Liam Byrne MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 17 Jul 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Business and Trade Committee’s inquiry on small business is still open for evidence from Members from across the House. On Tuesday, we took evidence from the chief executive of Ofgem, who made it perfectly clear that a complete collapse of regulation in the years after covid led to thousands of businesses across our country paying higher energy bills than they needed to. Can the Secretary of State assure the House that the small business strategy, when published, will contain a strategy for bearing down on the energy rip-off that is challenging small businesses across our country?

• 9 Jul 2025 · Birmingham Pub Bombings · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right: this is about the past, this is about truth and this is about justice, but she is right to say that this is also about the future. This is about whether we, in this House, believe in justice without exception, justice without delay, and justice that does not stop at the doors of power. It is about whether the Government of this country will look the people of Birmingham in the eye and say, “We hear you. We see you. We believe you, and we will not rest until you get the answers that you deserve.” Let us honour the memory of those 21 souls who never came home that night. Let us stand with their families and speak for a city that is still scarred by the silence. Let us at long last do what we should have done decades ago: let us hold a public inquiry into the Birmingham pub bombings.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Birmingham Pub Bombings · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, and that is why I am grateful to have been given time to make this call on the Floor of the House tonight.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Birmingham Pub Bombings · Hansard source

  More

  Fifty-one years ago, on 21 November 1974, two bombs exploded in the heart of Birmingham, at the Mulberry Bush and the Tavern in the Town. Twenty-one lives were lost and 220 people were injured. Families were destroyed, futures were stolen, and scars were left that never healed. In those two pubs, the Provisional IRA murdered 21 souls. James Caddick, John Jones, Stanley Bodman, John Rowlands, Charles Grey, Jimmy Craig, Trevor Thrupp, Michael Beasley, Thomas Chaytor, Marilyn Nash, Stephen Whalley, Eugene Reilly, Desmond Reilly, Maureen Roberts, Pamela Palmer, Anne Hayes, Maxine Hambleton, Lynn Bennett, Jane Davis, Paul Anthony Davies and Neil “Tommy” Marsh all lost their life. They were sons, daughters, parents, brothers, sisters—innocent people murdered in cold blood in Britain’s deadliest act of terrorism before 7/7. Today, it is still the largest, worst, unsolved mass murder in our nation’s history. To this day, not one person—not one—has been brought to justice for this atrocity. That is why I rise today to call for a statutory, judge-led public inquiry into the Birmingham pub bombings under section 1 of the Inquiries Act 2005. We all know what happened that night. We know that the bombs were planted by members of the Provisional IRA. We know that a warning was phoned in, and we know that it came too late—that it was chaotic, inadequate and fatal. We know that the Birmingham Six, members of the Irish community in Birmingham, were arrested, tortured and convicted of a crime they did not commit. They spent 16 years in prison before the Court of Appeal quashed their convictions in 1991. The relatives of the victims were left to grieve in silence, and were lied to by the police and by politicians alike. For decades they were shut out of justice, ignored, patronised and disbelieved. In 2019, a jury at the resumed inquest concluded that the 21 victims were unlawfully murdered and that the IRA was responsible, yet the jury was not allowed to consider who precisely carried out the bombing. The question of who bombed Birmingham, who murdered the 21, and who committed the largest unresolved murder on these islands, was ruled out of scope, so today the truth remains buried. This is a wound that has never really healed. Since 2012, the families of those who died have fought with extraordinary courage and dignity in the search for truth and in the quest for justice. They have knocked on every door, they have sat with Ministers, they have won legal battles, they have crowdfunded representation, and they have taken their case to Westminster, Brussels, Dublin and Belfast. They have formed the group Justice for the 21, led by Julie and Brian Hambleton, whose sister was killed that night. Together they have done what so many others have failed to do: they have had the courage and the will to keep the flame of truth alive.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Birmingham Pub Bombings · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. Member for bringing that point to the Floor of the House, and for backing my call. This campaign is not about vengeance. It is about truth and justice. It is about the right to truth and accountability. Our system of law and order, and our democracy, should work for all, not just the powerful. We have to ask in this House why, after all this time—after 51 years—there has not been a public inquiry. Let us be clear: this cannot be a desktop review. This cannot merely be looked into by an independent panel. It must be a judge-led statutory public inquiry, with the full power to summon evidence, compel witnesses and hold institutions to account. Why? Because these grieving families have been failed time and again, and after 51 years, it is enough.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Birmingham Pub Bombings · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is exactly right. She speaks with such passion and eloquence about this issue. She knows as well as I do how deeply the families feel their pain. Since the exoneration of the Birmingham Six—the men who were tortured, framed and imprisoned—no one has been held to account for that failure. Since 1991, no new suspects have been brought to trial. Since 2019, even though witnesses have admitted that they knew who was responsible, no one has been compelled to testify, despite the fact that men like Michael Christopher Hayes, a former member of the Provisional IRA, confessed in a 2017 BBC interview that he accepted “collective responsibility” for what he called a terrible tragedy, and despite Witness O and Chris Mullin indicating in their evidence to the inquest that they had knowledge of those responsible for the murders. While the coroner accepted assurances from the Government Legal Department that relevant documents had been disclosed, widespread doubts remain about whether information held in the Home Office, Foreign Office or Ministry of Defence was, in fact, made available.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Birmingham Pub Bombings · Hansard source

  More

  The thrust of what the hon. Gentleman says is right. I will come on to some reflections on that in just a moment. We know that there are documents that were not provided to the inquest. Key individuals involved have died, but there are allegations that at least two of those responsible are still alive and living free, and that their names can be found in books in the House of Commons Library. As my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Northfield (Laurence Turner) said, as the years pass, memories fade and witnesses die, and the trail of truth grows cold. That is why it is time to act now. Let us look at the facts. This is the largest unsolved mass murder in British history. No statutory inquiry has ever been launched into what happened. No one from the state has ever been held accountable for the failings of the investigation, the imprisonment of the innocent or the denial of justice to the families. By contrast, at the urging of this House, we have rightly ensured for victims of Hillsborough, the infected blood scandal, Grenfell, Windrush and the Post Office scandal that we got to the bottom of what happened, and what caused the pain for so many victims. Why not Birmingham? Why are the people of Birmingham not given the justice that they deserve? It is time we sent the message from this House that there can be no more excuses. A public inquiry is not just a legal tool, but a national act of conscience. It is how democracy apologises with honesty. It is how we tell the victims and their families that they matter, that their loss matters, and that their loved ones will not be forgotten. Crucially, it is how we learn. If we cannot learn the lessons of the past, the risk is that we repeat them. We say often in this House that justice delayed is justice denied. It has been 51 years since that terrible night: 51 years of injustice; 51 years of doors closed and backs turned. I say that is long enough. I want to be very clear with the House tonight about what we are seeking. We are seeking a statutory public inquiry under section 1 of the Inquiries Act 2005. We are seeking a judge-led process, with full legal powers to compel witnesses and evidence. We are seeking an independent inquiry that is resourced to ensure the effective participation of the families, and that asks openly, without constraint, fear or favour: who bombed Birmingham? We are seeking an inquiry that examines the role of the police, the criminal justice system and the state, both then and since. We have to be clear, Madam Deputy Speaker, that this crime is not covered by the legislation and the agreements that secured peace in Northern Ireland, and that means something important. It means that the Home Secretary has the power right now to order this inquiry. There is no legal obstacle; the only question is whether there is the political will. In April 2024, eight Birmingham MPs wrote to the Home Secretary to demand this inquiry. In November 2024, on the 50th anniversary, Justice for the 21 renewed its call, and that call was backed by a cross-party group of MPs, mayors, lawyers and campaigners. I wrote again to the Home Secretary in spring this year. I have not yet had an answer about a decision on whether an inquiry will be launched, which is why I have asked for this debate tonight. I am asking not for special treatment, but for equal treatment—for Birmingham to be given the justice that has been offered to the victims of so many scandals, where we have set up inquiries to get to the bottom of the truth.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Birmingham Pub Bombings · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. and learned Member for that intervention, and for his support for my call. He knows as well as I do that time after time, at every turn, the families were met with barriers, bureaucracy and broken promises. They were told that they could not get legal aid. They were told that their case was not part of the reconciliation, or the legacy of the troubles. They were told to wait until West Midlands police pursued leads that led precisely nowhere. They were told again and again to be quiet, but they would not be quiet and will not be quiet. This House should not sit quiet while their search for justice is unfinished.

• 8 Jul 2025 · Post Office Horizon Inquiry: Volume 1 · Hansard source

  More

  On behalf of our Committee, I welcome this report from Sir Wyn Williams. As Jo Hamilton has said, it unmasks the full horror of what was done to the sub-postmasters, including the truth that at least 13 suicides resulted from what the Post Office did to innocent people. Sir Wyn Williams echoes almost all the recommendations our Committee has now made three times to Ministers. There are 3,000 claims still outstanding, and there are, in Sir Wyn’s words, “egregious delays” at every stage of the claims process, so does the Minister now accept that, as we have recommended and Sir Wyn has recommended, up-front legal advice needs to be provided to victims? Does the Minister also accept that we must now, once and for all, strip the Post Office of any role in the Horizon shortfall scheme? Will the Minister commit to a date for getting rid of the Post Office altogether from that redress scheme? Today’s report makes it clear that at least 160 people in the Post Office knew exactly what was going on, and some of them came to this House and misled Members of this House not once but twice, so is it now the moment for us to commence contempt of Parliament proceedings against the leaders of the Post Office who misled us so badly?

• 1 Jul 2025 · Traffic calming measures on the slip road off Water Orton Road · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to present this petition on behalf of the residents of Water Orton Road, in Castle Bromwich in my constituency. It calls on Solihull council finally to take action to tackle the out-of-control speeding on the slip road off the Water Orton Road. Although Solihull council’s intention to tackle speeding on the main Water Orton Road was admirable, it has unfortunately diverted the problem to the slip road. This has made life for many of my constituents a misery, with resident Helen Rogers telling me that inconsiderate, selfish drivers are leaving locals intimidated and frightened for their safety. Let us not wait until there is a fatality. We must take action immediately. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to work with Solihull council to implement traffic-calming measures on the slip road off Water Orton Road following a spate of road traffic incidents. Following is the full text of the petition: [ The petition of residents of the Castle Bromwich Ward, Solihull, Declares that traffic calming measures need to be put in place on the slip road off Water Orton Road in the Castle Bromwich Ward to ensure the safety of local residents; further that Solihull Council need to act on the concerns of residents, following several recent road accidents as a result of road users using the slip road to circumvent the speed calming measures on the main road. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to work with Solihull Council to take immediate action to ensure that traffic calming measures are installed on the slip road off Water Orton Road, in Castle Bromwich, Solih u ll. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003087]

• 23 Jun 2025 · UK Modern Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the biggest remaking of the relationship between the public and private sectors for a generation. The business community in this country will be stronger and better for the measures that he has announced today. Business will welcome in particular the huge investment in skills, access to research and development, and access to capital, but the game changer is the investment in energy that he has announced. Cutting industrial energy prices is a way to get rid of the albatross around the neck of British business. It is a big promise; can he assure the House that there is both the plan and the pound notes to deliver on it?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for that question. Again, the report is a lot stronger for the insights my hon. Friend was able to bring to what was a very sustained inquiry. We must recognise that two problems have bedevilled industrial strategies in this country in the past. One is stop-start—we get some progress, but then we stop, and then we think again. That point was made, with some power, by Greg Clark, whose work I commend and whose evidence I want to highlight. This is about building a different kind of partnership for a different kind of economy. We have tremendous strengths: we love the rule of law; we are politically stable; we are an open trading economy; and we are a science superpower. This is a great place to do business, but if we are to become the world’s favourite place to invest, we must change the way that the Government and the private sector work together. If we get it right, the Industrial Strategy Council could be exactly that place, but the offer our Committee makes to the business community is that where things get stuck, we are here to help.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman makes a really important point. We have heard time and again—we heard it in relation to life sciences, defence and clean energy—that we have some of the best thinkers in the world, but they often struggle to get the start-up finance or the scale-up finance they need to turn those ambitions into new businesses. As someone who spent four years building a business before I was in the wrong place at the wrong time and got elected to this House, I know that what small businesses need to grow are sales. That is why we need to be doing a much smarter job of marrying public contracts with access to scale-up finance, but that will take the institutions we have today working very differently in the future. Perhaps our most shocking evidence session was on the subject of public procurement, when the chief commercial officer of His Majesty’s Government was just not clear how many jobs, how much economic growth and what levels of wages were driven by £1 of GDP. That is simply not good enough. I hope that there is cross-party consensus about these reforms because, ultimately, this is a once in 50 years moment. Our recommendations should command cross-party support, because that is how we ensure that they are sustainable for the long term.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. This report is an awful lot stronger for the raft of amendments that he brought forward, and for the thought and devotion he put into Committee hearings and the interrogation of our witnesses. He is absolutely right because, ultimately, we as a country will not unlock performance that matches our potential unless we think again about the way in which business and the Government work together for new times. That is the only way in which we will both tackle the stubborn challenges of the past, particularly the under-investment that has bedevilled us for so long, and navigate the seminal challenges of the future. There is no ideology in this report—well, perhaps there is, but the only ideology is a confidence in our country and a confidence that we can be better than we are today—which is a practical blueprint for turning those ambitions into action.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to commend to the House the seventh report of our Select Committee and the combined brilliance of Committee members in setting out a plan, a blueprint and a framework for scrutiny of the industrial strategy, which is still to come. Our report starts with a note of optimism, because the truth is that we stand on the cusp of a once-in-a-century transformation of our economy, from which Britain stands to gain enormously. In the next decade alone, the world economy may grow by something like £25 trillion, and those prizes could be seized by Britain. In the race on which we have embarked, we happen to hold many of the cards. In a world that is building walls, we in this country are building bridges to new markets. In a world that is about to be transformed by artificial intelligence, we are a science superpower. In a world that is crying out for energy, we are on the cusp of building green energy abundance. Time and again throughout our long history, these isles of wonder have made history by inventing the future. Even now, we have the future potential in our grasp in a way that we have not had for decades, but this report is a sobering read, because its conclusion is that our performance right now is very different from our potential, and promise is not going to be delivery. Unless we remake the state for a new age and renew the partnership between public ambition and private enterprise, we will squander the riches that could lie within our grasp. Our Committee has found that we are trapped by obstacles of our own making. We have sky-high energy costs that are driving away industry. We have a broken system of procurement that squanders £350 billion every single year—£1 in every £6 of our GDP. We have a chronic skills gap that locks out millions from the potential jobs that they could get stuck into, and which denies firms the skills that they need to grow. We have blocks on innovation diffusion that hoard breakthroughs with superstar firms. We have a finance system that all too often starves scale-ups of capital, and we have a Whitehall machine that is over-centralised, risk averse and too complex to drive change at the speed that the modern economy demands. Those are not conditions of growth; they are conditions of decline, and this country needs to rally to fix them fast. We therefore argue in the report that the industrial strategy has to break through the confines on growth. We need an ambition that is as great as the challenge before us, and we argue that that means mobilising public and private action around the grand challenges—the moonshots that are going to define the next century. We argue that we should maximise domestic demand through a dramatic overhaul of our public procurement system. We need to maximise foreign demand for the things that we make here through the trade deals that we strike with our allies around the world. We need to rewire the institutions of our economy in skills, energy, finance and innovation, and we then need to transform Whitehall itself by devolving power where we can, cutting red tape and putting regions back in control of their own destiny. In this report, we set out practical steps for how we can achieve every single one of those ambitions, and we then set 10 tests by which the forthcoming industrial strategy could be best judged. There must be vision, so that we can steer effectively. There must be metrics, so that we can judge progress effectively. There should be grand challenges set out by the Government to help galvanise a rally around national purpose and the possibilities of the future. There has got to be procurement reform, so that the £350 billion that the state spends each year drives domestic demand in new ways. There has to be trade alignment to connect our strengths with the global marketplace into which we sell. There has to be far better access to scale-up finance, to stop businesses being lifted and shifted—largely to the United States. There has to be cheaper energy, because we heard overwhelmingly that our energy prices are simply uncompetitive. There must be devolved skills funding where mayoral areas can prove that they are fit for purpose, to help manage and organise technical education. There needs to be much wider diffusion of research in order to spread prosperity. Above all, there has to be leadership from the very top, driven by the Prime Minister himself, and there have to be new ways in which we cut through the incoherence of regulation that bedevils business today. We propose a bold devolution of power, money and responsibility, particularly to mayoral areas where they can prove that they are up to the task. We propose new legislation to put the Industrial Strategy Advisory Council on a statutory footing, with the Prime Minister chairing meetings at least once a quarter. We propose that the Regulatory Innovation Office be expanded and moved to the Cabinet Office, and that it take on the role of a clearing house to make sure that there is somewhere that business can go in order to highlight ridiculous conflicts between rules and regulations that just hold back growth day after day. We also propose hardwiring the link between the Industrial Strategy Advisory Council and the new Council of the Nations and Regions. Yesterday, we saw some progress on a number of our recommendations—our Committee is nothing if not influential with both the Treasury and the Department for Business and Trade. On capital access, the British Business Bank is now set to receive almost £3 billion in order to crowd in tens of billions of pounds more, and the National Wealth Fund will grow to almost £30 billion, but we have to simplify access to that finance for businesses that need it. On energy, we had confirmation of investments in Sizewell C, offshore wind and small nuclear reactors, but we need lower energy costs in the here and now. On skills, there will be an extra £1.2 billion by 2028 for 65,000 more learners, but the skills governance reforms that we need were not quite clear enough, and business needs those reforms pronto. On research and development, £22.6 billion a year was promised by 2029, and there are targeted funds for advanced manufacturing, defence innovation, the Advanced Research and Invention Agency, and the new Edinburgh supercomputer. Those are good beginnings, but without a clear plan to diffuse the best ideas to every corner of our economy, we will not get the uplift in productivity that this country needs. There are without doubt big challenges, but what gave us heart as we took evidence over the course of this year is that business, trade unions and consumer groups are up for the challenge. They genuinely believe that we can become the fastest-growing economy in the G7. In 32 conclusions and recommendations, we set out very clearly the steps that Ministers could and should take in order to unlock the possibilities of the future. My final message is that we should draw a lesson from our history. Over the course of the last century and since the days of Joseph Chamberlain, there have been geopolitical shocks every 20 to 30 years that have forced us to think anew about the sovereign capabilities that we need, which always leads to conclusions about how we remake the state for new times. We are at exactly such a moment in our history, and yesterday gave us some heart that there is investment going into the things that business needs. This Government want to invest in growth, good jobs and good wages, but the potential of this country will be squandered unless we now build on the kinds of ambitions that we heard yesterday and implement the steps that our Committee has set out. Above all, I think that our plan is practical, and I have no reservation in commending it to the House.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  We heard this message loud and clear from Harland and Wolff when we were there: long-term contracts, not year-to-year contracts, with real stability so that a genuine partnership can grow and grow stronger over time.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is right. We have to be careful not to stray too far into the territory of our sister Committee, but once upon a time we built villages around factories; in today’s economy, we need to build local economies around universities. The role of universities in empowering economic change is something we will want to return to in the very near future.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  A very clear answer: leadership from the top—and that means coming from the Prime Minister directly.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The evidence base we were able to assemble was an awful lot stronger because of her connections with small businesses in her constituency and the insights she was able to bring from the world of labour. The point she makes is absolutely right. Past industrial strategies have sometimes conjured up images of corporate Britain calling the shots, but this country’s real potential is actually in abundance in smaller firms. Unless we can make sure that on our islands it is easier to start a business, easier to scale up a business, easier to hire people and easier to give people a pay rise, we are not going to unlock our full potential, and that is what this report sets out to do. We have clearly in our minds the richness and potential of our smaller firms, and we want our economy to be a bigger and better place for them.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. Perhaps the most critical test of the industrial strategy, when it is published, will be whether it brings industrial energy costs down. If it fails that test, it is going to struggle to make progress.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  That is absolutely right. The challenges we face as a country are so large that no one Department, business or sector can solve them on their own. The only way to crack the code of that challenge and to reach our ambitions for the future is by mobilising a whole-of-society approach. Otherwise, frankly, we are going to fail and squander the potential in front of us.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  This was an important area of debate when we were framing our recommendations. We felt that where mayoral areas could show ability—that might be a limited number—they might be much better able to understand the needs of business and to ensure that local technical colleges in particular provide the right kinds of skills and of qualifications. Sometimes we take too much of a central planning approach to the skills system, which means we are just not agile enough for the needs of employers today, and skills gaps therefore loom much too large.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I very much welcome yesterday’s investment in UK energy abundance, but as our Committee pointed out on Friday, the success of the industrial strategy will depend on a plan to cut industrial energy costs now. When the industrial strategy is published, will the Secretary of State reassure us that there will be a plan to ensure that UK energy prices are internationally competitive?

• 11 Jun 2025 · Spending Review 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  This spending review is good for Britain’s business, because it invests in the things that British business needs: it invests in skills, infrastructure and innovation, cuts red tape and supports small firms. Can the Chancellor clarify that this spending review will also open a new era of energy abundance for our country? The Business and Trade Committee heard directly from the International Monetary Fund in Washington yesterday that high energy costs are holding back growth. That is a consequence of the dither and delay from the Conservatives, who left us with the highest industrial energy costs in Europe. Will the Chancellor confirm to the House that we are consigning that era to history?

• 4 Jun 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  The barbarism of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Government against the Palestinian people is beyond belief. We should not be negotiating trade deals with the Israeli Government, we should not have trade envoys on the ground, and we should not delay recognition of the state of Palestine. The Business and Trade Committee, backed by my hon. Friend the Members for Slough (Mr Dhesi) and for Rotherham (Sarah Champion), is determined to get to the bottom of UK arms exports. I am grateful to the Business Minister for confirming last night that he will appear before the Committee before the summer recess. Can the Minister confirm tonight that a Foreign Office Minister will be alongside him?