Andy McDonald MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 24 Feb 2026 · Gaza Healthcare System · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) on securing this debate and on his expertise in the area. The Israeli Government carry out these crimes against humanity because they can, and no one stops them. For nearly two years, Gaza’s healthcare system has been systematically dismantled during Israel’s military campaign. The World Health Organisation reports that there were 735 attacks on healthcare in Gaza from 7 October 2023 to 11 June last year. In 2024, the UN commission of inquiry concluded: “Israel has implemented a concerted policy to destroy the health-care system of Gaza.” The special rapporteur Francesca Albanese has stated that the targeted destruction of Gaza’s healthcare system by the IDF amounts to “medicide”, part of “the intentional creation of conditions calculated to destroy Palestinians in Gaza which constitutes an act of genocide.” One image stays with me: a hospital tent, a patient on a drip, flames climbing the IV line, a man too sick to run. That is what the destruction of a health system looks like. Amid this horror, there have been many extraordinary acts of courage from very many British medics, including Middlesbrough doctor Mohammed Mustafa and Professor Ghassan Abu-Sittah. They have stitched, they have amputated, they have delivered babies and they have kept children alive in wards without power and under bombardment. Even under the so-called ceasefire, Israel restricts healthcare. Dual-use restrictions block medical equipment, including imaging machines, prosthetic materials and surveillance tablets. More than 6,000 amputees await limbs. Only a few hundred prostheses have been allowed in. Stocks will run out. Israel has moved to deregister more than 35 international NGOs, including those funded by the British public. Those organisations deliver one in three births in Gaza and hundreds of thousands of consultations. They are being forced to hand over staff data or be shut down. Medical evacuations remain desperately limited. The WHO lists 18,000 people as in urgent need of care outside Gaza. The deliberate targeting of healthcare, the obstruction of aid and the killing and detention of medical personnel raise serious questions under international humanitarian law and the Geneva convention. A ceasefire must mean a ceasefire. Israel must uphold the ceasefire, lift its blockade on medical aid, end registration rules, allow safe passage for patients, permit the reconstruction of hospitals and release detained healthcare workers. The UK Government must do more than issue statements. They must interrogate Israel’s actions and intent, and enforce consequences. We are seeing scenes where the dogs are healthy in Gaza and the people are starving. We must ask ourselves how it is that the dogs are so healthy. Where are they getting their nutrition? I will leave people to make up their own mind. I ask the Minister these questions. Have the Government assessed whether UK-supplied arms, including F-35s, were used in strikes on healthcare facilities? Will they publish their assessment? Will he state without equivocation that the destruction of hospitals in Gaza is a breach of international humanitarian law and is in direct contravention of the genocide convention? What diplomatic or economic sanctions has the UK imposed in response to Israel blocking 18,000 patients? What consequences will Israel face for deregistering aid agencies? How is the UK implicated through the Civil-Military Co-ordination Centre? Given that the UK sanctioned over 1,500 individuals after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the glaring double standards are beyond reprehensible. The UK’s diplomatic statements have not shifted the Israeli Government’s policy one iota. We must use leverage, trade measures, arms controls and sanctions—concrete consequences for grave breaches of international law. Healthcare is protected in war. That is not optional; it is the law. The UK has not done anywhere near enough to exert pressure on Israel. If the same ineffective stance is maintained, the UK risks facing charges of complicity. We have more than diplomacy in our locker. It is absolutely criminal that the UK is not using the levers available. We have legal, moral and historical obligations and responsibilities to the Palestinians, who this country has betrayed for over 100 years, from the Balfour declaration to the present day, and the genocide continues. In the name of God, I ask the Minister—I urge him and this Government—to do the right thing and act, before the Palestinian people are completely wiped from the map.

• 24 Feb 2026 · Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor · Hansard source

  More

  I am listening closely to what the hon. Member is saying. Does he agree, given that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is no longer a royal, that nothing is really stopping us having a judge-led public inquiry into his affairs and all that attends them?

• 23 Feb 2026 · Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his statement. I agree that the Prime Minister was quite right to put the “Lord of the files” outside the tent; we got there eventually. However, can my right hon. Friend assure me that the answer to the $64,000 question—what was known at the time when Peter Mandelson was appointed US ambassador—will be put in the public domain? Many people in this place and across the country would not have touched Peter Mandelson with a bargepole. They are trying to get their head round why on earth this Government were not of the same view.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Labour Together and APCO Worldwide: Cabinet Office Review · Hansard source

  More

  This is truly a sordid affair. The Minister speaks of receiving funds from Labour Together to work on policy; I will just remind him that when we sat on the Opposition Benches, many of us were quite content with the support we received from the trade union movement and were proud to declare it as socialists. On Labour Together and its funding basis, it seems clear that the former chief of staff in Downing Street was content with not declaring, safe in the knowledge that the Electoral Commission’s powers were very limited and that a fine of £16,000—in the context of £730,000 of moneys coming into the system—was simply the cost of doing business. Can the Minister assure me that Sir Laurie Magnus will look at the funding structure and consider whether we need to revisit the ways in which people can be penalised for such egregious transgressions and flagrant disregard for doing business properly? To my mind, these individuals should, just as we as ask directors to be individually responsible, bear personal responsibility in these circumstances.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman should not consider it to be faux outrage. I lived in my constituency throughout that period and saw the damage it caused.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her remarks. She will find very considerable support for the broad thrust of what she said, especially on streamlining and the new policing models. I know that she is thinking very seriously about how to get the best return on the reorganisation in order to tackle serious and organised crime, and she is alive to the regional specialisms and expertise that already exist. I thank her for that, and for her commitment to delivering better funding for our police force following the disastrous period of austerity under the Conservatives. I want to put some challenges to the Minister, because I have some local concerns. However, after hearing the shadow Secretary of State’s remarks about police numbers, I have to say, in all candour, that the reduction of 20,000 police officers in the name of austerity was one of the most reckless and stupid things a Government could ever do. I would like him to come to the Dispatch Box and apologise for that gross dereliction of duty. [ Interruption. ] The right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) chunters and laughs from a sedentary position.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  I hear what the shadow Minister says about police numbers, but what did he say when Cleveland lost 500 police officers on his Government’s watch? Was he concerned then?

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  The penny has not dropped for the shadow Secretary of State, who cannot for one minute understand how that translated in our communities. That is the issue, because he simply does not take into consideration that loss of expertise. We cannot replace those police with recruits overnight. It was the stupidest thing a Government could do.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  The difference between me and the right hon. Gentleman is that I am capable of being objective when facts are put in front of me, whereas he appears to be completely myopic and in total denial about his own Government’s record of decimating our police forces and the consequences of that. I am perfectly content with making proper representations to the Government on the settlements that have been devolved. That is a perfectly reasonable proposition, and it is a shame that he could not participate in a more sensible discussion. With almost a third of our neighbourhoods in the top 10% of the most deprived nationally, local residents cannot shoulder a £90 increase on band D properties to restore staffing to safe levels. The police and crime commissioner has written three times to the Minister seeking urgent clarity about how the settlement was calculated. Each time, he has not had a response, and I ask the Minister to reflect on that and come back to me. Our communities and their elected PCC deserve answers. It is not just a matter of fairness; it is a matter of public safety. Without adequate funding, Cleveland police cannot meet the Government’s own objectives of reducing knife crime, tackling violence against women and girls, and maintaining effective neighbourhood policing. The people of Cleveland, their PCC and officers on the frontline have done everything asked of them—exceeding recruitment targets, investing in neighbourhood policing and achieving crime reductions above the national average—and of course they made incredible efforts in response to the riot on 4 August 2024. It was the most remarkable response by the police and the community, banding together in the wake of the most violent attack on our community. I must pay tribute to the incredible work the police did, because they have never had to deal with anything like that. They did it with such incredible dedication and professionalism, and we cannot ever be thankful enough to them for their efforts. Again, I just ask the Minister to reconsider this settlement, because I am not convinced that it reflects their efforts, and it redistributes scarce resources to other forces with less need. I therefore urge the Government to revisit the settlement urgently; to properly resource Cleveland police based on need, deprivation and demand, not on population alone; and to provide the answers that the PCC and our communities deserve. Our officers deserve the support they have earned, and our residents deserve the safety and security that only properly funded policing can provide.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, and we should acknowledge the damage that was caused. I am going to be challenging my own Government, and I am trying to be objective about these issues, but what has to be understood in this place is the consequences of the terrible decisions that were made. I will now move on, because I want to ask the Minister to address the real issues involving Cleveland police. There is more to be done in improving funding, which remains uneven, and some local areas continue to miss out. I hope to explore this in an objective and rational way with those on the Front Bench. I want to draw attention to the urgent and growing concerns of Cleveland’s police and crime commissioner about the funding of our local force. Despite serving one of the most deprived and high crime areas in the country, Cleveland police remains the force with the lowest number of officers compared with 2010—a reduction of some 12%—leaving the community more vulnerable and officers overstretched. With the greatest respect, the recent funding settlement compounds the problem. Cleveland received the smallest increase in the country—just 3.3%—and after accounting for inflation and pay awards, that leaves a real-terms shortfall of about £2.4 million, which is equivalent to 40 officers. The Government continue to expect this deficit to be met through local council tax, and I just respectfully suggest that is unreasonable.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes a pertinent point. Those were the lived experiences of our constituents, and those were the consequences they had to live with. Opposition Members may say that was because of the financial situation they were left with, but austerity was of course a political choice. The Conservatives deliberately ploughed this furrow with disastrous consequences, and they should have the humility to get up and acknowledge the error they made.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  I will in a minute. Perhaps the shadow Secretary of State would like to apologise to the country for the damage that was caused. I can tell him that removing so many officers at a stroke had a devastating impact. Looking at the raw numbers— [ Interruption. ] The right hon. Member chunters, but he fails to comprehend.

• 10 Feb 2026 · Pensions and Social Security · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure my hon. Friend will be aware of today’s Resolution Foundation report that shows how increases in income have significantly slowed over the past 20 years, particularly for those on low incomes, as shown by the basic rate of UC, which has fallen by 9% in real terms since 2010. Does she think there is merit in proposals from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation for an independent advisory process to inform universal credit rates, ensuring that the standard allowance reflects the real cost of essentials and the inflation experienced by those living on lower incomes?

• 5 Feb 2026 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Genocide Risk Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  I am honoured to serve as co-chair of the Britain-Palestine all-party parliamentary group. We face a stark legal reality: the UK’s duty to prevent genocide is triggered the moment a serious risk becomes evident. The International Court of Justice made that clear in January 2024. Judge Joan Donoghue stated that the Court found “a real and imminent risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused to the rights of Palestinians under the Genocide Convention.” The Court issued provisional measures directing Israel to prevent genocide—measures that Israel has ignored. Words matter too. Israel’s President Herzog declared, “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible.” Under international law, such statements are evidence of intent. The UN commission of inquiry confirmed that the ICJ’s provisional measures placed all state parties on notice of a serious risk of genocide in Gaza, triggering legal obligations on third states, including the UK. As its chair, Navi Pillay, stated, “Israel has flagrantly disregarded the orders for provisional measures from the International Court of Justice…and continued the strategy of destruction of the Palestinians in Gaza.” Yet in September 2024, UK Government lawyers concluded that there was no serious risk of genocide occurring. That defies the Court, the commission and the law. The UK itself has argued that genocide is not limited to killings, but includes forced displacement, serious bodily or mental harm and deprivation of food, particularly when children are targeted. Despite that, the UK has failed to acknowledge the risk, failed to respond to the ICJ or the commission and failed to act as it has elsewhere. I ask the Minister what evidence would be required to accept the risk of genocide if neither the ICJ nor the UN commission of inquiry suffices, and why, when the UK has argued that acts against children and forced displacement are indicators of genocidal intent, it has not applied that standard here. History will judge whether we acted when the warning signs were crystal clear. I urge the Government to acknowledge the risk and meet their legal duty to prevent genocide.

• 5 Feb 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I would like to place on the record my disappointment that today the Government have chosen to make two oral statements, both of which are of huge significance—on Sudan and on the national cancer plan—when so many Members will be absent from the Chamber. As co-chair of the Britain-Palestine all-party parliamentary group, may I put on the record that this shows disrespect to Members seeking to participate in today’s Backbench Business debates, particularly the one on the obligation to assess the risk of genocide under international law in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territories? Over many months, the Government have failed to respond to the decisions of the International Court of Justice and the UN commission of inquiry, and they have now squeezed the time available for Members to discuss that with the Minister. This is a gross discourtesy to this House, and to the millions of Palestinians impacted by Israel’s actions. Can the Leader of the House prevail upon Government Front Benchers to provide us with adequate time to debate this key issue in this place as soon as possible?

• 4 Feb 2026 · Lord Mandelson · Hansard source

  More

  Given what the hon. Gentleman has said, does he agree that the amendment as drawn would, in effect, just throw a cloak over the very issues that many right hon. and hon. Members of this House want to see dealt with, and that the way to resolve those sensitive issues is simply to engage the Intelligence and Security Committee? Is that not the best way forward?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Court Backlog · Hansard source

  More

  7. What steps he is taking to tackle the backlogs in the courts.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Court Backlog · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister was previously asked but did not clarify whether the Ministry of Justice conducted modelling on how much reducing jury trials would actually reduce the backlog. The Bar Council and the Criminal Bar Association have repeatedly asserted that there is no evidence that limiting jury trials will meaningfully reduce court delays. Can the Minister publish the evidence on which these reforms are based and explain why no pilot schemes were undertaken?

• 2 Feb 2026 · US Department of Justice Release of Files · Hansard source

  More

  This is a disaster, and against the backdrop of the incredible abuse of young women for such a long time, it fills the House will horror. I must agree with the hon. Member for North Dorset (Simon Hoare); this House would be minded to bring forward legislation and to do so quickly. It would appear that Gordon Brown was very concerned in September 2025 that there had been a disclosure of information by Mandelson to Epstein that may have been used for commercial gain. He turns out to have been right. How is it that such an error could occur within government and that the information was not known? Can the Minister assure the House that those matters will be given full attention in any inquiry and that, from this day on, there will be full engagement with the criminal authorities, because, as many Members have said already, the time has come for criminal prosecution?

• 27 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T10. Ben Houchen’s Teesworks saga has seen more than half a billion pounds of taxpayers’ money funnelled into enriching a few business people, while the opportunity for a sovereign wealth fund investment programme has been squandered. What steps are being taken to ensure that there is meaningful investment for economic growth and development in Teesside?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Yesterday, MPs heard from some of the international non-governmental organisations whose Israeli registration to operate in Palestine will be terminated and which from 1 March will no longer be able to provide critical aid. In Gaza, the suffering and the killings have not stopped. In bitter winter conditions, delays are preventing critical food, medical, hygiene and shelter supplies from entering Gaza. Many still face starvation. The birth rate has dropped by over 40% in the past year, and newborns are not surviving. While Israel prevents the work of aid organisations, the UK continues its membership of the Civil-Military Co-ordination Centre, which is meant to facilitate the flow of humanitarian assistance into Gaza—part of the state of Palestine, which the UK now recognises. Can we have a debate in Government time to explore the exposure of the UK to this restriction via the CMCC and what measures the UK can take, economic and otherwise, to ensure that UK public-funded agencies can continue to deliver aid and help bring this catastrophe in the state of Palestine to an end?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Government Insourcing · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister will be aware that too many retired civil servants are waiting too long to be paid their pensions and lump sums. Seventy thousand people are still caught up waiting for past discrimination to be addressed under the McCloud remedy, and there are already concerns about Capita’s management very early in its new contract period. Does the Minister share my concern that this is completely unacceptable and that urgent action, as called for by the Public and Commercial Services Union, is required? Can he provide the House with a full statement on Capita’s performance in administering the civil service pension scheme at the earliest opportunity?

• 21 Jan 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles: Legacy and Reconciliation · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the introduction of the remedial order. It is a necessary and overdue step if the Government are to retain the confidence of the people of Northern Ireland that they are serious about justice, accountability and dealing honestly with the legacy of the troubles. As several hon. and gallant Members have said from the Government Benches, those who served never wanted special protection, exemptions or immunity from the law. They wanted and expected exactly what the public expect: to be judged by the same universal standards of justice that apply to everyone else. Accountability does not weaken the armed forces but strengthens trust in them. The remedial order recognises that basic principle. It removes the conditional immunity and de facto amnesty contained in the 2023 legacy Act—provisions that were found unlawful by the courts in the Dillon case in Belfast. The High Court and the Court of Appeal were clear that those provisions breached articles 2 and 3 of the European convention on human rights and the Windsor framework. The Government accepted that judgment and rightly abandoned their appeal. Those immunity provisions never legally took effect, and it is right that they are now formally removed. The order also restores access to civil claims, reopening an important route to truth and accountability that had been wrongly closed. These processes were never about witch hunts. Since the Good Friday agreement, only one former soldier has been convicted for a troubles-era killing, and he received a suspended sentence. That is not lawfare. What civil cases and inquests have done is to correct false records, expose wrongdoing and finally give families truthful answers after decades of official denial. However, we must honest. The remedial order does not go far enough. Section 45 of the legacy Act, which blocks the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland from investigating troubles-related police misconduct, remains unaddressed. The Court of Appeal found that to be incompatible with human rights, yet victims and families are still denied access to a fully independent investigative mechanism. That failure continues. The Government are, of course, serious about a victim-centred approach to the past, and in pursuit of that further amendments are essential. National security must not be used as a smokescreen for secrecy. Families must have enforceable rights to truth, information and challenge, particularly when the Secretary of State retains wide powers over legacy bodies. That is especially important given the unresolved disagreements surrounding the Public Office (Accountability) Bill.