Ben Goldsborough MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 16 Apr 2026 · Video Games Industry · Hansard source

  More

  10. What steps she is taking to support the video games industry.

• 16 Apr 2026 · Video Games Industry · Hansard source

  More

  Norfolk is home to a thriving games development community, with Norfolk games developers supporting over 500 members through mentoring, skills and business growth, contributing to a survival rate of small and medium-sized enterprises that is way above the UK average. What steps is the Department taking to ensure that areas such as Norfolk can access and shape the video games growth package? Will the Minister meet with me to discuss this matter further?

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

  More

  I thank Philip Rycroft for his review and for meeting me to discuss his report. I also thank the Government for the quick action that they are taking. On cryptocurrencies, what further action will the Government be taking to ensure that the influence does not move from politics into lobbying or, even worse, into think-tank organisations?

• 19 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The constituents, businesses and residents of Wymondham are sick to the back teeth of not having a mobile phone signal for nearly a month now. The companies have fobbed us off with excuses and have given no information about this happening. Will the Leader of the House help me to secure a meeting with the relevant Minister so that I can raise my serious concerns about mobile phone companies not looking after their customers?

• 19 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T8. One in five people face a vitamin D deficiency, with serious health impacts, but in South Norfolk we are part of the solution. The John Innes Centre is boosting vitamin D in tomatoes using gene-editing technology, and the Quadrum Institute is studying the impact. Will the Minister visit Norwich research park to support the changing agritech that is supporting people to live healthier lives?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Heating Oil Support · Hansard source

  More

  With one in four households in South Norfolk relying on heating oil, the announcement today will make a huge difference to my constituents and I thank the Government for their extremely swift action. As local discretion is to be exercised by local authorities, will the Minister make it clear to local authorities up and down England that they need to ensure this addresses as many people as humanly possible, to give them the support when they need it most?

• 9 Mar 2026 · Immigration Policy · Hansard source

  More

  South Norfolk expects our immigration system to be fair, open and transparent. The one problem we have come across, unfortunately, is that there is a lot of confusion online, as has been expertly shown by the shadow Home Secretary today. Can the Minister clarify that the process we are looking at will save the taxpayer £20 million, instead of spending money to keep open asylum hotels?

• 9 Mar 2026 · Middle East: Economic Update · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Chancellor and Treasury officials for working closely with the Labour rural research group to discuss the heating oil troubles that we are facing right now, with prices going up by over 200% in some parts. Can she elaborate on what action will be taken with the Competition and Markets Authority to ensure that we are protecting our consumers from these price gouging effects?

• 5 Mar 2026 · Energy Markets · Hansard source

  More

  To follow on from that exact question, I, too, represent a very rural constituency, and there will be constituencies up and down the United Kingdom, particularly in Northern Ireland, that are heavily reliant on heating oil as our source of energy. Will the Secretary of State say what action will be taken in the medium and short term to take account of the price shocks? I have already had the chair of the parish council in Thurlton get in touch, along with many other constituents who are very worried about this price shock.

• 2 Mar 2026 · Representation of the People Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I strongly welcome this legislation. The proposals for votes at 16, streamlined voter registration and tightened political funding regulations are very welcome, and I applaud the Government for grabbing the bull by the horns. Others will want to address various aspects of the Bill, but for me the most pressing issue relates to political funding. Hon. Members may be aware that, on behalf of the Petitions Committee, I recently led a Westminster Hall debate on foreign political interference in UK politics. In preparing for that debate, I met various experts on political interference. What they told me has stayed with me and impressed upon me the immense scale and severity of the threat that we are facing, and I want to reflect on that aspect of the Bill. We know that Russian money has already been used to influence and manipulate British politics. We know for a fact that Reform’s former leader in Wales took at least £40,000 in Russian bribes, a crime for which he is now serving a 10-and-a-half-year sentence—I hope he feels that his treachery was worth it. He is not the only Reform politician who has been singing from the Kremlin hymn sheet, but we can only work on the assumption that the others do so as a political choice, rather than as a result of financial inducement. So we know that Russian money has already infiltrated our politics; what can we do now to prevent future betrayals like that of Mr Gill, and to defend our democracy? The Bill makes great strides in the right direction—restricting political donations from foreign companies is a hugely positive step, for example—but when malign actors want to subvert our democracy covertly, they will continue to do so, or will attempt to do so, and we must therefore be forceful in defending ourselves against all covert illegal donations. One way for malign actors to dodge our defences is to donate to political parties using cryptocurrencies. The experts I have spoken with tell me that cryptocurrencies pose a new threat to our democracy, an opportunity for hostile states to bypass the laws that protect us and our political system from meddling. Only one of the parties represented in this place today accepts crypto donations. No prizes for guessing which one: yes, it is the same party once represented by Nathan Gill; the same party whose leader thinks that the west provoked Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and regards Putin as the world leader he most admires. However, it is not just political parties that influence and shape our politics; so do think-tanks, and experts also suspect that Russian money is being used to fund think-tank activity in the United Kingdom. The Government are taking a huge step in the right direction, and I will be proud to walk through the Aye Lobby tonight in support of the Bill. The threat facing us from hostile states is extremely serious, and it is critical that the Government act with strength to ensure that that influence is no longer there.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman; I think he has read a bit of my speech. Technological change is introducing new risks. The conversion of blank-firing weapons and imitation firearms, and emerging technologies such as 3D printing, are changing the landscape of firearms crime. Such developments do not respect the boundaries of legislation written decades ago. We face a dual responsibility: we must protect public safety, and we must do so in a way that is fair, proportionate and grounded in evidence. The petition before us, signed by more than 121,000 people, reflects genuine concern. Many petitioners fear that merging section 1 and section 2 licensing would increase bureaucracy, create delays and impose additional costs without delivering meaningful safety benefits. Those concerns are not just abstract; they reflect real frustrations with an already stretched licensing system. Many applicants experience long waits and many police forces face a capacity challenge. Will the Minister ensure that any proposed changes are accompanied by robust economic modelling, including of the potential impact on rural businesses, on employment and on participation?

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  Later in my speech, I will address some of the reforms that I think are needed. There are pressures on 3D-printed firearms, amendments and adaptions; those sorts of issues are more pressing matters that we need to address, but I will come to them later. In existing law, the distinction between sections 1 and 2 is clear. Under section 2, an individual may obtain a shotgun certificate and, once it is granted, may own multiple shotguns without specifying each individual firearm in advance. Under section 1, the process is more restrictive: applicants must demonstrate a good reason for owning each firearm; each weapon must be individually authorised; and use is generally restricted to specific land and subject to police oversight. That distinction reflects differences in use, tradition and lethality. Fortunately, gun violence in the United Kingdom remains rare by international standards. In the year ending September 2025, 4,851 firearms offences were recorded in England and Wales, a 9% decrease on the previous year. That is welcome progress, but behind the numbers are still lives lost, families grieving and communities changed forever.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  That was excellently put by my hon. Friend. All of us who had the pleasure of spending time with Christopher send our heartfelt condolences to his family, because he was, as my hon. Friend rightly says, a gent. We also need to ensure that we respond to the risk, protect the vulnerable and ensure that our laws reflect the reality of the world that we live in today, not the world as it was 60 years ago. Let me begin by setting out clearly where we are. In the United Kingdom, there are about half a million gun owners—they are roughly 1% of the population—and about 90% use their firearms for leisure, for sport or for legitimate countryside management. The overwhelming majority of owners are responsible. The National Crime Agency has said that firearms certificate holders are highly unlikely to be involved in serious and organised crime. That important fact deserves to be stated clearly in this House. The shooting sector is also economically significant. It contributes £3.3 billion a year in gross value added to the UK economy, generates £9.3 billion in wider economic activity and supports an estimated 67,000 full-time equivalent jobs. Those jobs are not abstract; they are jobs in rural pubs, hotels, small family-run retailers, manufacturing, tourism, land management and pest control. They are jobs that sustain rural communities and working people across our country. In my constituency of South Norfolk and those of many across the House, the leisure sector is not a lifestyle choice, but the backbone of the local economy. We must always be mindful that decisions taken in Westminster have real-world consequences in such communities. At the same time, our legislative framework is undeniably outdated. Much of it dates back to the 1960s and, while amendments made since then, in particular after tragedies such as Dunblane, have strengthened safety, the overall framework has evolved in a piecemeal way. Such reforms, including the ban on handguns, were necessary and proportionate responses to unimaginable horror. They reflected the will of the public and the duty of Parliament to act in the interests of safety. I do not believe that anyone serious about public safety would suggest reversing those protections, but it is equally true that legislation cannot stand still, because the world does not.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  I am going to make some progress. We can ensure that legislation keeps pace with technological change, closing loopholes before they can be exploited, and we can ensure that our approach is coherent, joined up and fit for the 21st century. Ultimately, this is not about choosing between safety and the rural economy; it is about recognising that both matter and deserve our attention, and that good legislation must deliver both. In my constituency and constituencies across the country, people expect us to get this right. They expect us to listen carefully, act responsibly and put safety first while respecting lawful activity and rural livelihoods. This debate is not about ideology; it is about responsibility to victims, rural communities and the many thousands of people who participate in shooting safely and lawfully. Let us approach the issue in that spirit, seeking not easy answers but the right ones, not driven by fear but guided by evidence, and not choosing between safety and prosperity but delivering both. When we get legislation right, listen, and act thoughtfully and carefully, we strengthen not only public safety but public trust. That is our most important duty of all.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Member for his intervention. I will be addressing those issues in my speech. We need to be clear on what today’s debate is about. We are discussing a specific policy point: a proposal to merge sections 1 and 2 of the Firearms Act 1968—in other words, to align licensing controls on shotguns with those that already apply to rifles. In introducing this debate, I will do my utmost to explore how we can protect the shooting industry and rural economy, tidy up and update the legislative framework, and ensure the safety of all our constituents. At its heart, the debate is about balance. It is about recognising the legitimacy of lawful shooting and the economic and cultural contribution that it makes.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  I am going to make some progress. We must never fall into the trap of believing that good intentions alone are sufficient. Policy must be judged on outcomes. We must also recognise the distinct nature of different firearms. Shotguns and rifles serve different purposes, they have different characteristics and they are used in different contexts. Farmers and pest controllers rely on shotguns as tools of their trade. Any reform must recognise that reality and ensure that legitimate working use is protected. At the same time, we can take clear and practical steps to strengthen safety without imposing unnecessary burdens. We can ensure that licensing decisions are informed by the fullest possible information, including appropriate engagement with medical professionals. We can strengthen safeguards in cases involving domestic abuse. We can modernise licensing systems, embracing digital technology to reduce delays, improve consistency and free up police time.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew) always needs to have the final word. It is really helpful that we have put forward pragmatic solutions to an issue that we all care about deeply: the safety of our constituents and the United Kingdom. They are not just throwaway suggestions; they are grounded in facts and evidence, to protect both the rural economy and the lives of our rural constituents. I look forward to working closely with the Minister in the months ahead, when the review comes forward—in due course—to make sure that the policy lands in the best place possible. Question put and agreed to. Resolved , That this House has considered e-petition 750236 relating to section 1 and 2 firearms licensing.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  I will continue a little. In the year ending March 2025, 32 people were killed by shooting. When we look more closely at the figures, we see deeply troubling patterns. More than 60% of women killed with guns were shot using a licensed firearm. That statistic should give pause to everyone in the Chamber. It reminds us that the greatest risks often arise not from organised crime, but from breakdowns in systems that are supposed to protect people. Domestic abuse featured prominently in many of the conversations I had ahead of this debate. Firearms in the home can be used not only as weapons, but as tools of coercion and control. Their presence can deepen fear, make escape feel impossible and turn moments of crisis into irreversible tragedy. We must also recognise the wider context. Mental health challenges are particularly acute in rural communities, and isolation, financial pressure and barriers to accessing services all play a role. Access to a lethal means during moments of acute distress can turn temporary despair into permanent loss.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for that intervention.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petition 750236 relating to section 1 and 2 firearms licensing. It is, as always, a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I refer hon. Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. In preparing for today’s debate, I spoke with experts on both sides of this issue. I thank everyone who took the time to speak with me, including the petition creator, Lisa, the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, the Association of Professional Shooting Instructors, the Gun Control Network and a professor of criminology. I also thank everyone who took the time to meet me, and I thank the excellent staff of the Petitions Committee for their support. Colleagues will be unsurprised to hear that strong views were expressed on both sides of the issue, but what impressed me most was the broad agreement that I found on the need for legislative reform and the need to ensure safety. I know that some hon. Members here today represent constituencies that have been touched by gun violence tragedies in recent years. I trust that everyone here will agree that we must be in full listening mode when hearing from those colleagues. We all want the best for our constituents; we all want to ensure that they are kept safe, and it is crucial that even when Members disagree, today’s debate is kept respectful.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Firearms Licensing · Hansard source

  More

  This has been a brilliant debate, which is what our constituents cry out for. It has been measured in tone, with solutions and not just mud-slinging. A fair amount of social media clips will have been thrown in here and there, but that is just the nature of the beast.

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

  More

  My hon. Friend hits the nail on the head. One of the experts I spoke to worked on that campaign, to make sure that loopholes were being closed to protect Moldovan democracy. We are no different from anybody else; he is completely right. Disinformation relies on and deepens political polarisation in our country, creating uncertainty, distrust of truth and a rush to political extremes. “The Integrity Initiative Guide to Countering Russian Disinformation” says: “When people start to say, ‘You don’t know what to believe’ or ‘They’re all as bad as each other’, the disinformers are winning.” Information warfare with the Russian state is not new. So much of what we are discussing today could be straight out of the cold war, but thanks to social media it is now easier than ever for Russia to disseminate disinformation. As one expert put it to me, the UK currently has an analogue response in a digital age. To put it another way, the Russian state has brought an ICBM to a knife fight. The experts also pointed out that media literacy in our country is poor. We are not equipped to spot disinformation, so people fall prey to lies. This affects everyone: no one is immune to disinformation, and people who think they are immune are most at risk. Thirdly, our own authorities are unarmed. The Electoral Commission is toothless and not fit for purpose. It is unable to tackle this existential threat and has been stripped of all the powers needed to tackle political interference. The Home Office, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and intelligence agencies are siloed. Our civil servants change jobs too frequently and do not have the experience or expertise necessary to deal with the threat. What can we do to protect our democracy? First, we need to get real. We might not feel as if we are on the frontline, but we are. Russia knows it, and we need to recognise it now. Secondly, we need a single agency responsible for identifying, tracking and defending against disinformation. The Swedish have their Psychological Defence Agency, which co-ordinates defence and provides agencies, local government, companies and organisations with support and education in countering disinformation. The French have VIGINUM, which detects information from hostile foreign actors and works to identify bot farms. Thirdly, we need substantial investment in critical thinking education and a focus on training future generations to critically analyse sources. The threat will be with us for many years to come, and we must ensure that future generations have the tools they need. Much of the framework is already in place in the current curriculum, but we need to go further. Scrutiny of the provenance and validity of sources should be an absolute priority in the curriculum. Maths already does it, so will the Minister’s Department work with colleagues in the Department for Education to improve media literacy? I cannot impress strongly enough on hon. Members how urgent the situation is. We must act swiftly and decisively to secure our nation from Russian interference.

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

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petition 744215 relating to Russian influence on UK politics and democracy. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Pritchard. In preparation for leading this debate, I met experts and researchers; I also spoke to Alex, the organiser of today’s petition. I thank everyone who took the time to speak with me, I thank the diligent staff of the Petitions Committee for their support in organising those meetings, and I thank the 114,704 signatories to the petition, who have brought this critical issue to the attention of the House. I know that the Government have already commissioned an urgent review of foreign financial interference in UK politics, led by Philip Rycroft. That is extremely welcome, and I applaud the Government for doing it, but I want to make a clear distinction. Financial interference is just one way in which the Kremlin meddles in our democracy; there are other ways as well. The petition calls for a public inquiry into all Russian interference in our politics. Such an inquiry should be broad, covering all aspects of Russian interference. I know that my hon. Friend the Minister will want to address that in his response. From my discussion with Alex, I also know that the petition was inspired by events including the conviction of Reform’s former leader in Wales, Nathan Gill, and concerns about Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum and Boris Johnson’s close personal relationship with Evgeny Lebedev, a man whom Boris Johnson elevated to the other place and the son of a “former” KGB officer. I strongly believe in looking for solutions and looking forward, not back, but it is clear to me that the petitioners are deeply concerned about past events. With that in mind, I will start by talking about some of those events and outline how we have reached this point, to explain why the petitioners are so deeply concerned. We then need to talk about the state of play today. Where are our weaknesses? Where are our vulnerabilities to Russian interference? How is the Russian state already meddling in our democracy? Finally, we need to talk about solutions. What can the Government do to mend and protect trust in British politics? I will start with Nathan Gill. The fact that the petition received so many signatures in Welsh constituencies should tell us that the crimes of Reform’s former leader in Wales were a major cause for concern for all petitioners. Nathan Gill is currently serving a 10-and-a-half-year sentence for taking, at the very least, £40,000 in Russian bribes. Now, £40,000 is a huge amount of money, but I ask hon. Members: is it enough to betray your country? I suggest not. Perhaps Mr Gill’s political leanings were already closer to the Kremlin’s than those of the rest of us. For the sum of £40,000, Nathan Gill gave TV interviews in favour of an ally of Vladimir Putin and made speeches in the European Parliament. Spouting pro-Russian talking points is not new for Reform politicians: Nathan Gill’s boss, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), blamed the EU and NATO for Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, said that the west had “provoked” the invasion and described Putin as the world leader he most admired. It seems that Reform politicians are comfortable doing the Kremlin’s dirty work for it, regardless of whether they get paid for the privilege. Maybe Russia should have asked Mr Gill to betray his country for free. It may as well have saved £40,000. The problem spreads further and higher than Reform, however. The former Prime Minister Boris Johnson has serious questions to answer about his relationship with Lord Lebedev, whose father was a KGB officer. There is, as they say, no such thing as a former KGB officer. In April 2018, when Boris Johnson was Foreign Secretary, he visited Alexander Lebedev’s Italian villa, a location allegedly being investigated for use in spying. He did so without his officials and travelled to Lebedev’s villa directly from a NATO summit. We were told by the former Prime Minister that “no Government business was discussed.” We have only his word for that. I will let hon. Members make up their own mind about how much trust should be placed in the former Prime Minister’s words. In 2021, Italy’s foreign intelligence agency wrote to the Italian Prime Minister to report that Lord Lebedev’s father “enjoyed the favour and friendship of Vladimir Putin” and continued to attend KGB meetings in Moscow. The House of Lords Appointments Commission raised concerns about “significant potential risks” from Lord Lebedev’s “familial links”, but thanks to the former Conservative Prime Minister, this man now sits in the other place, with all the access and credibility that that place imparts, not to mention the ability to make decisions about the direction of our country. Where do we stand now? I found my conversations with various experts extremely helpful in answering that question, and the points that I am about to make owe a huge amount to them. First, our defences against money as a vector for political persuasion and control are insufficient. The case of Nathan Gill proves that. Although we should be pleased and relieved that Mr Gill was caught and punished, the damage was already done. Appropriate systems must be put in place to prevent any recurrence of his treachery. Some experts mentioned concerns that Russian money is used to fund think-tank reports in Britain. I ask the Minister whether the Government will consider mandating that all UK-based think-tanks declare their funding. Critically, cryptocurrencies pose a new threat to our democracy. If we do not have the tools to tackle and prevent old-fashioned cash-in-hand corruption, what can we do to tackle bribery and corruption founded on cryptocurrencies? I ask the Minister whether the Home Office is taking steps to develop digital tools to tackle cryptocurrency bribery and corruption. I appreciate that the Rycroft review will assess financial interference specifically, but I would be grateful if the Minister told the House what efforts the Home Office is already making to clamp down on the malign influence of Russian money in our democracy. Secondly, we must discuss an issue outside the remit of the ongoing Rycroft review. The experts I spoke to were explicit: Britain is on the frontline of an information war. Thanks to the security, crime, and intelligence innovation institute at the University of Cardiff, we know that Russia employs at least 500 political technologists. These are people who plan Russia’s informational, political, economic, cultural and legal subversion of its enemies. One such political technologist was in London on the day of the 2016 Brexit referendum. On the day we made one of our biggest ever decisions as a nation, this Russian political technologist was in our capital city, taking photos of polling stations and sharing them on social media with his followers in Russia. This man has personally met senior UK political figures, and he wrote a report that personally thanked someone who worked on Conservative campaign headquarters election campaigns and alongside two former Prime Ministers. This man is now using the skills he acquired in Britain to deliver a master’s degree in Moscow, designed to train specialists in information warfare. Russia clearly sees that this is a war, even if we do not. Its strategy is one of division, to create distrust and to convince Brits that we are all the same.

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

  More

  The upside of this debate is that everyone present knows of the threats that we are facing from the Russian state, as do the over 100,000 people who signed the petition, but, as the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. and gallant Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp), said, not enough people in the United Kingdom know. It is incumbent on every single one of us in this room, be they visitors in the Public Gallery, Members of Parliament or people who signed the petition, to spread the news that we have to be aware, because democracy is so precious. It is not the normal state of things. We are currently living through something that we need to defend. As an individual MP, I appreciated the Minister’s collaborative and thoughtful reply, as I am sure the petitioner Alex did, but we need to work cross-party on this. This is not one political party’s aim, goal or win; this is about keeping the United Kingdom safe and defending the values that make it the great country that we all love. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered e-petition 744215 relating to Russian influence on UK politics and democracy.

• 5 Feb 2026 · National Cancer Plan · Hansard source

  More

  Three hundred and eighty-eight days ago, the words were uttered to me, “You have stage 2C skin cancer.” I have had 388 days of scans, operations and treatments that did not need to happen, because preventive care could have stopped me getting skin cancer. That is why today’s statement is so important. Action 30 in the plan focuses on melanomas and skin cancers, and it means a huge amount to me personally that the Government have taken this issue so seriously. My ask of the Government is that when we undertake the reviews into UV and preventive skincare, we should look at the examples of Australia and other countries that take this seriously, so that we can ensure that our young people and adults know how to stay safe in the sun.