Iqbal Mohamed MP: speeches

446 published records · newest first.

Speeches

30 Jun 2026 · Culture, Media And Sport · Hansard source
More
I commend the investment that the Minister has already announced. In Dewsbury, our leisure centre and swimming pool were closed in September 2023, and have stood there, with no repairs or survey. Will she meet me to discuss what the Government can do to help reopen them? Maybe they could have some of the £400 million. The youth in my community are asking, “What can we do during the summer holidays?”
30 Jun 2026 · Antisemitism: University Campuses · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. The right to freedom of religion is a fundamental human right and must be protected. I congratulate my neighbour and West Yorkshire colleague, the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards), on securing the debate. I speak to join him and others in trying to help tackle antisemitism in UK universities, but also antisemitism anywhere and everywhere in our wonderful country. I begin by placing on the record my clear and unequivocal belief that antisemitism, like all other forms of religious discrimination, is a scourge that has no place in our society, and that we should do all we can to stamp it out. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to hate or to incite hatred or violence against others, including against Jewish people. It deeply saddens me when I read news stories about how Jewish students have been feeling increasingly unsafe on university campuses in recent years, or reports about things such as the Union of Jewish Students poll that found that one in five students would be reluctant to, or would never, house-share with a Jewish student. I am not Jewish and I am not going to try to deflect attention away from the subject of this debate, but I share some of the experiences of Jewish students. They may not, thankfully, be as extreme or intense, but I understand some of what those students are or may be going through and I have complete sympathy. I could cite similarly harrowing statistics, but other Members have already mentioned those, so I will skip them because of the lack of time. This reality is unacceptable, plain and simple—no ifs, buts or maybes. No Jewish student should be made to feel intimidated or of less worth because of their beliefs. We must demand a far more proactive and co-ordinated response from Government, higher education institutions and civil society organisations. Universities must not only have robust policies in place, but actively enforce them. Reporting mechanisms need to be accessible and trusted. Support services must be properly resourced. And there must be a clear message from leadership at every level that antisemitism has no place in our educational institutions or our society. At the same time, it would be remiss of me not to say that it also deeply troubles me when I look across the pond to the United States and hear accusations of antisemitism—including at protests on campuses—thrown around without sufficient care in response to criticisms of the Israeli state’s actions in the middle east. Just last week, the independent UN inquiry found that Israel continues to commit genocide by deliberately targeting Palestinian children in Gaza. However, Israel is a state. It is a Government. It has its army. It does not represent or reflect the views or actions of Jews around the world. However, on campuses and across our country, many students are engaging in protests because of their principled opposition to these gross injustices. Those protests cannot and must not include acts or words of antisemitism. It is therefore vital that we do not conflate legitimate and courageous defiance of this Government’s apathy in the face of inhumanity with the specific and pernicious form of racism that antisemitism constitutes. Safeguarding free speech and the freedom to protest is not in tension with protecting Jewish students from discrimination. Rather, the two must go hand in hand. If we dilute the definition of antisemitism to incorporate righteous criticism of Israel, we risk eroding trust among students and communities. It is also important to acknowledge that discrimination rarely exists in isolation. Alongside antisemitism, we are witnessing worrying and cascading levels of Islamophobia, with hostility and suspicion towards entire Muslim communities intensifying and spreading in response to individual incidents and subsequent inflammatory comments by politicians and public figures. What is needed is a consistent, principled approach that protects students from harassment and hate, while also upholding their rights to political expression and peaceful protest, and that brings communities together, rather than pitting them against one another. Ultimately, this is about the kind of society we want to be—one where Jewish students are safe and supported, where Muslim students are free from prejudice and suspicion, and where all students can engage critically with the world around them without fear of being mischaracterised or silenced. We must be able to hold two truths at once: that antisemitism on campuses is real and must be confronted decisively, and that legitimate political dissent from students and academics, peaceful, principled and rooted in justice, must be protected. If we can strike that balance, we will not only make our universities safer, but we will make them stronger. I conclude by extending my support to the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley and Members across the House in working together to tackle and address antisemitism in UK universities and wider society.
30 Jun 2026 · Antisemitism: University Campuses · Hansard source
More
I commend the hon. Member for his unity and solidarity with Jewish students and Jewish people. Does he agree that conflating Israel with all Jewish people is also something that should be avoided, as it can lead to an increase in antisemitism?
30 Jun 2026 · Antisemitism: University Campuses · Hansard source
More
Does the Minister agree that people who are trying to divide us will sometimes pit one community against another, and where one community is being rightly and legitimately supported, they will try to weaponise that in another community and create friction? Does he also agree that the steps taken by the Government can be replicated across communities, and that communities and leaders in each of the discriminated-against communities should work together so that the support cannot be weaponised?
30 Jun 2026 · Department of Health and Social Care · Hansard source
More
An estimated 229,000 excess deaths by 2036—that is the eye-watering figure that BMJ analysis identifies as the upshot of diverting NHS funding to pay more for pharmaceuticals in response to Trump’s threats. Estimates day debates exist to scrutinise how public money will be spent before that spending has happened, not least when the decisions could have such damaging consequences for the health of our nation. This estimates day debate does not include the full budgetary consequences of the UK-US pharmaceutical deal agreed on 1 December. When we look at the cost, the Government’s figures simply do not stack up. Instead, we see a structural weakening of NHS safeguards on drug pricing, higher thresholds, weaker rebate mechanisms and a commitment to dramatically increase spending, which will prove devastating for patient health. Ministers claim that the arrangement will cost about £1 billion over the current spending review period, but independent analysis tells a different story. Using the projections of the Office for Budget Responsibility, the House of Commons Library suggests that increasing spending on medicines in line with the Government’s commitments would require about £1.7 billion extra by 2028, and potentially as much as £14 billion a year by 2036. The Government have been clear on one point, and one point only: they say that those increased costs will come from existing NHS budgets. No new funding has been guaranteed. Every extra billion spent on higher-priced medicines is a billion not spent elsewhere in a system that is already under immense strain. This is money not spent on tackling waiting lists, not spent on primary care, and not spent on saving lives. As we have heard, the Nuffield Trust has made that point starkly, estimating that the NHS will be able to save 340,000 fewer years of quality-adjusted life in 2035 if the promised spending goes ahead. Despite the magnitude of these changes, the Government have refused to publish the full impact assessment of the deal that they hold. Why? This worrying development can be seen in the way in which the UK-US pharma deal was forced through, with no vote and scant parliamentary oversight. Let me summarise what I wrote on PoliticsHome back in March. This deal will increase the cost-effectiveness threshold set by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, curtail the overall cost cap on patented medicines, double the amount spent on such medicines, and increase the share of the NHS budget allocated to medicines. That should worry every Member of this House, because once those safeguards have been eroded, they are very difficult to restore.
30 Jun 2026 · Department of Health and Social Care · Hansard source
More
Will the hon. Gentleman to comment on the fact that the NHS pays 10 times the manufacturing costs for over 80% of the licensed medicines that we buy? How is that underpaying?
23 Jun 2026 · Puberty Blockers · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech. I have huge respect for her and I completely agree that nobody here or outside should be looking to disrespect or harm any individual, whatever their age. Would she agree that parents should also be given all the information available around this condition, its treatments and the paths that children follow? Over 93% of children who experience gender dysphoria grow out of it and then are happy in their natural body. Does she agree that that and other information should be made available to the parents?
23 Jun 2026 · Puberty Blockers · Hansard source
More
On that point, in normal clinical trials, the active substance and a placebo would be used, and the impact, changes or benefits that each cohort experienced would be checked. If children have a psychological leaning and are emotionally feeling that they are in the wrong body, is there not value in having a cohort that takes a placebo and seeing if that improves their mental health?
23 Jun 2026 · Puberty Blockers · Hansard source
More
Does the hon. Lady agree that unblocking the reasons why the data is not being made available should be the top priority, and that analysis of that data should be done before any further experiments on children are done?
23 Jun 2026 · Puberty Blockers · Hansard source
More
Will the hon. Member give way?
23 Jun 2026 · Puberty Blockers · Hansard source
More
Will the Secretary of State give way?
23 Jun 2026 · Puberty Blockers · Hansard source
More
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and for making such a passionate speech. I think we all agree, across the House, that we are here not to politicise or to demonise, but to try to make the right decisions for the safety of children. I think that all Members here share that intention. It was said earlier that these drugs are already used to treat different conditions, such as prostate cancer, endometriosis and precocious puberty. For the first two conditions they are taken by adults for a very short time, and for the third they are taken for a limited period until the child reaches the age of puberty. Such misinformation—or comparison—is not really valid, and should be avoided.
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
On a point of order, Mrs Harris. The hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) referred to my remarks in answering a question. Maybe I was not very clear, but he mischaracterised my remarks as referring to all Jews or Jewish donors. My remarks clearly referred to pro-Israeli donors, whoever they are. To clarify, it is those who support the illegal actions of Israel or—
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
I agree with the Minister that lobbying and donations across Parliament from any source must be investigated and that the rules must be reinforced. But on the specific point around Israel, Labour Friends of Israel, Conservative Friends of Israel and other friends of Israel groups—
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
Will the Minister answer the question?
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
I will continue because of time. Britain claims to defend its democracy from foreign interference. We rightly sanction Russia for undermining democratic institutions, and warn about the threats from China and Iran to our political system, yet when substantial evidence of foreign influence concerns Israel, our principles of transparency, scrutiny and accountability appear to vanish. Given the lack of time, I will give just one example. Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer, operates 16 sites across the UK and supplies around 85% of Israel’s drones and military ground equipment—systems that have been widely used during Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Declassified UK reported that in December 2024, representatives of Elbit Systems met Home Office officials in a private meeting, with details withheld under FOI exemptions. Elbit Systems benefits from substantial British defence contracts. The defence industry cannot become a shield for privileged and secret political access without accountability. No amount of democracy should exempt a state from scrutiny, no lobbying should be beyond accountability, and no Government should let political convenience override the principles of democratic integrity.
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
I will continue. The 255 of my constituents who signed this petition, and the 118,000 people who signed from across the country, would like to hold our Government and our system to account for these donations. What are they for?
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
I apologise for not giving way earlier. On the point about Israel being singled out, the Rycroft review focused specifically on Russia and China, and did not mention Israel once. It was correctly carried out and nobody had any objections. What is the difference?
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
My definition would be donors who turn a blind eye to blatant violations of Israeli law, British law or international law.
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
Does the hon. Gentleman believe that we need more of the AI weapons that Israel has used to shoot at children’s genitalia in Gaza?
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
22 Jun 2026 · UK Politics: Pro-Israel Influence · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate. I join my friend, the hon. Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali), in condemning antisemitism in all forms, anywhere. My remarks referring to Israel refer to the Israeli Government’s actions and organisations’ interactions with parliamentarians in this place. In June 2024, Declassified UK revealed that 13 of the then 25 members of the Labour Cabinet received hundreds of thousands in donations from pro-Israel donors, and that some 180 of Britain’s 650 MPs had accepted such funding during their political careers. That is one in four elected Members.
15 Jun 2026 · Social Media Ban for Under-16s · Hansard source
More
A massive thank you to the Secretary of State on behalf of parents in Dewsbury and Batley. We have argued in this place that the root problem lies in the illegal content, harmful content and deliberately addictive design of these platforms, which impact children and adults alike. What will the Government do to introduce and enforce regulation so that the platforms, and the services and features they provide, are safe for all?
11 Jun 2026 · Legacy of Jo Cox · Hansard source
More
Does the hon. Member agree that unless and until the Government take action that hits these companies where it hurts—in their profits—they will continue to do what they are doing? We set age limits on alcohol and cigarettes, and we ban heroin, crack cocaine and all that kind of stuff. This is one of those products that causes such harm.
11 Jun 2026 · Legacy of Jo Cox · Hansard source
More
To highlight the hon. Gentleman’s point, after the murder of Mr Nowak, Tommy Robinson said: “The whole system is set against white people. And it must be smashed!” In recent days, Musk has reposted messages claiming that the British Prime Minister hates white people and “millions must go”. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this is the language of incitement to hatred and violence, and that wherever it is possible for our law to reach, the Government and law enforcement agencies must tackle that behaviour with the strongest force of the law?

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →