Kemi Badenoch MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 5 Feb 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  That is a weak answer, because the Prime Minister does not know what is going on. Last week, I asked about the employment Bill; he did not know what was going on. We asked about the education Bill; he did not know what was going on. Let me tell him what is going on. Perhaps he can answer some questions. Shell has said that a one-year delay to Rosebank will cost £350 million and the loss of 1,000 jobs. Equinor has said that a two-year delay to Jackdaw will cost £800 million. The only benefit that I can see is the £400,000 to Labour Ministers. At a time of war in Europe, threatened energy security and increased competition from the US and elsewhere, we should be getting British oil and gas out of the ground. Does the Prime Minister have the guts to take on Labour donors and his Energy Secretary and approve the licence applications when they are resubmitted?

• 5 Feb 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  I am speaking on behalf of the people of this country. When Labour negotiates, our country loses. The Prime Minister talks about bringing growth and investment. Last week, he lost a £450 million investment from AstraZeneca that we negotiated, which would have delivered growth immediately. That same day, he also lost the £8 billion oilfield investment that would have delivered next year. Business is abandoning the North sea because of his decisions. What signal does he think he is sending to investors?

• 5 Feb 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  When Labour negotiates, our country loses. Yesterday, we heard that the Government offered £18 billion for Mauritius to take our territory in the Chagos islands. This is money that belongs to our children and their children. This is an immoral surrender, so that north London lawyers can boast at their dinner parties. When Labour negotiates, we all lose. Sometimes, it does not even bother to negotiate. Why did the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero withdraw Government lawyers from defending the case against the eco-nutters who want to obstruct the Rosebank oil and gas field?

• 5 Feb 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  How can anyone believe that this man is defending UK interests when he bends the knee to anyone who asks him? His answer was so weak and so waffly it is no wonder that he needs a voice coach. But he did not answer the question I asked him—why the Energy Secretary was not defending our country. The Secretaries of State for Energy Security and Net Zero and for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs received nearly £400,000-worth of donations from Lisbet Rausing. It is her money that is behind the court case that will stop an £8 billion investment, threaten thousands of jobs and endanger energy security for all of us. Did the Energy Secretary refuse to defend UK interests because he is funded by billionaire eco-zealots?

• 5 Feb 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  It is so hard to believe anything the Prime Minister says. This is a man who needed “emergency” voice coaching on Christmas eve. This Government are so clueless they are borrowing £8 billion for GB Energy—a vanity project that is not great, not British, and does not produce any energy. Its own chairman admitted that it will take 20 years to create just 1,000 jobs. Meanwhile, 200,000 jobs are at stake in our oil and gas sector right now. Does the Prime Minister think that 1,000 jobs in 20 years’ time are worth more than the 200,000 jobs that we have now?

• 5 Feb 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister can waffle for as long as he likes, but we know that Labour promised to bring energy bills down by £300. Instead, bills are going up. He is freezing pensioners while shovelling money to Mauritius. The Prime Minister is not just managing decline; he is creating decline. He has the power to grant these licences, open these oil and gas fields, save British jobs and bring down bills. Why does he find it so hard to do the right thing?

• 29 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The arrogance of the Prime Minister is that he thinks that it is his Government who create growth. He is wrong. It is business that creates growth. Our economy is built by entrepreneurs, risk-takers and the hard graft of working people. They know that you cannot tax your way to growth, you cannot borrow your way to growth, you cannot legislate your way to growth. Other countries are serious about freeing business from red tape. President Trump is doing it in America. Argentina is taking a chainsaw to regulations. Even the EU is not going as far as this left-wing Government. This Bill will put us at the bottom of the pack. Added to the jobs tax and the family business tax, it is no wonder that wealth creators are fleeing Britain in droves. The Chancellor is desperately trying to save her reputation. She knows Labour has damaged growth. This Bill manifestly fails the Prime Minister’s own growth test. If he will not drop the unemployment Bill, what is the point of his growth test?

• 29 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  All the Prime Minister’s ideas are the ones that we thought up. He needs to make sure that we deliver growth now, as well as in the future. To grow our economy, we must get more people off sickness and welfare, and into work. Clauses 8 and 9 of the unemployment Bill take us in the opposite direction by increasing entitlements. The Government themselves—his Government—estimate that these changes will increase business costs from £600 million to £1 billion a year in sick pay. That will mean higher prices, fewer jobs and less growth. Will he drop these measures from the Bill?

• 29 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister does not want to talk about the employment Bill because he does not know about it. Last week he misled the House. He was not on top of his own Education Bill—

• 29 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Last week, the Prime Minister claimed to have laid down an amendment that he had not made. He does not know what is going on in here or out there. Last week, I spoke to a woman running a business in Exeter. She is terrified of taking on new staff. She is struggling to keep her head above water, dreading what this Government will do next. She is not alone. The Federation of Small Businesses says 92% of small employers are concerned about the employment Bill. Clauses 1 to 6 make it harder for businesses to hire new employees—often young people looking for their first job. This is not an employment Bill; it is an unemployment Bill. Given these clauses, will he drop his Bill and show that he is not anti-growth?

• 29 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister does not know what his Bill is doing. He should listen to business, which is terrified of this Bill. The only workers he cares about are lawyers, but it is not just lawyers benefiting from this Bill. Who else benefits? It is not taxpayers; they will be paying for even more welfare. It is not young workers; they will not get their first break. It is definitely not businesses; they are being hammered with yet more burdens. Who benefits? It is the trade unions. Part 4 of the unemployment Bill— [ Interruption. ] Labour Members have not read it. Part 4 of the unemployment Bill is the biggest expansion of trade union powers for a generation— [Interruption.] Exactly; thank you. The public will have heard them cheer. Rather than deregulating for business, which creates growth, he is deregulating for the unions. Clause 61 alone reduces the notice period for strikes to just one week. Given that strikes are catastrophic for growth, will he drop part 4 of the Bill?

• 29 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  May I take this opportunity to solemnly commemorate the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz? We remember the 6 million Jewish men, women and children who were murdered. The Holocaust stands as a unique evil in human history. Yesterday the Prime Minister set his growth test. He said that if a policy is “good for growth…the answer is ‘yes’, if it’s not then the answer is ‘no’.” This morning the Chancellor embraced a series of Conservative policies. Although many are welcomed, they will take years to deliver. When the Conservatives left office, we had the fastest economic growth in the G7, but what are the Government doing for growth now? They are destroying it. Let us look at the employment Bill. The Government’s own figures say it will cost business £5 billion a year. It clearly fails the Prime Minister’s growth test. Will he drop it?

• 29 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister forgets that his own Chancellor blocked an airport in her constituency. They are hypocrites. Let us talk about the employment Bill. Part 1 of the Bill means that a new employee could start a job in the morning and take their employer to a tribunal that afternoon. It is no wonder that this Bill has been called an “adventure playground for lawyers”. This Bill is terrible for business, but it is great employment for lawyers. I know the Prime Minister loves the legal profession, but he needs to stop being a lawyer and start being a leader. This is another measure in the Bill that fails his growth test. Will he show some leadership and drop it?

• 22 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister needs to get out more and speak to schools. I was at the Harris academy just this month, and what is it saying? The Bill reverses two decades of progress. It is imposing Labour’s new curriculum on every school, taxing the education of children with special needs and excluding talented outsiders—the closed shop is back. This is pure educational vandalism. Alongside those attacks, Labour is removing single-word Ofsted judgments so that parents cannot see standards slipping. It is the same old Labour: bad outcomes for all children; excellence for none. I know what it is like to go to a school that did not care about standards—this is a tragedy in the making. The key changes in the Bill were not in Labour’s election manifesto. Is that not because the Prime Minister knew that parents and teachers would reject them?

• 22 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The facts speak for themselves: standards went up under Conservative Governments. What we need to know is who is benefiting. Everyone is asking: who is benefiting from these changes? It is not teachers—their pay is being capped. It is not parents—their choices are being restricted. It is definitely not children—their outcomes will get worse. So who is benefiting? It is the trade unions. The National Education Union sent out a tick list proving that after a decade and a half, it is finally getting its way. Why is the Education Secretary allowing trade unions to run her Department and ruin children’s education?

• 22 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  May I take this opportunity to welcome the release of hostages, including Emily Damari, from barbaric captivity? I also know that the thoughts of many will be with the victims of the Southport killings. There are important questions to answer, and I will return to those after the case is concluded. Between 2009 and 2022 the OECD found that children in England rose up global league tables in maths, reading and science. Conservative Government action means that English schools now top the western world at maths and reading, but the Prime Minister’s Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which will be voted on in Committee this week, reverses the improvements that made that happen. The Bill is an act of vandalism. It is wrecking a cross-party consensus that lasted for decades. Why does the Prime Minister think that so many school leaders are criticising the Bill?

• 22 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  That is nonsense. The amendment that the Prime Minister is talking about does not address the issue. He raises academies, and that is exactly what I am talking about. Like every parent, I believe that all our children should have the best teachers. Apart from the issue of cutting teachers’ pay, the head of year 11 at Michaela—the most successful school in the country—came from the armed forces. The headmistress of that school has said that with Labour’s new rules, she would “never have been able to hire him.” Those are the academy freedoms that I am talking about. The Bill would have blocked that veteran from teaching. The Bill implies that doctors are not sufficiently qualified to teach biology and that an Olympic medallist cannot teach PE. Why is the Prime Minister closing down routes into teaching when we should be opening up more of them?

• 22 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister thinks that he can distract people from what is wrong with the Bill. This is not about breakfast clubs and school uniforms. Teachers and parents will be horrified at just how bad this Bill is. Even his own MPs may not realise it, but the Bill will cut teachers’ pay—it cuts pay for 20,000 teachers. His Education Secretary says that there is “not a ceiling” for pay— [ Interruption. ] Labour Members are all shaking their heads; they clearly have not read the Bill. The Education Secretary hasn’t read the Bill either, because clause 45 means that teachers’ pay will be capped. Did the Prime Minister know that the Bill as it stands will cut teachers’ pay?

• 22 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. and learned Gentleman did not even bother voting on that Bill. He talks about safeguarding measures, but that is not what the issue is—this is about the reforms that he is changing. We have an example of where those reforms were not introduced—Wales, which has been under Labour control for two decades. Welsh educational outcomes have tumbled down international league tables, and poor children in England now do better than wealthier children in Wales. The Bill denies children the guarantee that their failing schools will be turned into a better academy. It is an attack on excellence, it is an attack on higher standards, and it is an attack on aspiration. The Bill is the worst of socialism. Is it not deprived children in England who will pay the price?

• 15 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister did not answer the question about the National Crime Agency—no answer on investigating dodgy Labour Ministers, just as last week he did not want an inquiry that might expose dodgy Labour councils. He knowingly appointed a convicted fraudster as his Transport Secretary. The anti-corruption Minister who he had full confidence in only days ago resigned yesterday in disgrace. He is negotiating a secret deal to surrender British territory, and taxpayers in this country will pay for the humiliation. Now it turns out that his Government may write a cheque to compensate Gerry Adams. That is shameful. We left the Prime Minister the fastest growing economy in the G7. In just six months under his leadership, it has been taxes up, borrowing up, and mortgage rates up—and that is not all: business confidence is down, jobs are down, and growth is down. Can the country afford four more years of his terrible judgment?

• 15 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister claims he has full confidence in the Chancellor, but the markets clearly do not. Yesterday, the Chancellor repeated her promise to have “just one Budget per year” to provide businesses with certainty. The talk in the City is that she cannot meet her fiscal rules, and that there will need to be an emergency Budget. Does the Prime Minister stand by the Chancellor’s commitment that there will be only one Budget this year?

• 15 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  On Friday, while borrowing costs hit levels not seen since Labour was last in government, I met business owners and their employees in Chesterfield. One of them told me that his business will not exist in four years’ time because of this Government’s policies. It might not even exist next year. The Prime Minister may try to blame his inheritance, or blame global factors, but why should anyone trust a word he says over what businesses are saying again and again—that his Budget means fewer jobs, lower growth and higher borrowing costs?

• 15 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  There is no one the Prime Minister can blame for this dud deal except himself. At the Budget, Labour was congratulating itself for having the first female Chancellor, instead of ensuring that the country had someone actually qualified to do the job. [ Interruption. ]

• 15 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister knows very well that the Office for Budget Responsibility found no such black hole. He talks about a mini-Budget three years ago. Borrowing costs last week were at a 27-year high for 30-year gilts. The Chancellor is apparently promising to be ruthless in reducing spending. Let me suggest something that he should cut. There is no way that we should be giving up British territory in Chagos. He is rushing a deal that will be disastrous and that will land taxpayers with a multibillion-pound bill. Why does the Prime Minister think that British people should pay to surrender something that is already ours?

• 15 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  At a time of turmoil in the markets, the Prime Minister was distracted by the crisis around the former City Minister, the hon. Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Tulip Siddiq). What does it tell us about his judgment that yesterday he said he was saddened that his close friend had resigned? This was an anti-corruption Minister under criminal investigation for corruption. Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel prize winner advising Bangladesh, said that London properties gifted to the former City Minister may be the proceeds of robbery. Will the Prime Minister offer Bangladesh the full support of our National Crime Agency in ensuring that any properties bought with stolen funds are properly investigated?