the implementation of a 10% levy to generate a further £3.2 million of waste enforcement funding each year. That would enable a further 30% increase in enforcement activity to be targeted at activities identified by the EA as waste crime priorities. Those include tackling organised crime groups, increasing enforcement activity around specific areas of concern such as landfill sites, closing down illegal sites more quickly, using intelligence more effectively and delivering successful major criminal investigations.

    Calum Miller

    I am grateful to the Minister for such a comprehensive response. On the question of funding, the £15.6 million in the budget this year for tackling waste crime, as she said, is for the officers who engage in investigation, but it still strikes me as a small amount of money, with 43 officers for a crime that is now taking place up and down the country. Can she clarify whether the additional £5.6 million is now permanently in that budget and will be going forward such that the additional funds she has referred to for permitting will be over and above that sum? Fundamentally, does she think that this is enough?

    Mary Creagh

    My aim is not to spend further taxpayers’ money on crime; my aim is to stop it happening in the first place. All budget decisions are subject to the normal business planning, but we hope that, through our three-year spending review, we can give the Environment Agency a three-year or indicative settlement that will enable it to plan, rather than the annual process of, “Up this year, down next year,” so that there will be long-range line-of-sight planning. As I say, the EA is consulting at the moment on the additional extra revenue. If that goes through, there would be a funding uplift.

    I have the answer to the question from the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade): we are happy to confirm that it is already possible to check the online database for permits, so that is good news there.

    I have mentioned the different reforms and I think I have answered all the hon. Gentleman’s questions. I am pretty much coming to the end of my speech. On steps taken since 11 December and his specific question about the rise in water level of up to two metres, equivalent to the peak recorded at Thrupp in November ’24, the waste is within a large floodplain that can store a substantial volume of water during heavy rain. The EA has carried out more detailed flood risk assessment to understand any changes in water levels due to the illegal waste and has determined that there will not be any increased flood risk to local properties. My understanding is that sandbags and a fence are there in order to protect the river.

    The EA has also carried out regular water quality sampling of the river to check for impacts of run-off or leaching and has found no indication of pollution. If any pollutants were found in the watercourse, the action would depend on the nature and type of the pollutants found.

    On fire risk at the site, EA officials have been working with the fire and rescue service, which is leading on monitoring the temperatures of the waste and planning appropriately. The fire risk was one of the main reasons that an exceptional decision was taken to progress works to clear the site entirely.

    Analysis on how the site would be cleared, including ecology surveys, has been carried out with partners and the Environment Agency to get contracts in place as soon as possible, but we need to follow legal process to ensure that the waste is disposed of correctly. The clearance timetable is being finalised and will shortly be published on the EngagementHQ website. As I said, we hope that clearance will begin in February. Early indications and scoping indicate that full clearance will take approximately six to nine months. Where possible, we are seeking to recover our costs from those responsible in accordance with the legislation and the “polluter pays” principle, and the EA is working with the economic crime unit to target the finances of waste criminals. That unit can freeze bank accounts, seize assets and investigate cases of money laundering linked to waste crime.

    Adam Jogee

    I am grateful to the Minister for setting out so clearly how seriously she is taking this issue, which will be of continued reassurance to people back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme. In many examples, waste crime is rural crime, such as in the example from the constituency of the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) and for me back home. The Minister talks about working together—can she touch a little bit more on the importance of co-operation and partnership work with the Home Office to make sure that we are getting that right? Clearly, in many communities up and down the country, people think that they can get away with doing whatever they want in rural communities, where there are fewer people around. We have to make sure that we tighten that up quickly.

    Mary Creagh

    I agree with my hon. Friend. One of the things that I am very interested in exploring is what the playbook is. The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock asked who such things should be reported to, and the problem is that if that is not clear, people do nothing. The most important thing when any crime is being carried out, wherever it is happening—whether that is on the Tube or wherever we see things happening—is for us as citizens to do something. That might be reporting it to the council, the local police or the Environment Agency, whose hotline is 0800 807060—I thank my officials for getting that through so that it is on the public record.

    The playbook is important. Once something has been reported, what does the local authority, the police or the EA do? What is the definition of “major site”? I have visited sites, including Watery Lane in Staffordshire, where two vanloads of fly-tipping was not classified as a major problem, and it fell to the local authority to clear it. People were locked in their homes physically unable to leave via the road—an absolutely extraordinary position for people to find themselves in. What is the playbook, what are the definitions and where do national agencies step in?

    The Environment Agency expects to fund the clearance efforts by making efficiencies in its operations, without impacting on or scaling back any other services. The EA is not funded to clear up waste sites nationally, however, and makes these types of decisions only in exceptional circumstances.

    The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock asked about additional landfill tax revenue. The waste crime survey that the EA has carried out indicates that 20% of waste is handled illegally. His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs estimates that 23% of landfill tax is evaded, contributing to an annual waste crime cost of roughly £1 billion a year, including a £150 million landfill tax gap, which is 23% of the theoretical liability—I hope that everyone can understand that. That £1 billion a year shows that this is big business. It is a profitable and lucrative business, and we are all paying. We are paying twice, because we are losing the £1 billion and then clearing up the waste, so it is a double whammy for us—it is maddening.

    Calum Miller

    I am grateful to the Minister for setting out those figures so clearly. That was the point that I was driving at in addressing the budget for waste crime. It is not so much that I or anybody else wants to spend money dealing with criminals, but a relatively modest investment in detection and investigation could yield a higher proportion of that missing tax. We lose £1 billion every year, but a relatively modest increase in the waste crime unit’s budget, or the National Crime Agency doing more, could potentially bring in more of that revenue, which should be used for the benefit of all taxpayers.

    Mary Creagh

    I am in passionate agreement with the hon. Gentleman, as I am sure is everyone in the Chamber and watching at home. I would say, however, that big businesses use all available resources to protect their income. They are sophisticated businesses—some are registered companies—and they have their own ways of making life difficult for law enforcement. We are in a bit of a David and Goliath situation. They have been very good at doing that. This is a complex crime, and it takes a while to unravel.

    We continue to work with the Treasury on the best approach to fiscal policies to tackle and reduce waste crime. The joint unit for waste crime is a UK-wide partnership, working with the Environment Agency, HMRC, the National Crime Agency, the police and others. It shares intelligence, powers and resources to disrupt waste criminals. The unit, which was launched in 2024 and uses proceeds of crime action and asset freezes, has doubled in size thanks to our extra funding. Anyone with intelligence about waste crime can report it to Crimestoppers on 0800 555111.

    My message to our constituents around the country is that waste crime is an absolute top priority for the Government. My message to the waste criminals is we are coming for you and we are going to shut you down. My message to the legitimate waste operators is thank you for your work maintaining safe, healthy and clean environments in our towns and putting pride in our places. Let us all ensure that we work together to create a truly circular economy in which this sort of terrible crime is unthinkable and its perpetrators are put out of business.