Chris Ward MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 5 Mar 2026 · Personal Protective Equipment Contracts · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right: fit-to-form PPE is vital to protect all workers, and I agree that there is an opportunity for Government to do more here. We welcome the new standard and think it will contribute to good practice, and we will monitor how that proceeds. I understand that the BSI will present on this to the construction sector soon. My hon. Friend and I are due to meet shortly, and I look forward to discussing how we can take this forward.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend refers to the A127, and I could mention that the A259 in sunny Brighton has the same hold-ups, but we will not dwell on that. He is right that we need to do more to support SME growth and productivity, and to free up opportunity across the country. We have recently changed procurement rules to make sure that more money—and more power as well—is kept in local communities. We will publish further plans soon. I hope that Transport Ministers have heard his point about a new link road.

• 5 Mar 2026 · UK-EU Emission Trading Systems · Hansard source

  More

  As part of our new partnership with the EU, we are currently negotiating an agreement to link emission trading schemes. This will lower costs for businesses and consumers, and, alongside the food and drink deal mentioned previously, add £9 billion a year to our economy. My right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office speaks regularly with Commissioner Šefčovič on this, and we will keep the House updated on progress.

• 5 Mar 2026 · UK-EU Emission Trading Systems · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely; I could not agree more. At the heart of the negotiation on which my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office is leading is how we reduce bills, ease the route to decarbonisation and reduce our reliance on volatile fossil fuel markets, which, as we have seen in the last week, is not just a national security issue but a cost of living issue. That is why we are working so hard on it, and why such work is broadly welcomed by so many businesses.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Health and Social Care: IT Systems · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend raises a serious point, which builds on the last question, which the Minister of State, Cabinet Office, who is also the Security Minister, answered, and the question about digital ID. If it is okay with my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) , I will write to her about the steps that the Department is taking and how we are working across Government on this important matter.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Health and Social Care: IT Systems · Hansard source

  More

  The Government are determined to ensure that our £400 billion-a-year procurement budget supports British businesses. The Cabinet Office has published the digital, data and technology playbook, which provides guidance on how to source and contract digital data and technology projects. It includes guidance for all Departments, including the Department of Health and Social Care.

• 24 Feb 2026 · EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK · Hansard source

  More

  I am afraid I will not give way. That is the silent tragedy of the Brexit decade. It is a mistake we will not repeat. I have a quick confession: at the time of the referendum I was a youngish political adviser to the relatively new Member of Parliament for Holborn and St Pancras. I remember sitting in his garden the day after the referendum, discussing what on earth we would do next. Suffice to say, he was not best pleased with the result, but he understood its significance and, as the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) referred to earlier, the importance of respecting that result and finding a way through. After a short period of introspection, the now Prime Minister sketched out a vision of what he thought Britain should do. In time, this became known as “making Brexit work”. It meant being outside the EU, but being close to it. It meant leaving in an orderly way, while minimising the economic, cultural and diplomatic dislocation that we all knew would follow. It meant co operating where we can, protecting British businesses, supply chains and employment standards and, as he mentioned many times in the House during the subsequent debates, ensuring no hard border in Northern Ireland. Nearly a decade on, this Labour Government were elected with a mandate to do precisely that. Last year, the Prime Minister hosted the first UK EU summit, where we agreed the first stage: the common understanding and a new framework for UK EU relations.

• 24 Feb 2026 · EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins) for securing the debate, and other Members for the many contributions today from all sides of the House and all parts of the UK—if not quite representing both sides of the debate in proportion to the referendum result. I want to cover some of the questions raised regarding the Government’s approach, and reflect on the importance of the vote 10 years on. Whichever side we were on, the Brexit result was the most significant and defining political moment of a generation, not just in terms of our relationship with the EU but in reshaping our place in the world and challenging long-held assumptions about our economic and trading relationships, our security relationships and our diplomatic power and reach, as well as the very ties and bonds that hold together this great United Kingdom of ours—particularly in respect of Northern Ireland, where the referendum result has undoubtedly raised huge challenges, which were powerfully brought up earlier. Of course, the referendum result also defined the political choices of the last decade, leading not just to the rise and fall of many Prime Ministers but to gridlock in Parliament and, in my view, to an overlooked consequence: the big domestic reforms that the country was crying out for—on special educational needs and disabilities, social care, planning and tackling inequality—were ignored because Parliament and successive Governments proved themselves incapable of doing Brexit and, frankly, anything else. [ Interruption. ] That—

• 24 Feb 2026 · EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK · Hansard source

  More

  I am afraid I will not; I am so sorry. That first stage includes a new security and defence partnership because, as the Prime Minister said in Munich, there is no British security without Europe and no European security without Britain. As mentioned, it also includes an SPS agreement which will—my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner) made this point powerfully—make a huge difference to farmers and food producers. We are also in the process of negotiating access to the EU’s internal electricity market, which will cut bills for businesses and consumers. We are negotiating the youth experience scheme, which a number of Members mentioned and which I strongly support and called for. I am also delighted that we have negotiated—quite quickly, I think—to rejoin the Erasmus+ scheme, which will benefit more than 100,000 young people. We will legislate for that shortly. We aim for the agreements to be in play by the first half of 2027. The progress we have made in the last 18 months is the basis of the closer relationship that the Prime Minister had in his mind’s eye when we discussed this back in his garden some 10 years ago. To be clear—I say this proudly and confidently—this is just the start of a new relationship with the EU under this Government. We are no longer, as the Prime Minister said in Munich, the Britain of the Brexit years. We want a closer relationship with the EU and we want deeper integration. We were elected with a mandate to do precisely that and we will deliver it. In line with our manifesto, that will be outside the single market and the customs union and without freedom of movement. We will not try to relitigate the referendum result, but we will repair the unnecessary national self harm of the deals negotiated in the last decade, and we will align with the single market where it is in our national interest and our sovereign right to do so. We will deliver a partnership with the EU, based on common economic and cultural interests and in the national interest, and turn the page on the last decade of failure.

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

  More

  Thankfully, I am no longer an adviser. I am a Cabinet Office Minister, and it would not be appropriate for a Cabinet Office Minister to talk about the Cabinet Secretary. Let me reassure the House that the Cabinet Office is working hard and diligently on this. That process is ongoing. Any speculation around the Cabinet Secretary does not affect the process. The right hon. Gentleman mentioned Palantir, and I committed to write to him. I have spoken to officials about that, and I promise we will get that to him. There was an urgent question on this matter, which I think the Ministry of Defence responded to, and which provided an update, but I promise I will come back to him on that. Finally, the right hon. Gentleman touched on Lord Doyle. That is outside the scope of this Humble Address and outside the scope of the papers, so the urgent question does not touch on that.

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

  More

  My hon. Friend makes the point incredibly powerfully. It is one that we have lost somewhat in the discussion about technicalities around the process, but it is the central point that we should be trying to address. As I say, the Prime Minister has committed to driving through change and ensuring that this Government reflect that. We are bringing forward the groundbreaking, long-overdue violence against women and girls strategy, but there needs to be much broader cultural change as well.

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

  More

  As I say, the Government are looking at legislation that addresses the broader question of how to remove people from the Lords; it will be broad legislation, rather than just for specific cases. The sooner it comes to the House and we can consider it, the better. The hon. Gentleman raises an interesting point in his second question—I am afraid I really do not know the answer. I imagine it is a question that a lot of people are considering; I will come back to him on it.

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

  More

  I really wouldn’t believe everything you read in the press. Let me be very clear from the Dispatch Box: the Government are complying fully and transparently, and are working very hard to so do. Any reports to the contrary are just not right.

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

  More

  As I say, scoping is under way. I cannot give a precise number at the moment, because there may be a large amount of information covering a long period of time. I am afraid that I cannot give a date, but the Cabinet Office is working closely with the ISC to deliver the information as quickly as possible, and to do so in the right order of priorities.

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

  More

  To conclude my answer, the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister set out the specifics on Monday. We will come forward with further details, and we will tighten transparency regulations as well.

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

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to say that victims should remain at the heart of this. In answer to his question on the legislation to strip Lord Mandelson of his peerage and on broader reform of the House of Lords process for removal, that will come forward as soon as possible. It will be in Government time, as I committed to last week, and we will bring that forward after the recess. It is obviously a Cabinet Office matter, so the Cabinet Office is accountable, but obviously the Prime Minister is accountable for this as well. As I say, we will comply fully with the motion, and we will publish material as soon as we can.

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

  More

  I think the hon. Member is referring to severance pay. I think the Foreign Office is providing an update on that. I am afraid it is not a question that I can provide an answer to.

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

  More

  The Prime Minister gave his answer on that yesterday, and No. 10 has provided further information on it, but that question does not relate to the Humble Address.

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

  More

  Yes, absolutely; that should be the guiding principle as we go through. The test at the end should be not only whether we have complied with the motion, which obviously we will, but whether it has helped to restore transparency and trust for the public.

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

  More

  The Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister set this out on Monday. We are looking at the enhanced security vetting that comes in when there is a direct appointment. The Prime Minister and his Chief Secretary have set out the plans to reform that, and—I may be corrected if I am wrong—if they have not already come in, they will be coming in very quickly. The reform will come in as soon as possible, so we can tighten this up.

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

  More

  I was not involved in that matter at all, so the answer simply is no.

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

  More

  Yes, I agree. As I have said, we expect to be able to start publishing this material as soon as possible after the recess. We will do that as quickly as we can. The hon. Lady’s broader point about public confidence is essential. It is why I tried to emphasise in the debate last week—as heated as it occasionally got—that we want to comply, and to get to the bottom of this. There is no one on the Government Benches who does not want to get to the bottom of the lies that Mandelson told and the problems that led to. It is about broader public confidence and trust. We need to demonstrate that this House is not reflected by the acts of Mandelson et al., and that this House is instead about doing public good and public service. The publication of the material is an important part of getting to that.

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

  More

  I completely endorse the point that the right hon. and learned Gentleman makes about the independence and integrity of the ISC. He identifies two very fair points. I say that not as a reason not to comply; it is just the reality of the complexity of what we are dealing with. The volume is larger than in other Humble Addresses—that is not a complaint, but a statement of fact. However, there is no attempt to narrow the scope and no attempt to narrow the motion. The process that the Cabinet Office is going through is to define the scope and harness what falls within it. The right hon. and learned Gentleman’s point about the Metropolitan police is well made. The Met and the Government both recognise that, ultimately, Parliament retains the right to publish material, but obviously a responsible Government will wish to act in a way that does not prejudice an ongoing live case, which we would all like to see reach a conclusion. We are working through these matters; they are complicated, but he raises them in exactly the right fashion. Royal Assent

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

  More

  The Prime Minister has made it very clear that there needs to be a managed process that the Cabinet and Ministers agree with. Such information will be published in the right fashion, and it is important that there is a proper process. We need to agree across the Cabinet and Ministers how that will happen, and that is what is going to happen.

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

  More

  Last week, the House made a Humble Address to His Majesty for the Government to disclose material surrounding the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States of America. On Monday, my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister updated the House on further action that the Government are taking. My right hon. Friend confirmed that the Government will bring forward legislation to ensure that peerages can be removed from disgraced peers, and that Peter Mandelson will be removed from the list of Privy Counsellors. He also explained how we have changed the process for relevant direct ministerial appointments, including politically appointed diplomatic roles. He also set out other areas where we recognise the need to go further, including tightening transparency and lobbying. In that statement, my right hon. Friend also set out how the Government are responding to the Humble Address motion, and I am pleased to provide a further update to the House today. The Government will comply fully and publish documents as soon as possible. As I said in the House last week, we welcome both the principle and content of that motion, and we will deliver on it as soon as we can. As such, Departments have been instructed to retain any material that may be relevant, and work is under way to identify documents that fall within the scope of the motion. We will do so as soon as possible when the House returns from recess. In line with the motion passed by this House, where the Government consider that documents may be prejudicial to UK national security or international relations, the Cabinet Office will refer that material to the independent Intelligence and Security Committee. The Prime Minister has written to the ISC, and senior officials have met the Committee to discuss what it requires in order to fulfil that role. As I said in the House last week, full resources will be made available to ensure that process happens, and we will work with the Committee to explain the Cabinet Office’s process for providing material relating to national security or international relations. The Government are very grateful to the ISC for its work, and we commit to full engagement with it to ensure timely and effective release. The House will also be aware of the statement from the Metropolitan police regarding the ongoing police investigation. That statement made clear that the “process to decide which documents should ultimately be published remains a matter for…parliament.” That is absolutely right, and we agree, but as the House would expect, the Government rightly do not wish to release anything that may undermine an ongoing police investigation. As such, we are working with the police as they conduct their inquiries to manage this process. I think that is the right way forward, Mr Speaker, and I hope you and the House agree. In conclusion, the Government continue to take this matter incredibly seriously, and given the nature of the issues at stake and the scope of material in play, we will comply fully and deliver this material as quickly and transparently as possible. The Government will keep the House updated as they do so, and my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister will publish a written ministerial statement later today.