May I extend my deepest condolences, and I am sure the condolences of the House, to the family and colleagues of Lance Bombardier Ciara Sullivan, who lost her life in a tragic incident on Friday? She was an exceptional soldier and will be deeply missed.
It would be remiss of me not to comment on one of Manchester’s great heroes moving on after almost a decade, so let me congratulate Pep Guardiola on all his success at Manchester City. If I could declare an interest, Mr Speaker, I would also like to say congratulations to Arsenal football club on becoming the premier league champions.
This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.
May I share the condolences expressed by the Prime Minister?
As a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine to the Iran war, people have struggled with the cost of living. In my constituency in the heart of Scotland, road travel and logistics are key to everyday life and local industry, and the Road Haulage Association is headquartered in Bathgate. What reassurance can the Prime Minister offer my constituents that this Government will tackle household bills and business cost pressures?
Families across the United Kingdom are facing the impacts of a war that we did not choose, so it is welcome news today that inflation is falling. There is more that we can do, and I can announce today that we are giving our hauliers a 12-month road tax holiday, helping to keep prices down, and we are backing drivers by extending the freeze in fuel duty for the rest of the year. This is possible because of the decisions taken by the Chancellor, making us the fastest growing economy in the G7, and she will set out further action tomorrow. This is not our war, and although Opposition parties wanted to jump into it, Labour will always protect working people.
I call the Leader of the Opposition.
I would like to associate myself with the words of the Prime Minister regarding the tragic death of Lance Bombardier Ciara Sullivan. We send our condolences to her family on this terrible loss.
I welcome some of what the Prime Minister has said about fuel duty. Yes, there is still a freeze, but we asked him about this on 11 March and 25 March and he said he was not going to do it, so I thank him for the U-turn—[Interruption.] Labour Members are shaking their heads—it would make more sense if they just did what we are doing, because they get there in the end anyway.
Yesterday, Labour MPs voted to ban new British oil and gas licences. Why?
In relation to fuel duty, under the plans that we inherited, fuel duty was due to go up by 5% in April. We stopped that and the Conservatives voted against it. We are now extending the freeze because of events in the middle east. I know that the Leader of the Opposition likes to claim responsibility for things that have got literally nothing to do with her—in her mind, she won Eurovision on Saturday and scored the winning goal in the FA cup final—but she never takes any responsibility for what the Conservatives did for 14 long years.
Oil and gas is coming out of the North sea 24/7. It will play an important role for many years to come. We are supporting existing oil and gas fields throughout their lifespans and we made changes in November to allow neighbouring fields to be exploited, but families across the UK are fed up with their bills going up and down because of global conflicts. The only way to take control is through renewables. We have now consented to renewables to power 23 million households. The Leader of the Opposition wants to stick with the old Tory energy policy, which is leaving households exposed to higher bills year after year.
What is causing problems for British consumers is the high energy prices, which were caused by the Prime Minister’s policies. I asked him why Labour Members voted for this, and he had no answer, so let me make clear what is going on: we are losing 1,000 jobs a month in oil and gas. I asked him about new licences, not existing drilling. Then, late last night, the Government snuck out an announcement that they were removing sanctions on Russian oil. Can the Prime Minister explain why oil from Russia is acceptable, but oil from Aberdeen is not?
Let me address the sanctions head-on, because we have been united across this House on these issues since the beginning of the conflict. What we announced yesterday was a strong new package of new sanctions, going well beyond existing sanctions. It is a new package. That includes new bans on maritime services on liquefied natural gas and new bans on refined oil products from Russia.
We also issued two targeted short-term licences to phase the new sanctions in and to protect UK consumers. That is standard practice. This Government have phased in sanctions in that way before, and the last Government used exactly the same technique when they introduced sanctions. When they did so, we supported them, because we could see that the sanctions were the right thing to do to bear down on Russia. These are new sanctions being phased in. This is not a question of lifting existing sanctions in any way whatsoever, and we will continue to work with our allies on further sanction packages.
Hear, hear.
That was a very weak set of cheers from the MPs who are trying to get rid of the Prime Minister. He does not know what he is talking about. This level of processology is not going to get him out of these difficult answers. Let me tell him what is going on: Labour is giving money to Russia, and Reform is taking money from Russia. There is only one party that is standing up to Russia, and that is the Conservative party. I cannot believe he is actually saying that he is doing something good on the war in Ukraine. What is he talking about? This morning, Ukraine’s sanctions chief disagreed with the Prime Minister’s approach. That is what Ukraine is saying.
In March, when the United States eased sanctions on Russia, the Prime Minister said:
“All partners should maintain pressure on Russia and its war chest”.
The Prime Minister also said:
“Our sanctions remain, and there is no question about that.”
What has changed?
I really think that on an issue of this importance, which is about further sanctions on Russia in relation to Ukraine, it is really important that the position is not misrepresented. This is a new package of sanctions. None of the existing sanctions are being lifted in any way, so this is not less pressure on Russia; it is more pressure on Russia. It is more pressure than there was the day before yesterday and more pressure than there was under the last Government.
What is happening is that those sanctions are being phased in, in a way that was used by the last Government when they introduced new sanctions. We bothered to do the processology and work out what we were doing, and we supported them, because we could see that they put more pressure on Russia. Similar methods are used by other countries. They are done because of the impact on the market and to protect UK consumers. These are new sanctions putting more pressure on Russia. If the right hon. Lady had done her homework, she would actually support us on this.
Being patronising is not a substitute for understanding policy—[Interruption.] I have heard this tone before; this is the same tone that the Prime Minister used during the Mandelson scandal. Labour Members were all cheering, but then it turned out that he was wrong, wrong, wrong. He says that other countries are doing this; the EU is not doing this. Let me make it clear—I know it hurts him to hear it: he is now choosing to buy dirty Russian oil. That money will be used to fund the killing of Ukrainian soldiers. Isn’t he ashamed?
I really think that to misunderstand and misrepresent what is happening—this is a very serious issue. We are working—[Interruption.] These are new bans—they are new sanctions. They are new maritime services bans on LNG, as of yesterday. They are new bans on refined oil products from Russia, as of yesterday. They are being phased in, in the same way that previous sanctions regimes have been phased in, exactly as the last Government did and we have done. Other countries do exactly the same. The EU has its own way of doing it. Australia and Canada have their own way of doing it. To play party politics on Ukraine, where we have stood firm! The only person who benefits when we play party politics on Russia and Ukraine is Putin.
That pompous tone does not cover for the fact that the Prime Minister has got his policy all wrong. I have asked him about oil and gas again and again and again. The last time, he told me that it was the Energy Secretary’s job and it had nothing to do with him. That is what is destroying this country. It is not playing politics; it is speaking up for the people who are out there. The fact is that more people are buying Russian oil because British oil is not being drilled. He is sanctioning British oil but not Russian oil, and he should be ashamed. I cannot believe that this Prime Minister, even when he has nothing to lose, continues to defend banning new British oil and gas licences.
In April, Britain saw the single biggest drop in employment ever since the pandemic—and that is under Labour. Some 210,000 people have lost their jobs in the last year. What the Prime Minister is doing is going to cost thousands more people their jobs, especially in cities such as Aberdeen that rely on oil and gas, so can he tell us why he is doing everything to save his job and doing nothing to save other people’s jobs?
There is drilling in the North sea. [Interruption.] She said that there is no drilling in the North sea—she is going to have to refer herself to the Privileges Committee. There is drilling, it is 24/7, and oil and gas are coming out. That will be important for many, many years to come. We are supporting those existing oil and gas fields throughout their lifespan, and we made changes in November to allow neighbouring fields to be exploited, but it is because we are on the international market that our prices for businesses and households go up every time there is an international conflict. We saw it with Ukraine and we saw it with Iran, and people were fed up with the last Government not taking control of their bills. We are taking control of their bills; the way to do that is through renewables, and that is what we are doing.
It gets worse and worse—the Prime Minister does not understand the policy. I am asking him about new oil and gas licences, which Labour Members voted against yesterday. If they had approved those licences for Jackdaw and Rosebank like we did, we would have that oil in this country now.
Just listening to the Prime Minister, I wonder if he is okay. He is so deep in the bunker. He is importing sanctioned Russian oil, nationalising steel and imposing price controls in the supermarket—it is like the Soviets won. This country needs a Government who have got their act together. Instead, what we have is a Prime Minister hanging by a thread with fake support from his Back Benchers, too scared to take difficult decisions, and losing his moral compass by backsliding on Ukraine. [Interruption.] Yes, he is. The shaking of Labour Members’ heads is so feeble—it is absolutely laughable. Yesterday, we saw them huddled in the corridors, talking about Andy Burnham and Wes Streeting. The fact is that the Prime Minister has a Cabinet fighting to replace him, and the worst part is that they are not getting rid of him over his terrible agenda—no, they actually like it. They just want a better salesman. Is it not the case that it does not matter who replaces him; the real problem is the Labour party? [Hon. Members: “More!”]
I think not.
A lot has been happening in recent days, so the Leader of the Opposition may have overlooked the fact that last week, the Office for National Statistics announced that we have the fastest growing economy in the G7. Last week, we had the biggest fall in NHS waiting lists for 17 years. Today, inflation has come down more than expected. Mr Speaker, if you had offered me that and Arsenal becoming premier league champions, I would take it every day of the week.
I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the bravery and sacrifice of the Royal Regiment of Scotland. I have had the privilege of meeting Scots serving in our armed forces across the world. They deserve our deepest gratitude. I cannot understand how the SNP and Greens have arrived at this decision, particularly when Glaswegians have contributed so much to the Royal Regiment. It is not too late to do the right thing, and I urge them to reconsider.
I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.
I join the Prime Minister in sending our condolences to the family of Lance Bombardier Ciara Sullivan, who died in a tragic accident, and to all her colleagues. I hope the Prime Minister will also join me in sending condolences to the family of Scott Hastings, the former Scottish and Lions rugby player who sadly passed away at the weekend.
In 2025, Donald Trump and Elon Musk abolished America’s international aid programme. At the same time, the Government made huge cuts to the UK’s aid programme. We now see a dangerous outbreak of Ebola in central Africa, which many people fear is going to spread and get much worse, yet there are rumours across Whitehall that the Prime Minister is planning further cuts to Britain’s international aid programme this year. Will he rule that out entirely today?
The right hon. Gentleman raises the important issue of Ebola and Africa, and obviously we are working on it at pace and with others. We took a decision on aid in order to fund defence spending, because we needed to increase defence spending, but we are committed to our overseas aid, and we mitigated that decision with some of the measures put in place.
I am not sure if the Prime Minister completely ruled out further cuts to the international aid programme. With defence chiefs this week writing to The Times to say that cutting aid for defence is a mistake, I hope that the Prime Minister and his Ministers will rule that out today. If he does not, I hope that Labour party members will ask all the Labour leadership candidates their position on the future of Britain’s aid programme.
In the past few days, two of those Labour leadership candidates—the right hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting) and the Mayor of Greater Manchester—have ruled out any support for Britain joining the EU customs union, despite the fact that it would boost growth and help cut the cost of living. Is the Prime Minister relieved that he finally has something that he can agree with his colleagues on?
In the last two years, I have been negotiating serious trade deals that are vital for the most important sectors of our economy. These are trade deals with the EU, but also with India, North Korea and the United States. I remind the right hon. Gentleman of the value of those deals. Before the deal with the United States, I went to Jaguar Land Rover in Solihull and talked to the workforce. They were worried sick about their jobs and communities. When we agreed terms, I went back to JLR—because of the deal we got with the EU, thousands of their jobs were safeguarded. The right hon. Gentleman’s approach would throw all that away. He would have to go and see those workforces and tell them that their jobs are gone. I am not going to do that.
My hon. Friend makes a powerful case. We have already committed to a moratorium on crypto donations to political parties, and the King’s Speech introduces tougher rules to protect our democracy. However, the £5 million question is: why did the Reform leader keep this donation secret? I see that he is not here to answer. What did the billionaire lining his pockets ask for in return? Those questions need to be answered—and that is why he is not here.
I call Dave Doogan.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, for calling me for my first Prime Minister’s question since becoming SNP Westminster leader, following the SNP’s stunning victory in Scotland. I am enjoying the sense of challenge and opportunity a new job can provide—a sense of renewal I am certain the Prime Minister will be enjoying in the weeks ahead.
This week, we saw the latest chapter of Labour infighting, in which Andy “Brexit” Burnham wants the UK to stay out of the EU, but Peter Mandelson’s pal, the former Health Secretary, wants us to go back in. Can the Prime Minister advise us which of his potential successors he agrees with?
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his new post and thank him for the calm, reasonable approach I have come to expect. My position is very clear: we have already negotiated a closer relationship with the EU, which we did last year. We will have another negotiation and agreement this year at a summit, where we will get even closer and take a big step forward in our relationship with the EU, which is in our national interest.
I call Chris Vince from Harlow.
I have very fond memories of visiting Harlow Town with my hon. Friend. The point he makes is an important one: football clubs bring our communities together. They are part of our social fabric and, in some places, they are one of the last places left where members of the community can come together. That is why my Government fought so hard to create the Independent Football Regulator to protect our national game. We should remind everyone—every football fan across the country, from Harlow Town to Wigan Athletic—that it was Labour that was on the side of football fans, while the Tories and Reform opposed us every step of the way.
Before I answer that question, I have just been handed a note saying that I inadvertently said that we did a trade deal with North Korea, rather than South Korea. That would be breaking news and not very good. Before I am referred to the Privileges Committee, can I correct the record in that regard? It was a slip of the tongue, but a pretty unfortunate one.
In relation to my hon. Friend’s question, families and farmers are rightly frustrated about being impacted by a war that the UK did not start. Protecting working people is our priority. Today, we are cutting red diesel costs for farmers by a third, delivering the lowest rate for 20 years. That is alongside a record £11.8 billion for the farming budget and a new national programme to redistribute surplus food. We will make sure that no one in this country goes hungry. I can confirm that the Chancellor will make further announcements tomorrow.
First, can I welcome the hon. Lady to her place, because I think this is her first question in PMQs? There will be different views on whether people should be able to enjoy a drink here or not, but I think we can agree that the majority of people in this country want an economy that works for them, public services that are there when they need them, and every child going as far as their talent or ability will take them. The only way to deliver that is through a Labour Government, as we are doing. The Greens think that their leader walks on water. It turns out that he just lives on water and does not pay his council tax!
The story of my hon. Friend’s constituent is deeply concerning, and I thank her for raising it. It underlines why we must and will act. We have already acted by shutting legal loopholes so that AI chatbots must abide by the Online Safety Act 2023, but we obviously have to look at what further measures we can take, including age-related bans, restricting children’s use of chatbots and stronger parental controls. I am meeting parents, teenagers and civil society representatives later this afternoon to discuss further, stronger protections for children. We will make sure that my hon. Friend is updated on those steps.
Yes, I will do both those things, and I thank the hon. Lady for raising her own experience here to highlight the issue. The thoughts of the whole House will be with the family and friends of the young person who died. I thank all the public health specialists working in Reading to ensure that those affected are receiving appropriate treatment. The hon. Lady’s question reminds us that vaccines do save lives, and we must do everything we can in relation to that.
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue, because the Government are cracking down on disgraceful waste criminals through, for instance, tougher penalties for fly-tippers—including service in clean-up squads, and the potential loss of their driving licences—more powers and funding for the Environment Agency, and stronger checks across the industry to tackle fly-tipping at its source.
Yes, I will, and I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising the issue. I will ensure that the detail is looked at, and that appropriate steps are taken. May I also take this opportunity, through the hon. Gentleman, to mark the tragic anniversary of the devastating fire in his constituency? I know that the thoughts of the whole House remain with the families and colleagues of Martyn, Jennie and Dave, and I know that he has done a lot to support them.
A stroke happens every five minutes: that is six lives changed in the time that we have been sitting in this Chamber. Two years ago, while I was sitting in the Chamber, my husband suffered a stroke. We know that when it comes to the right care and treatment every single second counts, and we know at first hand why the work of the Stroke Association is so important, ensuring that everyone knows the signs and symptoms, because when a stroke strikes, acting fast matters. Will the Prime Minister join me in marking Stroke Awareness Month, and will he update the House on what he is doing to ensure that every stroke survivor receives the care that he or she needs to recover and to thrive?
My hon. Friend has raised an important issue. The Government are investing in our NHS to make sure that every second counts. I know my hon. Friend’s husband, and I know the impact that this had on him and on her, and on their wider family. I thank her for raising such a personal issue in the Chamber to highlight this point.
Because of the choices that we have made, ambulance response times are at their fastest for five years. We are investing £10 billion to innovate technology and transformation, and the NHS is already using artificial intelligence to cut treatment time for stroke patients by an hour and tripling full recovery rates.
I agree with what we said in our manifesto, which we are implementing. We are closer to the EU as a result of the agreement we reached last year, and we will be closer again as a result of the agreement we reach this year. We are building on the botched Brexit deal that the Conservatives did, which did such damage to our country.
My community has been left in deep shock and concern following allegations of serious sexual offences, forced marriage and modern slavery against members of the Ahmadi religion of peace and light. Will the Prime Minister join me in thanking Cheshire constabulary, Cheshire East Council and wider agencies for their response to these concerning events? Will he also commit himself to ensuring that we receive the necessary resources to deliver justice when crimes have been committed and to reassure the wider community that this Government are on their side?
I thank my hon. Friend, and I am grateful to all the agencies involved in the enforcement action, including Cheshire police. It is vital that local public services get the funding that they need, and that is why we have increased Cheshire’s police budget by over £15 million. We have also recruited 3,000 more neighbourhood police officers while bringing forward wide-ranging reforms to ensure that everyone has access to swift and equal justice.
I am really sorry: the answer is no, and I cannot bring myself to congratulate the councillors. I apologise.
From 1997, the Prime Minister campaigned to scrap single-judge trials in Northern Ireland, yet when I opposed his Government’s plan to bring in single-judge trials in England and Wales, I received hostile briefings and smears about my mental health from the lads in No. 10 Downing Street. The Chief Whip is shaking his head, but he knows about it. The Prime Minister knows that my nephew Matty took his own life as a result of work-related stress as a young criminal lawyer. During Mental Health Awareness Week, when Ministers spoke with compassion about health and wellbeing, did the Prime Minister reflect on those hostile, discriminatory briefings, which he knew about and allowed to happen?
The hon. Gentleman has previously told me about Matty and the impact that that had on him. I totally understand that, and I want to be absolutely clear that nobody should be smeared in relation to mental health—nobody—on any issue, whatever they may argue on any other issue. I will do everything I can to make sure that that is the position.
In five weeks’ time, the Government will be introducing penal tariffs on steel imports into the UK and, at the same time, massively reducing tariff-free quotas. This will cause enormous damage to the UK’s manufacturing base in the absence of adequate steelmaking capacity in the UK. Furthermore, the way the tariffs are drawn means that Stannah Lifts, a world-beating company based in Andover in my constituency, will face tariffs when importing steel into the UK to manufacture its products, but a competitor’s imported finished product, made from the same steel, will not attract tariffs. This situation cannot be allowed to persist. Will the Prime Minister please arrange for his Secretary of State to focus on this issue and get it sorted out?
May I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this really important issue? I give him an assurance that it is not just the Secretary of State; I am also absolutely focused on this, because we are all very well aware of the consequences that would otherwise follow. I am personally invested in this, as is the entire Cabinet, because it is a very important issue, as the right hon. Gentleman rightly points out.