Alex Sobel MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 8 Jun 2026 · Water Companies · Hansard source

  More

  Minister, we know that our water company, Yorkshire Water, is a dirty business, flushing sewage into rivers such as the Wharfe and the Aire, with children and others getting ill from swimming in them. But is it not also a broken business, with debt more than four times its revenue, while still paying over £50 million to shareholders last year? What financial studies has the Minister done to look at Yorkshire Water’s viability? Is it not time that the people of Yorkshire have the same say over their water company as the people of Wales?

• 2 Jun 2026 · Children: Development of Essential Skills · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship for the first time, Dr Allin-Khan. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow). It is well known across the House that he is a classics scholar; indeed, he chairs the APPG for classics. Our democracy is based on that of the ancient Greeks, and demos is a Greek word from which we draw our idea of democratic values. One of our greatest ever parliamentarians from Leeds, Denis Healey, was himself a classics scholar. He inspired many others in Leeds and his constituency to study the classics, some of whom are now elected politicians in the city, so this subject is dear to our hearts in Leeds. Substantial democratic political education for our young people can help to comprise a curriculum for life for the future of the UK. I am proud of the commitment in the Labour manifesto at the last election, and many elections beforehand, to give the right to vote at 16. That must go hand in hand with a genuine education in critical thinking and democratic processes, and a guide to citizen participation. Without that education, we are all vulnerable to reductionist populism, as seen on the extremes of our political landscape. Equipping the next generation with the skills they need to identify mis- and disinformation, to call out discrimination and prejudice in politics, and to navigate our political system will forge a brighter and sharper future for our country. It is an education that I am sure we all wish we could have had access to across the United Kingdom. As the MP for the constituency with the youngest electorate in the country, I can say that the young people of Leeds Central and Headingley are switched on to what is going on in the world. As I am sure hon. Members will agree, when we visit schools and sixth-form colleges, we are kept on our toes by the young people there as much as we are in the Chamber itself—more so, actually, the majority of the time. If we can fully enfranchise young people with the tools on how to navigate all the layers of our political landscape, we will have a succession plan for a stable and ethically awake future. These tools are needed now more than ever, at a time when we are at the mercy of faceless social media, bot farms and nefarious online foreign actors that seek to disrupt the stability and the fabric of communities in our country. Furthermore, better political education can help tackle the negative perceptions of politicians and the growing levels of abuse, harassment and intimidation. We need politics to be an environment that is representative of the UK, not one that intimidates colleagues out of the field—or that intimidates people out of even considering entering elected politics. I believe that reducing the voting age will help increase the political engagement of younger people, and I agree with the House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee that lowering the voting age is a good opportunity to develop a new school curriculum for political education—an education that can enable young people to exercise their right to vote without unduly swaying or influencing them. Let us create the fairest and most democratic UK we have ever seen, with Government support for children to develop skills in political education and with enfranchised 16 and 17-year-olds, hopefully in a fairer voting system where all votes count.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Preparedness for National Emergencies · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. Agility and long-term planning are two essential cornerstones of our preparedness for national emergencies. There are two types of national emergency where we must instil those traits: climate and nature, and artificial intelligence and data centres. The UK’s food system, economy, water security, flood protection and public health all depend on functioning ecosystems, yet the Joint Intelligence Committee has warned that every critical ecosystem that the UK depends upon is on a pathway to collapse, posing huge risks to our security, prosperity and way of life. Restoring nature is vital to avoid national emergencies. A functioning, healthy ecosystem reduces flood risk; protects our homes, hospitals and transport systems from overheating; sustains soil so that we can grow food; and cleans the very air that we breathe. By legislating for a strategic nature network and recognising it as national infrastructure, we can restore, connect and maintain a system of key functional ecosystems that strengthen our national security, protect communities and build resilience across the UK. Furthermore, in terms of the preparedness of our infrastructure for national emergencies, Britain is not truly sovereign as long as we are helpless to act in an AI emergency in our country. Data centres are now part of our critical national infrastructure, but the UK does not have the sovereign capability to pull the plug in the case of a dangerous AI cyber-attack or the takeover of Britain’s data centres. My amendment to the Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill would change that. This kill switch would be a last resort, allowing the Government to pull the plug when things go wrong or where there is sufficient evidence that things will go wrong. It would cover two threats: AI-driven cyber-attacks and the development of superintelligent AI that is utilising UK data centres. Most of the public would be surprised to find that kill switch powers do not already exist: there is no big red button to shut down a data centre that poses a risk to people, the economy or our national infrastructure. Kill switch powers are an essential first step in preparedness, and Parliament should seize this opportunity to truly prepare for such a national crisis.

• 1 Jun 2026 · Equality Act 2010: Code of Practice · Hansard source

  More

  As a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, I have concerns that human rights that have long applied to trans people since the Gender Recognition Act 2004 will no longer apply. I am afraid that that will be the case more broadly than in the areas that the Minister mentioned in her statement. When read together, paragraphs 2.5 and 2.92 of the code imply that a transgender person and a cisgender person who are in a relationship can no longer enjoy the rights that they have enjoyed since the introduction of the Act—for instance, in terms of their relationship being respected, registered and recognised by the law. Has there been a human rights analysis of the EHRC guidance? The right to family life appears to be under threat from it.

• 20 May 2026 · Processed Russian Oil Products: Sanctions · Hansard source

  More

  This package of sanctions has come to us very quickly, and I am slightly concerned about how it has been communicated today, so a bit of clarity would be really welcome. How long will the regulations made under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 stand prior to completing the phasing in of the new package of sanctions? Will there be a gap, or will we immediately turn to the new sanctions and implementation of the sanctions regime?

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  Will the shadow Minister give way?

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak in this debate, and I thank the Energy Secretary for making another clear case for the energy transition. I welcome the energy independence Bill, which will be one of the most significant and pragmatic pieces of legislation that we seek to work on in this Parliament and is directly entwined with our national security. Energy independence sets us free from the energy cost chaos caused by Putin’s erratic warmongering and is another step that enables us to stand in strong solidarity with the people of Ukraine. The stabilisation of our energy security will enable us to work on Jo Cox’s agenda of progressive internationalism, by improving our capacity to be a force for good—the 10th anniversary of her tragic murder is coming up shortly. On Jo’s progressive internationalism, I am also proud to see the European partnership Bill, and I welcome the youth mobility scheme. Many of my constituents will be able to take advantage of that, so I am keen to see even more progress in our European relations, including freedom for European musical acts to tour Europe and visa-free travel. I also hail the power of rail, with delivery of a fair deal for the north of England, something that was sadly neglected during the 14 years of Conservative Government prior to 2024, and the northern powerhouse rail Bill, a scheme announced and then cancelled by the previous Conservative Government. That said, there is more work to be done on the clean water Bill to ensure that we establish true water resilience for our national and energy security. We must ensure that the Bill does not tie us into a failed, privatised system owned by overseas actors. The only route to our security is through mutual ownership. In England, we should have a system like the one in Wales, where the people own the water company—notably different from 1970s-style nationalisation. As we know, nationalisation is at the mercy of any future Government who might seek to privatise the sector again, whereas mutual ownership puts the public first, with local people making key decisions about their water supply systems. We should have mutual ownership of the entire water industry, which would ensure a stable and secure future for our water systems. The public must have a say in the future of our water, with genuinely clean waterways that are publicly owned and secure for the future of the nation. Restoring waterways and nature is not separate from national security—it underpins it. My amendment (g) on today’s Order Paper recognises that functioning and healthy ecosystems reduce flood risk, protect our homes, hospitals and transportation systems from overheating, sustain soils to be able to grow food, and clean the air we breathe. The UK’s key ecosystems are every bit as vital as our roads, energy grid and water networks, yet we continue to treat them as an afterthought. As the Treasury-commissioned Dasgupta review has made clear, we undervalue the natural assets that our economy and security depend on. By legislating for a strategic nature network and recognising it as national infrastructure, we can restore, connect and maintain a system of key functional ecosystems that strengthens our national security, protects communities and builds resilience across the UK. Other Members have mentioned the prospect of electoral reform through the Representation of the People Bill. We have just seen local council elections in which a councillor was elected on 20.5% of the vote, even lower than the lowest percentage at the last general election. Candidates are winning with increasingly low percentages of the vote as we move to a five-party system in England and a six-party system in Scotland and Wales. We need a national conversation and to think about this issue clearly for the long-term future of our country, so I will be tabling an amendment to the Representation of the People Bill that would establish a national commission for electoral reform. I urge the Government to set one up so that we can take clear actions to ensure the future of our voting system and its integrity. I am sure that those on the Treasury Bench have heard what I have had to say about amendment (g) and the need to consider nature as infrastructure. I am content not to press it, knowing that the spirit of the amendment has been heard and taken on by the Government.

• 27 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  In my comments, I will address the agent of change principle. I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on music, and this has long been on our agenda. The shadow Minister got the gist of this right when saying that it is about existing or long-standing venues—music venues and nightclubs, in particular—having to bat back legal challenges from residents of any new build residential property, but primarily apartments. We have had examples of cases, such as Alphabet and the Moth club, where there have been legal costs of £50,000 or more from having to take on new developments that are challenging their ongoing operations. I encountered a case of this kind in my constituency, which we had to fight in the planning committee. An organisation called Music and Arts Production provides music and arts education in its building for young people who have been excluded from school and who would otherwise become NEET—not in education, employment or training—but who are thus kept within the education system. One of its main sources of funding is Cosmic Slop, an event that raises a significant amount on Saturday nights. There was to be heavy residential development in the area in the form of a new block of flats in Mabgate, opposite the MAP building. The problem was that there would be no sound protection or mitigation; in its local plan, Leeds had not mapped music venues or nightclubs. I received thousands of emails about the planning application from as far away as New York. We had to have significant discussions with the planning department and councillors to ensure that the necessary stipulations were made for noise reduction, and to ensure that the new residents could not, in effect, close down the club night, because if that happened MAP would have to close as well, and all those young people would become NEET. I sympathise with the Ministers dealing with this matter, because throughout the process the national planning policy framework, on a non-statutory basis, has forced local authorities to take such action. I think we should consider ways of addressing this issue through secondary legislation and the local planning process, because at present neither the Bill nor the NPPF protects venues adequately. I know that, like mine, the Minister’s constituency contains many music venues and nightclubs, and she obviously cares deeply about such venues. I hope she will reassure me that the Government will look at the agent of change principle and ensure that, both locally and nationally, the relevant protections are available so that further pressures are not put on those venues. Nightclubs in particular are already suffering as a result of the business rates increases and other recent cost pressures, and the additional costs of having to fight developers will eventually push them out of existence.

• 27 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that there are particular issues for councillors on the planning committees of local authorities? The amendments would bring a clarity that would make it much easier for planning committees to operate and give music venues and nightclubs the reassurance that they need.

• 27 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Would the Minister and colleagues be prepared to look at the idea that grassroots music venues and nightclubs should be in the local plan, so that planning committees and planning officers have to have regard to them? This is clearly a gap. If they are in the plan, this will not move on to a statutory footing, which is something that she is obviously concerned about.

• 16 Apr 2026 · Grassroots Music Venues · Hansard source

  More

  I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. On 19 November, the Secretary of State made the welcome announcement that we would end the abuse of ticket resale. Since then, gig goers at grassroots music venues have been ripped off by tens of millions of pounds. With the new Session coming, will that Bill be in the King’s Speech? Can gig goers look forward to the end of being ripped off by touts?

• 14 Apr 2026 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I want to raise the systemic issue of honour-based abuse. The perpetrator is usually not just one person; they are a family, a group or a network of people who believe that an individual has or may bring dishonour or shame to the family or community. My hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato) has tabled a simple amendment to Lords amendment 300 to insert the word “persons”, which would address the issue. I stand here on behalf of my constituent Fawziyah Javid, who was an incredible woman and member of our community; she was also a victim of domestic homicide and honour-based abuse. My hon. Friend’s amendment shows that honour-based abuse runs deep within communities. I have worked with Karma Nirvana in my constituency on that. Does the Minister agree that honour-based abuse is an issue not just for one person, but for many people, and that that should be acknowledged?

• 25 Mar 2026 · Foreign Financial Influence and Interference: UK Politics · Hansard source

  More

  I thank Philip Rycroft for meeting me in my position as chair of the fair elections APPG and for including some of my points and evidence in this excellent review. I also thank the Secretary of State for including the donations cap—an issue that I raised with the Minister for Democracy, my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon), when we met. My question relates to page 45 of the review, which talks about international best practice, and the point I raised with Philip Rycroft about VIGINUM in France, which monitors foreign online interference. That is the most pressing issue in UK politics today. It is about not just identifying it and publishing it, but attributing and exposing it, and in some cases even getting it removed. Are we considering the same modalities, capabilities and powers when implementing that recommendation in the UK?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  Many of my constituents have spoken or written to me because they are anxious about the pausing of the trial. In the words of one of my constituents, “to be a true ally you must support all trans people and their needs, not just adults”. As a matter of principle, politicians should not meddle in medical decisions. If we accept that trans people exist, and if they are to be accepted, they need to have access to healthcare. We must listen to the experiences of trans young people and take action to protect their wellbeing by opposing restrictions on gender-affirming care for trans youth. All children need access to safe and timely healthcare in line with international best practice. The pausing of the trial is causing deep anxiety among many of my constituents. International best practice, as laid out by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, emphasises that decisions around hormones should be made on a case-by-case basis. Puberty-suppressing hormones have long been used by children who experience early-onset puberty, and significant international research and advisory bodies already support their use by trans adolescents as a safe, reversible means of alleviating gender dysphoria and improving psychological functioning and wellbeing. They are used in Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands and many other European countries. I have four asks of the Minister. Will the Department engage legitimately with the widest range of advocacy groups, including groups such as TransActual, to understand the real human impact of the ban and ensure that future policy is informed by those who are directly affected? Will the Department reinstate the trial, while ensuring that those who do not wish to take part in research can continue to access appropriate healthcare? Will the Department revise its policy on the prescription of gender-affirming hormones to remove arbitrary age limits, in line with international best practice? Will the Department do more to bring down waiting lists, which are more than six years for a first appointment at a young person’s gender service? Like many, I am concerned about the erasure of the trans community. Today, we need to heed the many arguments they are making. In the words of the trans community, “Nothing about us without us.”

• 18 Mar 2026 · Student Loans · Hansard source

  More

  I have read the motion and the amendment. Students today are on a new loan—the plan 5 loan—and Conservative Members have completely forgotten current students. The Government amendment talks about the system in the round. Can my hon. Friend reassure me that the Government are going to look at the system in the round and not just at plan 2, so that all students and graduates have a fairer system?

• 18 Mar 2026 · Social Enterprises and Community Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my fellow Co-operative MP, my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh and Atherton (Jo Platt), for introducing the debate. She served admirably in the social enterprise sector while she was resting from this place. Like her, I spent many years working in the social enterprise and co-operative sector, running Social Enterprise Yorkshire and the Humber. I hark back to a golden age—although we probably did not consider it one at the time—of social enterprise and co-operative support, which ended fairly abruptly in May 2010; I cannot quite pinpoint what could have happened in that month to make that change. Prior to then, we had Business Link, an organisation run by the Government through the regional development agencies and funded by the then Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. It provided social enterprise and co-operative support, either directly or through regional social enterprise bodies. Such support is really important. We also had co-operative support through a similar regional mechanism funded by the Co-operative Group, which ended, a bit later, due to the issues with the Co-operative bank—we probably do not need to rehearse those in this debate. Now there is very little support available, so I am absolutely delighted that MHCLG has announced the co-operative development unit. When I was running an organisation, we would not have had community asset transfer, or the scaling-up and development of new social enterprises, without that support; it is absolutely essential. I do not mean financial support, but support with advice, legal structures, business planning and mentoring—the whole range of support that was provided regionally. I first want to make a plea for regionalisation in the co-operative development unit. It is then really important for Departments to work together. As I was pleased to hear my hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) raise, we need the DBT, MHCLG and DCMS to work together to provide that support. Let us do this—let us get the band back on the road and see that support being provided.

• 9 Mar 2026 · Immigration Policy · Hansard source

  More

  In response to the urgent question, the Minister did not mention the announcement last week that people from four countries—Sudan, Afghanistan, Myanmar and Cameroon—will no longer be able to apply for a student visa. Many students who applied for such visas and came to study here subsequently found that the situation in their country had materially changed, so they then applied for asylum. I am very concerned that when things materially change, we will change the policy on student applications. We are seeing a war in the middle east now, and the situation in Ukraine, and I am concerned that this is now the Government’s policy. We should take it in good faith that people who come here to study do so—that they study and contribute, and that they can go back to their countries to contribute there when things have settled. We should not be cutting off student visas for people from countries in conflict.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Energy Markets · Hansard source

  More

  One of the first lessons from the Russia-Ukraine war, and now from the war in the middle east, is that oil refineries and fossil fuel infrastructure are primary targets and that energy prices are now part of war strategy. Our race to renewables is important not just here in the UK, but around the world. The price of Urals crude has nearly reached the price of other crude oils, and we need to ensure that other countries are not reliant on Russian oil being delivered by the shadow fleet. Is the Secretary of State working with other countries to ensure that they are taking the same path towards the renewable transformation that we are taking?

• 9 Feb 2026 · Russian Influence on UK Politics and Democracy · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) for his excellent opening speech. I agree with the statement in the petition, which 168 of my constituents signed: “We are concerned about reported efforts from Russia to influence democracy in the US, UK, Europe and elsewhere. We believe we must establish the depth and breadth of possible Russian influence campaigns in the UK”. However, I emphasise that that influence is being exercised throughout the world, not just in the west. I agree with the e-petition, not only from my constituents’ point of view but as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for fair elections, the largest APPG in Parliament, and as chair of the APPG on Ukraine. Russian influence and interference is the converging issue at play between those groups. We must listen to and learn from Ukraine, as the Ukrainians are on the frontline defending Europe. We are in a hybrid war with Russia—that is not a new phenomenon. It is trying to erode our democracy on home soil. I will guide Members through the historical influences on our politics and democracy; address what we already have on the table with the Rycroft review; and conclude with what we must also place on the table, especially via our upcoming elections Bill, in order to ensure that we protect the freedom and fairness of our democracy for evermore. Russian influence—or should we say interference?—in UK politics is here. Reform’s Nathan Gill was guilty of eight charges of accepting bribes from the Kremlin. The Kremlin exploited legal loopholes to influence the Brexit vote, as ex-MI6 spy Chris Steele revealed just last week here in Parliament. For at least 15 years, the Kremlin has exploited loopholes in political finance rules, with anonymous donations through Northern Ireland, Scottish and Welsh limited partnerships, unincorporated associations, cryptoassets and parapolitical ecosystems such as think-tanks, opaque media organisations and political movements not formally classified as parties. Evidence of Russian election interference was described as “overwhelmingly clear” as early as 2017 to 2019, with its “utterly disruptive and malign presence” in British national life. If we do not resist, act and legislate now, how can we ever expect to be rid of Putin’s influence and to live in a legitimate democracy? Foreign influence is not a new challenge to democracy, especially during wartime. We are, I emphasise, in an ongoing hybrid war with Russia. During the second world war, the British Ministry of Information, in co-operation with the War Office and the Ministry of Home Security, issued a guidance pamphlet on disinformation. It detailed how foreign powers may seek to: “make use of the civilian population in order to create confusion and panic. They spread false rumours and issue false instructions. In order to prevent this…do not believe rumours and do not spread them…make quite sure that it is a true order and not a faked order”— that is disinformation. Disinformation is fake news. It is created and spread deliberately by someone who knows full well that it is false. Disinformation is vast. It is a technique, like dark money and manipulation, as old as nefarious actors themselves. The distinct difference between that guidance published in the 1940s and today is that the digital realm we are operating in is evolving minute by minute. Our regulation must evolve alongside it. The Rycroft review, the independent review launched in response to the shocking case of Reform’s Welsh leader, Nathan Gill, is a good first step. I wish to give the review the opportunity to uncover events and make substantial recommendations going forward. Former permanent secretary Philip Rycroft will assess finance and bribery rules and how to reduce the risk of foreign interference, and will build on new rules set out in the election strategy to guard against foreign political interference. I will welcome Mr Rycroft’s report, which is to be sent to the Home Secretary and Security Minister at the end of March. It will focus on the effectiveness of UK political finance laws, as well as the safeguards in place to protect our democracy from illicit money from abroad, including cryptocurrencies. I look forward to hearing about how it will examine the rules governing the constitution and regulation of political parties, and the Electoral Commission’s enforcement powers, as well as exploring the role of the checks-and-balances system. That being said, to keep up with the technological developments that enable Russian influence in UK politics, we need a multitude of regulation and recommendations to ensure that the Kremlin keeps out of Westminster. The elections Bill will be a vehicle for that. As chair of the fair elections APPG and Ukraine APPG, I look forward to seeing such firm regulatory action being taken. First, on dark money, we must stop corrupt, foreign state-sponsored money entering our political system. One way to better restrict that would be to outlaw both crypto donations and those from unincorporated entities. Furthermore, there should be a ban on all overseas donations. All known loopholes and political funding architecture must be closed, including Northern Ireland anonymous donations, Scottish and Welsh limited partnerships and so on. That must be tackled through new laws or legislative instruments. Secondly, on disinformation, we need to rapidly improve our transparency in the UK to make a free and fair digital environment for elections. Without transparency, we get populist information dynamics. That means elections with information disorder, trust erosion as political terrain and narrative amplification over institutional debate. Simplified, reductionist and emotionally resonant narratives are how the predator of big tech preys on the electorate. We must learn from international leaders such as Estonia, which has whole-of-Government electoral threat monitoring, real-time co-ordination between security agencies and electoral authorities and public transparency during interference incidents. We can also learn from France with its election period intervention, which includes legal powers to act rapidly against co-ordinated foreign disinformation during elections combined with rapid attribution and public exposure. Overall, foreign disinformation thrives where public trust is weakest. A voting system that leaves millions without meaningful representation actively undermines that trust. There is more to do to ensure that our elections are free and fair. These three pillars—eradicating dark money, disinformation and misinformation, and overall electoral reform—are the pillars of the APPG for fair elections. If we work together, we can have a free, fair and democratic future.

• 9 Feb 2026 · Jimmy Lai: Prison Sentence · Hansard source

  More

  The Government have been pretty generous to the Chinese Government—first the embassy, then the Prime Minister’s visit to China and trade concessions. In return, the Chinese Government have conferred a death sentence on Jimmy Lai. Will those in Hong Kong’s Administration and judiciary who undertook this politically motivated sham trial be welcome in the United Kingdom, or will they be sanctioned?

• 2 Feb 2026 · Indefinite Leave to Remain · Hansard source

  More

  Many people in my constituency who are on the skilled worker visa programme have written to me. They are being told, if they are already on a five-year programme, that it will be changed retrospectively to a 10-year programme. Does my hon. Friend agree that there is an inherent issue of fairness in retrospectively making changes, and that, at the very least, the Government should have transitional arrangements?

• 2 Feb 2026 · China and Japan · Hansard source

  More

  It is right that the Prime Minister goes to China if he is acting in the best interests of all those living here. Last year, the Joint Committee on Human Rights undertook an inquiry into transnational repression. In front of us, we had Chloe Cheung, a young Hongkonger from Leeds who had a $HK1 million bounty put on her head. She told us about how she had been intimidated and harassed. Did the Prime Minister speak up for all the Hongkongers in the UK who have had bounties on their heads and who have been intimidated and harassed? Will he ensure that people living in the United Kingdom are safe from the Chinese regime?

• 29 Jan 2026 · Holocaust Memorial Day · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is making an excellent speech. This Sunday, I went to our Holocaust Memorial Day event in Leeds and met Trude Silman, my former constituent from when I was a councillor. She is 97 years old, and we have fewer and fewer of these Holocaust survivors. I pay tribute to the children of Holocaust survivors—the second generation—including my father, who gave oral testimony to the Holocaust Centre North. I hope that by next Holocaust Memorial Day that will be transcribed and available to the public, not just so that my children and I can understand our family’s history, but so that everybody can learn from that and understand our link in the UK to the Holocaust and how it can echo through the generations.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Ukraine: Non-recognition of Russian-occupied Territories · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely; Russification is the central policy of the Kremlin. It is happening today in the occupied territories, and we need to ensure that it ends and does not spread through the rest of Ukraine. That is why the self defence of Ukraine is so important. Many of the abducted children have lost their parents, who have either been jailed in the detention centres I discussed earlier, or killed by Russian forces. Russian families come to the occupied territories of Ukraine, abduct the children of detained or murdered parents and take them to Russia. Some Members may have heard the interview on the BBC’s “Ukrainecast” in December about the so-called Russian “children’s rights commissioner”, who is the subject of an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for the allegedly unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children. She gave an interview in October on Russian talk show in which she openly discussed a child she claimed to have “adopted” from Mariupol. She described how Philip, a young Ukrainian boy, was reluctant to accept a Russian identity. She described how he spends his time—in Moscow, in her home—on Ukrainian websites and singing songs in Ukrainian, but also how she managed to “gradually” change his mindset to the “way things were”. Those abducted Ukrainian children will consequently be militarised and indoctrinated, and used as troops against their own people. Those atrocities, along with the disinformation fed to Russian troops about how they are “liberating” Ukrainians by occupying their territories, needs to be called out consistently by the international community. The policy of non-recognition of Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine can help with that process. Temporary occupation, regardless of duration, is illegal and does not confer any territorial rights upon the occupying power. Journalists who have tried to document events have also become victims of torture and repression. Ukrainian journalist Viktoriia Roshchyna was abducted and died in Russian captivity after a prolonged secret detention with signs of violence. An expert mission report by the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe found that the arbitrary deprivation of the liberties of Ukrainian civilians has been a “defining feature” of Russian-occupied territories since 2014. These reports underscore that the perpetration of seven particular crimes against Ukrainian civilians by Russian authorities violate international law and likely amounts to war crimes and crimes against humanity. These seven interlocking crimes against humanity, which illustrate what I have spoken about today, are: persecution, illegal detention, deportation or forceable transfer, enforced disappearance, torture and other inhumane acts, sexual violence, and illegal imprisonment. They mutually reinforce one another to disable dissent and consolidate control over areas that Russia has illegally occupied during its war of aggression against Ukraine.

• 29 Jan 2026 · Ukraine: Non-recognition of Russian-occupied Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the matter of non-recognition of Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine. Today is 1,435 days since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It has been nearly 12 years since Russia’s invasion of Crimea, which many would say is when the war really began. The same fact stands as it did back in 2022 and back in 2014: we do not recognise the Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine as Russian. That is why the policy of non-recognition is as paramount today as it has ever been. Ukraine is a sovereign state with established borders, including Crimea and the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions. Those borders are recognised by the United Nations and the majority of states worldwide. All the partially occupied regions voted in a nationwide 1991 referendum for Ukraine’s independence from the Soviet Union. We must preserve the principle of territorial integrity. Ukraine’s borders are internationally recognised and any changes achieved by force have no legal validity. That protects a core principle of international law: the prohibition on acquiring territory through military force. The policy of non-recognition prevents the creation of a dangerous precedent that would allow other states to change borders through military aggression, undermining the UN charter and international treaties. Non-recognition matters because resolutions and official statements on non-recognition provide the legal and political foundations for imposing sanctions, internationally isolating the aggressor and holding it accountable for violations of international norms. Furthermore, maintaining the status of those territories as part of Ukraine protects rights related to citizenship and legal protection, as well as the future processes of de-occupation and restoration of control. Non-recognition of Russia’s illegal occupation of Ukrainian territories would send a clear signal to Russia, and other states willing to change borders by force, that there is a price to pay for aggression. It is crucial to remember that the weak international reaction to the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 enabled the current wave of Russian aggression, which is much more extensive and violent. I will address the immensely human side of why non-recognition of Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine is vital, as well as the horrors of occupation for children, civilians and detainees, and the eradication of Ukrainian identity through Russification. I will also address how there are shocking beliefs and disinformation about these atrocities not being true. Finally, I will detail the asks needed to uphold the prospect of non-recognition of Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine. Non-recognition sends a single to the Ukrainian state and army that the international community supports its legitimate self-defence, including attempts to de-occupy all of its territory. Historically, non-recognition of illegal occupation made the reverse of such occupation easier, for instance in the case of the Baltic states’ occupation by the Soviet Union. It also sends a signal to our allies that international law matters, a signal to Ukrainian civilians in the occupied territories that the international community cares about their fate, and a signal to Ukranians who had to flee the occupied territories that they might be able to return. There are some significantly grave atrocities being committed against Ukrainian civilians in the occupied territories. According to Freedom House, the index of civil and political rights in the Russian-occupied territories is minus 1. For comparison, North Korea’s index is 3. The Russian-occupied territories are the least free place in the world. More than 100,000 people in the occupied territories have been killed as of January 2026. If not killed, there are heavy efforts to engineer ideological control. In 2022, the Russian Ministry of Education dictionary instructed teachers on how to “re-educate” Ukrainian children based on Russian “spiritual and moral values”.