Lincoln Jopp MP: speeches

Speeches

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Going back to our conversation with the head of IT security and compliance at NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and what could be designated an operator of essential services, and our subsequent conversation with Palo Alto, how do you envision that bit of the Bill working? Taking Glasgow as an example, while neither of us are doctors, we both broadly know what happens in hospitals—and there is also a doctor sitting to my right on the Committee, should we need one. On the example that I gave, given what is written in the Bill, how do you think it should work? Kanishka Narayan: Do you mean operators of essential services, or critical suppliers, as in the third party element?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q To come back to Dr Spencer’s original question about the scope of the legislation, the current situation, as I understand it, is that there is a carve-out for small and medium-sized enterprises because we do not want to put too much regulatory burden on them, but, under the new proposed legislation, operators of essential services that are SMEs will be designated by their regulator. That brings us back to the question of which regulator that would be. Do you currently use that designation for operators of essential services, or would you have to do a piece of work, presumably looking at a number of different regulators’ points of view, to designate the operators of essential services? Brian Miller: We would work with the Scottish Health Competent Authority as our regulator; I cannot speak for other regulators and what that might look like. We are doing work on what assurance for critical suppliers outside the Bill looks like just now, and we are working across the boards in Scotland on identifying critical suppliers. Outside of that, for any suppliers or any new services, we will assess the risk individually, based on the services they are providing. The Bill is really valuable for me, particularly when it comes to managed service provision. One of the questions I was looking at is: what has changed since 2018? The biggest change for me is that identity has went to the cloud, because of video conferencing and stuff like that. When identity went to the cloud, it then involved managed service providers and data centres. We have put additional controls around that, because the network perimeter extended out into the cloud. We might want to take advantage of those controls for new things that come online, integrating with national identity, but we need to be assured that the companies integrating with national identity are safe. For me, the Bill will be a terrific bit of legislation that will help me with that—if that makes sense.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q To be very clear, the three regulators we had here today were the Information Commissioner, Ofgem and Ofcom. If they thought that they had a locus because of something that that hospital did, all three would do the step test, they would come up with their bucket of SMEs that they wanted to bring into scope, and those would be added together and that would be the impact. Kanishka Narayan: Yes, I guess, added together in the sense that they would be separately regulated, but they would all come within the scope of the regulations. Where there is an overlap in the party being regulated, my hope is that the Bill provides for individual regulation, but is very much open to the prospect of a lead regulator engaging in a softer way with the other regulators, as long as each regulator feels that that has assured them of the risk.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Sorry, I misspoke. I mean an SME that is deemed a critical supplier. Who is going to deem them so? Which of the many regulators at play in that hospital is going to decide who is a critical supplier? Kanishka Narayan: There are two things to say on this. There is at least a four-step test on the face of the Bill for what would qualify as a critical supplier. First, a critical supplier has to supply to an operator of an essential service, in this case the hospital. Secondly, the supplier itself must engage with important network and information systems. Thirdly, the disruption to that third party supplier would have to cause a material disruption to the operator in question—in this case, if the third party supplier falls over from a cyber-security point of view, there would be material and business continuity disruption to the hospital. Fourthly, not only that, but that disruption would have to be sufficiently severe in its impact to be in scope. That is one set of things. Underlying that is a further test in the Bill, whereby alternative provision of that third party supply could not be secured in a practicable way. The combination of those tests means that the scope set out for the critical third party suppliers is extremely tight and robust. Then there is still the question, having gone through that five-step test, of the particular burden placed on relevant suppliers in scope. My expectation and hope would be that regulators take a much more proportionate approach there than to set the precise same conditions on those suppliers as they do on the operator in question; in particular, that the burden on them is placed specifically in sight of the directional risk that they pose to the operator, rather than the risk in sum for that third party supplier. The first thing is therefore that the Bill clearly specifies a very tight scope. The second is that it does not seem to me, as a relative novice to both the medical world and cyber-security, unusual to have a specification of this nature in a Bill. Given my professional context, I am particularly conscious of the very clear and critical third party comparable requirement in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, which focuses on both cyber-security and supply chain risks. That has worked relatively proficiently in that context, so I hope that there are some good lessons to learn from that.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I want to make sure I have understood exactly. Is the regulator going to tell you who your operators of essential services are, or are you going to tell the regulator? Brian Miller: I think we would work with the regulator, but we are looking for more detail in any secondary legislation that comes along. We have read what the designation of critical suppliers would be. I would look to work with the Scottish Health Competent Authority and colleagues in National Services Scotland on what that would look like. Stewart Whyte: On how we would make that decision, from our perspective we are looking at what the supplier is providing and what sort of data they are processing on our behalf. From the NHS perspective, 90% of the data that we process will be special category, very sensitive information. It could be that, from our side, a lot of the people in the supply chain would fall into that designation, but for some other sectors it might not be so critical. We have a unique challenge in the NHS because of the service we provide, the effect that cyber-crime would have on our organisations, and the sensitivity of the data we process.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Do either of the other witnesses have anything to say on that? Jill Broom indicated dissent. Dr Sanjana Mehta indicated dissent .

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q On the question of closer alignment, can you give us a sense from the international picture of whether certain regulatory regimes raise the barrier to terrorists or criminals so high that they are left alone? Is that a national thing or a company-based thing? Where are the flow lines of attack and threat? Is it on a national or a corporate basis? Stuart McKean: I do not think the cyber-criminal really cares, to be blunt. They will attack anywhere. You can, of course—

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I appreciate that. My question was about where that leads them to attack, on the basis that they will take the route of least resistance. Where is that? Is that an international thing, a national thing or a corporate thing? Stuart McKean: It is probably across all three, to be quite honest with you. It is very dependent on what they want to achieve, whether it be an economic attack or a targeted attack on a corporate entity. I do not think it has those boundaries—I genuinely think it is across the whole industry and the whole globe. The reality is that cyber-attacks everybody. We are being attacked every day. I do not see it as an international boundary, or a UK thing or a US thing. It is generally across the globe.

• 2 Feb 2026 · Support for Veterans · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Mr Speaker. Whose job is it to protect and enhance the moral component of fighting power?

• 2 Feb 2026 · China and Japan · Hansard source

  More

  I just want clarification on the Members of this House who were formally sanctioned. The Prime Minister said: “President Xi said to me that means all parliamentarians are free to travel to China”. Does that mean that they are no longer legally sanctioned, and did he get that in writing?

• 2 Feb 2026 · US Department of Justice Release of Files · Hansard source

  More

  When the Prime Minister sacked Lord Mandelson as the American ambassador, Ministers came to the Dispatch Box and I pointed out to them that for the whole time he was our ambassador he had been subject to politically fatal kompromat, which left him open to leverage—as it finally played out. I said that if we had found out he was spying for Russia or China, we would be turning every single aspect of his time in office inside out, to find out the truth, and the Government said, “Well, he’s been sacked.” Does the Minister regret the fact that, following Mandelson’s sacking, the Government did not do the sort of due diligence and inquiries that might have unearthed the documents from the Department of Justice?

• 29 Jan 2026 · Encouraging Exports · Hansard source

  More

  Defence and aerospace make up a huge element of our export business. As the Minister knows, plans without resources are hallucinations. The defence investment plan was promised to us in the autumn, and then by the end of the year, but it is still not there. When will the Government get their act together and stop dithering over the defence investment plan so that we can fuel our export economy?

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  Does my right hon. and gallant Friend agree that this could well be a case of, “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it is possible that you have failed to appreciate the gravity of the situation”?

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. and gallant Member for his intervention. If he wants to do so, I suggest that he takes it outside, as they say. I am very time-constrained, but I want to pay tribute to my hon. Friends on the Conservative Benches who have informed the debate with incredibly detailed research and knowledge. I have been delighted to see the Minister’s PPS running backwards and forwards from the officials’ Box, because I was rather hoping that the summing up would not simply be a reheating of the opening remarks made by the Minister with responsibility for the Indo-Pacific, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra). There have been substantive points made from these Benches, which I hope will be answered in the summing up. I am very time-constrained and a lot of points have already been covered. In search of inspiration I was wondering what I might add to the debate, so I will read out a piece of casework which, although not relevant to the Chagos islands, is an interesting comparator. It comes from a member of the public who had written to his bank manager. I suppose I owe it to him to anonymise him, so I need to come up with some sort of pseudonym. I will call him Mr Powell. Mr Powell wrote to his bank manager: “Dear Sir, a number of years ago, I inherited a large seven-storey home in Mayfair. I am incredibly lucky and I acknowledge that fact. It is far too big for me to live in. I live solely in half of the ground floor. For as long as I can remember, I have had Americans living on the other floors. I like these Americans, so they live there rent-free. What I am proposing, sir, is that I give you, the bank, this house. I then propose to pay you, the bank, rent above the market rate not only for me, but for all the Americans who live upstairs. I would be very grateful for your advice on this issue.” The bank manager wrote back to Mr Powell: “Dear Mr Powell, are you okay? I am concerned for your mental state, because what you are proposing would appear to be an act of GREAT STUPIDITY.” [ Laughter. ] The bank manager went on to make the following four points: “First, you do not need to do this at all. Secondly, it will cost you a fortune. Thirdly, you do realise that at the end of all this you will have given away your house? Fourthly, on a personal note, were these arrangements ever to become public, I fear that your neighbours would laugh at you. Yours, the Bank Manager.” I simply leave that analogue there, to let my colleagues in so that we may wrap this debate up.

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the and hon. and incredibly loyal Member for giving way. Does he realise that, as the result of a UN judgment in 1965, the United Kingdom was required to enter into negotiations with Argentina over the future of the Falkland Islands? Those negotiations continued until 1982, when they were concluded in a rather different way from that envisaged by the UN.

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell). With his final words on self-determination echoing in my ears, I have no doubt he will be reflecting on whether he is going to afford the people of Romford the same rights that he is demanding for the Chagossian people.

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend will have heard the Minister for the Indo-Pacific, the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), list the preconditions before treaty ratification can take place. I am pretty sure that I asked about America, and she said that there needed to be an exchange of letters. The position of the American Administration is that the Chagos deal as proposed by His Majesty’s Government would be “an act of GREAT STUPIDITY”. We seem quite a long way from getting American agreement and acquiescence. Does my hon. Friend, like me, foresee that we would need a protracted period of negotiation with the United States of America to get its acquiescence to this deal?

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  I listened to the criteria that the Minister expressed before ratification is possible. Is American agreement one of the criteria that she considers essential?

• 27 Jan 2026 · Inflation · Hansard source

  More

  On Friday, I visited Primark in Staines, in my Spelthorne constituency, where the team, led by Luke, is doing a fantastic job in creating a vibrant retail experience. However, the British Retail Consortium has said that the Chancellor’s jobs tax is pushing up prices and raising the cost of living, and that the Employment Rights Bill will also be inflationary. When did the Chancellor stop listening to business?

• 27 Jan 2026 · Inflation · Hansard source

  More

  18. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of her policies on inflation.

• 26 Jan 2026 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Last time I checked, there were 404 Labour MPs. Why does the Minister think that his Whips could not come up with a single Back Bencher to come to the Chamber and support his position today?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The news has broken that overnight the first asylum seekers have been moved into Crowborough barracks in Sussex. The Minister for Border Security and Asylum stood at the Dispatch Box and told me that the Stanwell hotel in my constituency would not be kept open as an asylum hotel for a minute longer than necessary. Will the Leader of the House please use his good offices to encourage the Home Office to come here on Monday to make a statement, which I am sure would be of interest across the House, to find out where the asylum seekers that have been moved into Crowborough barracks have been drawn from?

• 22 Jan 2026 · International Day of Education · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you for that welcome, Ms Vaz. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I congratulate the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous), who is also the chair of the APPG on global education, on securing this debate and on his long-standing interest in this matter. I also thank the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) for his gracious words of welcome, particularly because he was due to be standing at this Dispatch Box. When I saw him walk into Westminster Hall, I have to admit that my blood ran slightly cold, worrying that perhaps our shared team had prepared the same speech for us both to give—I should have known better. We on this side of the House recognise the huge benefits that education brings to supporting aspiration and helping to fulfil potential. Whether at home or abroad, we know that education lays the foundation for young people to build better futures. Here in England, the last Conservative Government raised standards in our schools and lifted the UK’s standing in international league tables for literacy to first in the western world, and fourth in the world. We also increased the number of full-time teachers by around 27,000, which is about 2,000 a year on average—a higher annual rate of growth than the 6,500 over five years promised by the current Government. Internationally, we played our part in supporting initiatives to lift people out of poverty. With the United Nations International Day of Education approaching on 24 January, this is an opportune moment to reflect on the links between education and economic development, and the role that the UK can play. Members will be aware of the UN’s sustainable development goal 4, which focuses on quality education to “Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”. The previous Government focused effort and resources on this area, including expanding and improving access to education, especially for women and girls, who face particular barriers to securing a meaningful education and childhood in parts of the world. This led to 19.8 million children, including 10 million girls, being supported with a decent education since 2015. That made a profound difference to those lives. The international women and girls strategy launched in 2023 had a strong focus on education. It highlighted the wider societal benefits of improved education for women and girls in developing countries, including that “A child whose mother can read is 50% more likely to live beyond the age of five”, is more likely to be immunised, and is about “twice as likely to attend school.” Girls benefiting from higher levels of education are also less likely to be affected by violence from a partner, less likely to marry as a child and more likely to find employment and start businesses. One of the great untapped potentials in developing countries is the enterprise and entrepreneurial spirit of women. Better education can help to unleash that potential. That is something that Members in all parts of the House can agree on. That strategy also focused on the three Es of educating girls, empowering women and girls and championing their health and rights, and ending gender based violence. But education is the essential first step. I ask the Minister, are the Government committed to implementing that strategy? With international development budgets understandably being reduced to support efforts to bolster our defences and national security, can the Minister update the House on the areas where the Government intend to focus resources for the rest of the decade? My team and I had prepared a rather different speech, but I have been very struck by the fact that four Members have mentioned Afghanistan. If the Chamber will indulge me, I, like the sponsor of this debate, would like to understand from the Minister what the Government are doing in terms of education in Syria, Iran, Gaza and the west bank and Sudan, but I want to tell a rather different story about international education. It is 2009 and we are in Basharan in the Helmand river valley of Afghanistan. There is a small village in Basharan with a defunct school. A young company commander by the name of Sean Birchall takes over that area and is determined that the school should open for boys and girls. He spends vast amounts of time going backwards and forwards, at great risk, to Lashkar Gah to try to get the education department there to provide teachers and school equipment, such as books and chairs. Sean was killed by a bomb, leaving a widow and an 18-month-old son, Charlie. Nevertheless, the men and women in his company of Welsh Guards continued his extraordinary work and the school got up and running. Fast forward to April the next year and I am the commanding officer of the Lashkar Gah battlegroup. We have Basharan in our patch, and very near one of the routes into Basharan was an impassable road—the Taliban had put a tax office on it and seeded it with a number of improvised explosive devices. I was given the mission to clear the road. I discussed it with the company commander and said, “It looks to me like we now need to start at one end and go to the other, or start at the other end and go to the other.” He said, “Let me have a think.” Then he said, “Right. I want to start in the middle and clear out in two directions.” I said, “Right, okay.” Taking the Taliban tax office would send a signal to the area that there was greater control. This involved a lot of moving people and equipment around, which alerted the locals that it was happening. I was at the checkpoint nearest to where we were going to start the operation the next day, and a young lance corporal called Cammy sent a message saying, “Commanding officer to the front gate,” so I went there. My approach to counter-insurgency, which I told the battalion, was: “We need to take risks to be safer.” It is one of the paradoxes of counter-insurgency; it is incredibly dangerous but, nevertheless, it can bear results. Cammy introduced me to a fellow with a wooden leg—a local—who had come to the gate and asked what was going on. Cammy said—he did not ask me—“I’m going to tell him the plan for tomorrow,” and I said, “Crack on.” So he told him the plan: that we were going to go in the next day and take down the tax office, and that we were going to clear the bombs but knew it was very dangerous indeed. The man, who was known as the Muj—mujaheddin—said, “Well, I’m going to come with you tomorrow at dawn and I’m going to show you where the bombs are.” I asked him, “Why are you going to do that? It’s incredibly risky.” And he said, “I will show you where the bombs are so that you can clear them, so that you can open the road and my daughter can go to Basharan school.” We all had a fitful night’s sleep, and, good as gold, the next day, at dawn, he turned up and we gave him a can of yellow spray-paint, and he hopscotched his way around a high-density minefield and sprayed paint on where the bombs were. It is so rare for the good that we enable off the security line of operations—namely education—to play so directly into local consent, in order to advance the cause and British interests. Under the UK aid flag, our support for education should be a sign of hope and freedom for those who receive it. We have had strong successes in recent years in delivering quality education for those who need it across the world, providing new opportunities for millions. Along with our key partners, the UK should continue to play a leading role, exercising our resources, leverage and expertise to improve educational outcomes and lift millions, globally, out of poverty and into a better future.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles: Legacy and Reconciliation · Hansard source

  More

  I want to make a couple of points, one about democracy and one about service and justice. I am deeply uneasy about this remedial order being brought in today. I will make no criticism of those who are here, but for major parts of this debate over the past three hours, the Government Back Benches were empty and yet 20-plus veterans have stayed in the Public Gallery to watch our proceedings and see justice being done. I find it worrying. It is 6.57 pm on a Wednesday. There will be Members in the Tea Room and the bars, and Members working hard in their offices. The bells will ring, as the hon. Member for South Antrim (Robin Swann) said, and they will come down and ask each other, “What are we voting on?” and they will say, “Oh, it’s a Northern Ireland thing.” What they will not realise is that this remedial order removes a law from existence before another one is put in place.