Chris Ward MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  The wording in that statement was put in there to provide wider context of the situation, but as I have said many times, and I will keep saying it, that wording is provided independently by the DNSA without any involvement from Ministers or political advisers.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  I can understand how seriously my hon. Friend and her constituents will take this. If she will permit me, I will get back to her with a substantive answer on that from the team as soon as I can.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  It was. There was no political interference from the Government in any of the statements made. [ Interruption. ] It does not matter how many times hon. Members allege it; it was not the case.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  As I have said many times, the Government wanted the prosecution to proceed and allowed every opportunity for evidence to be provided for it and for the CPS to gather that. The Prime Minister has already stated when he was informed that the trial was in that process. He also made it clear yesterday, in response to the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat), that it is not his position to interfere. The case was then dropped by the CPS independently.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  The deputy National Security Adviser was reflecting Government policy at the time. That was his choice of words, and it was his decision to include that. But if we look across the statements, we see there is broad consistency and no material difference on the policy relating to China, which has been pretty much shared across the House.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  No. It is not the position of the Government, or of successive Governments, to vet witness statements made in such cases. The hon. Gentleman will correct me if I am wrong, but I think that is what he is asking. Across the three witness statements, the deputy National Security Adviser sets out—15 or 20 times; I cannot remember the exact number—clearly and consistently the very serious threats that China poses. On the basis of that, the decision not to prosecute is taken by the CPS.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  I will refer back to what I have said already: it is not the place of Ministers, under this or previous Governments, to be vetting or interfering in evidence on that matter.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend invites me to play party politics, and I have promised several times that I am not going to do that. Factually, it is true that if the espionage Act had been updated more quickly and the current Act had been in place at the time, the case would have been able to proceed. That is the case. Decisions were taken not to do that, and I think that is greatly regrettable.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  Having now had the opportunity to read these statements, Members will have been able to confirm for themselves what the Prime Minister and other members of the Government—

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  As I say, this was a decision taken by the CPS independently, with no interference or involvement from the Government. Members may or may not sympathise with that decision. It was a CPS decision. That is why it is important that the evidence is in the public domain now and that everyone can judge from that how things proceeded. I will just make one final point. Obviously, the CPS decision was not based purely on the evidence put forward by the DNSA. It was based on much wider evidence collected over a much longer period, so the decision on whether to proceed was taken by the CPS on a much broader evidential basis.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Official Secrets Act Case: Witness Statements · Hansard source

  More

  As I say, parliamentary scrutiny and transparency is something that, despite the allegation, we are trying to provide with statements and by publishing evidence. I am sure, going forward, that that is something that will carry on. I will come back to my hon. Friend on the precise mechanism for how we will do that, but I am sure people will be made available to his Committee.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Ambassador to the United States · Hansard source

  More

  indicated dissent .

• 4 Sept 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T7. In the last few days, I have had a huge number of emails from constituents about continued sewage discharge into our otherwise beautiful seas and the shocking record of Southern Water on this issue. I noted earlier that the Secretary of State said he had been to Bournemouth a couple of times, but can he come a little further down the coast, visit my constituency, and set out what this Government are doing to clean up our waters and hold Southern Water to account?

• 15 Jul 2025 · SEND Provision: South-east England · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) for securing the debate. I agree with much of what he and so many others have said. The fact that we all have similar stories from our constituencies underlines the scale of the challenge. In my constituency, one in five children receives some form of SEND support, and one in 12 has an EHCP. That is far above both the Sussex and national averages. However, I suspect that is just the tip of the iceberg. At my surgery just last week, I met a couple whose son finally has an EHCP after years of fighting—but there is no place in the local authority to provide it. He will almost certainly remain out of school, joining countless others who, as we have heard, are being let down by a system that too often frustrates and limits, rather than supports and fulfils potential. I do think in this Parliament—and this may be the optimism of a newcomer—we have a real chance, perhaps a final one, to sort this mess out. I welcome the fact that the Government are not ducking the issue, and the cross-party approach that has been taken; the longer we can sustain that, the better. I also recognise the scale of the challenge ahead of us and the need to listen to those most directly affected. That is why, a few months ago, I held a SEND summit in Saltdean, in my constituency, bringing together local parents, councillors, advocates and experts to hear their experiences. In the time I have, I want to outline three of the main takeaways from that summit. First is the need to dramatically improve SEND training in schools—in particular, to introduce mandatory and expert SEND training for all new teachers as part of initial teacher training, and then as part of continuous teaching development. Of course, that must go alongside wider reforms to schools and the curriculum to ensure that more children stay in and flourish. Mandatory SEND training would support early identification, allowing proper plans to be put in place sooner. It would boost professional standards and end the postcode lottery in how neighbouring schools approach SEND so differently. There is a Bill before the House, which I have co-sponsored with my hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan), that would achieve this. Will the Minister support it? The second major recommendation was to enhance the parental voice. That is really important and too often ignored. SEND families include not only those receiving support, but those who know how the system works and how it fails. Our summit discussed the idea of regional champions—SEND advocates, perhaps across new devolved areas—who could bring this together on a larger scale. Can the Minister say more about how she will listen to parental voices as these reforms come forward and how she will work with the sector? Thirdly, underpinning all the other points, is the need for a cultural change on how Government, Parliament and local authorities approach SEND. We need to focus less on proving exceptionalism and the limitations of SEND children, and more on how we fulfil the potential of every child; end the adversarial culture and lack of accountability that pervades in too many cases, and instead work with parents to navigate it; and, crucially, shift SEND services away from emergency, when there is already proof of trauma, to early intervention. There is a lot to unpack in those points, but they are the three main solutions that we have, and I hope the Minister will respond to them.

• 9 Jul 2025 · LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Lady for giving way. I also thank the Minister, who I know is personally invested in and has been a champion on this issue. He has the respect of the House and, more importantly, of the veterans concerned. I am concerned about the pace of the scheme. One of my constituents, who is a veteran, wrote to me to say that he is 77 and has prostate cancer, two brain tumours, heart disease and other complications. We have taken this up with the MOD, yet he still has no certainty about when he might get payments and the justice that the hon. Lady talked about. Does she agree that it is now incumbent on the MOD to demonstrate that it is doing everything possible to get the payments out as quickly as possible and finally deliver justice?

• 26 Jun 2025 · Road Network: Condition · Hansard source

  More

  Peacehaven in my constituency is a growing town, but it remains a one-road-in, one-road-out town. The daily gridlock and frequent roadworks on the A259 is the single biggest frustration and barrier to opportunity for my constituents. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we can unlock that and provide a real boost to Peacehaven and neighbouring towns?

• 28 Apr 2025 · Freedom of Speech: Universities · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister will know that the University of Sussex, one of my local universities, has recently been fined over £500,000—a record amount—following a three-and-half-year investigation by the Office for Students into freedom of speech. I know that the OfS is independent, but does the Minister share my concern that it reached this conclusion without ever speaking to the university or its current staff and students? Does she recognise the very wide implications of this ruling, and will she meet me and the University to discuss this?

• 28 Apr 2025 · Freedom of Speech: Universities · Hansard source

  More

  12. What steps she is taking to protect freedom of speech at universities.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Hospitals · Hansard source

  More

  The Royal Sussex in my constituency is in desperate need of a new cancer centre, and I am delighted that the centre is being added to wave one. I would be even happier if the Minister also added a new accident and emergency department, but we will come back to that another day. Is the reality not that we all want to build these new hospitals, but we all have to be honest with the public about how we will pay for them? The Liberal Democrats never are, and the motion is not. Bringing forward construction dates is a multibillion-pound commitment, but all the motion talks about is creating a taskforce. Is that not fundamentally unserious? This is an incredibly serious issue, and we should put forward proper proposals.

• 22 Apr 2025 · Court Backlogs · Hansard source

  More

  I recently met, in my constituency, two people whose son and daughter-in-law had been brutally killed in June 2023. Nearly two years on, the case has yet to come to court. It has been delayed five times, and a date in October has now been set. On each occasion, the delays have caused huge anguish to the family. Will the Minister agree to meet me to discuss this matter, and can she tell me what steps the Government are taking to ensure that trials are conducted promptly so that justice can be received by such families?

• 22 Apr 2025 · “For Women Scotland” Supreme Court Ruling · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister is absolutely right that we need to conduct this debate with respect and compassion, because ultimately this is about people’s lives and their rights. That is why there is such concern in the trans community at the moment, including in my Brighton Kemptown constituency, which has the largest trans community in the country. Can she confirm two things for me? First, how will she ensure that trans people have faith that their existing legal protections will be upheld and not rowed back on? Secondly, how will the Government ensure that trans voices are heard as public bodies roll out their response to the ruling?

• 6 Mar 2025 · English Football: Financial Sustainability and Governance · Hansard source

  More

  I want to briefly tell the story of my local club, Brighton and Hove Albion, which is very much the story of the recent highs and lows of English football. In summary, I have been a Brighton fan for 30 years. The first 15 of those were pretty terrible, but the second 15 have been fantastic. In that time we have played in all four leagues. We were one game away from going out of the football league; now we have spent nearly a decade in the premier league, and we have enjoyed European nights against teams such as Marseille and Ajax. In the dark days we experienced the very worst of ownership: our ground was sold and we ended up playing in Gillingham or in a rented athletics stadium. Despite the gloom, we always had two things on our side. First, we had the strength of our fans who stuck together through thick and thin, raised money, went on marches and did everything we could to keep the club going. Secondly, we found a saviour in new ownership—a Brighton fan and a genius; everything you would want in an owner—in the shape of Tony Bloom. Because of those two things, we have gone through the lottery from the worst to the best of ownership. We heard in the opening speech about the test of the Football Governance Bill being the Reading test, but I want to impose a Brighton test. Could the Bill have stopped the first 15 years of my life, where we experienced the worst of ownership? A second test: will it encourage more owners to come forward who, in the shape of Tony Bloom, are rooted in the community, serve the community and deliver a fantastic football team? I hope very much that the Bill can do both.

• 6 Mar 2025 · English Football: Financial Sustainability and Governance · Hansard source

  More

  I never thought I would say this, but I have a lot of sympathy with Reading fans at the moment. When I was a kid growing up, my team, Brighton and Hove Albion, experienced a lot of what my hon. Friend’s team is experiencing now. When Reading was well run by the Madejski family, Brighton were at the bottom of the league in very much the opposite scenario, and Brighton are now enjoying the other side of the pendulum. We have probably the best type of ownership. It is a fantastic model that everyone should try to emulate. Does my hon. Friend not agree that the lottery of ownership—the pendulum that went from, when I was young, Brighton having to sell their ground and play in Gillingham, to Reading now experiencing the problems that they are experiencing—is what we need to change with the regulator?

• 6 Feb 2025 · UK-EU Relations · Hansard source

  More

  I warmly welcome the Minister’s statement. Isn’t it nice to finally have a Government who want to work with, rather than alienate, our European partners? In that spirit, does he agree that there is a chasm between the thin, last-minute deal that the previous Government negotiated—which the Leader of the Opposition now derides as a deal “without a plan”—and the red lines that he and his Government have set out? That is the landing zone that I hope the Government will get to as soon as possible.

• 6 Feb 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Last week I visited a local sixth-form college in Brighton, and one of the first questions I was asked was when the House will vote on introducing votes at 16. I did my best, telling the students that we had a manifesto commitment and that I hoped the vote would be later this year. Will the Leader of the House do one better and confirm when we will have a vote in this House?