Manuela Perteghella MP: speeches
4 Jul 2024–3 Jul 2025
How these years work
Our reporting years run from 4 July to 3 July, starting with the 2024 general election. They are not official parliamentary sessions. Office costs keep IPSA’s April–March financial years. Records may cover only part of a year; a missing record does not mean no work was done.
Read what this MP said, asked and contributed in Parliament.
6 published records · newest first.
Speeches
- 4 Jun 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source
More
Can the Minister tell me how many more children must die before the Government finally ban the sales and export of all UK arms, including component parts, to the murderous Netanyahu Government?
- 3 Apr 2025 · UK Democracy: Impact of Digital Platforms · Hansard source
More
I start by congratulating the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) on introducing this timely and urgent debate. As we know, the digital age has brought about an unprecedented opportunity for campaigns of any kind, including campaigns of nefarious origins and by malign agents who seek to undermine democracy and the safety of our people. Digital platforms are proliferating at a rapid pace and reaching an unprecedented number of British citizens. They have become the most powerful communication tool of our age and are able to absorb vast amounts of detailed personal information about their users. Further, the platforms can apply complex algorithms to create tailor-made campaigns and personally targeted advertisements and content. That can include spreading conspiracy theories, extreme content and abuse towards citizens and elected officials. Regrettably, successive Governments have not been proactive in tackling the threat. They have been complacent with inertia and inaction, while tech and social media giants have spread misinformation and outright lies. They have let their digital platforms incite hatred and digital and physical violence, and they have caused riots on our streets. The digital world is the last frontier—wide open for exploitation by domestic and foreign powers who do not have Britain’s best interests at heart. The Russian Government have been accused of orchestrating a widespread campaign of interference and disinformation that seeks to undermine the global order. Last autumn, the head of MI6 warned that the international order is under threat in a way not seen since the end of the cold war, accusing Russia of a reckless campaign of sabotage across Europe. Likewise, Elon Musk recently used his platform to suggest that America should liberate the people of Britain and overthrow the UK Government. As we have heard, it is not just our democratic processes that are under threat and being targeted but our children too. With violent misogyny, online abuse, radicalisation and sexualisation on these platforms, who is keeping our children safe? The Online Safety Act 2023 must not be watered down in any future trade deal negotiations with the US. Further, the spread of misinformation online has the power to dramatically alter the outcomes of our elections and referendums, and in doing so change the course of this country. Who will take responsibility for the regulation of digital political campaigns? The Electoral Commission says that its focus is on campaign finance, the Information Commissioner’s Office says that its focus is on personal data, and the Advertising Standards Authority says that it does not regulate political adverts. When we do not regulate to protect our democracy and our children and young people, we rely on companies to regulate themselves. We hope that Facebook’s three-part strategy to target misinformation is robust enough, that Google’s centre for content responsibility takes its job seriously, and that the EU’s fine levied against tech companies for spreading disinformation has any real impact. Unfortunately, our hope will be in vain. In these unsettling times of global challenges, we must take the protection of Britain and its people into our own hands. We cannot rely on our safety being a priority for any other nation or for unelected tech billionaires. We need regulation and legislation to protect the people of Britain and ensure that our democracy is not affected by lies propagated by groups and individuals who do not have Britain’s best interests at heart. Effective tech regulation for digital platforms would result in radical real-time transparency for political advertising—for example, on donations and spending. It should result in strong laws on digital safeguarding, especially for young people and children. As America, influenced by its tech billionaires, withdraws from its role as the protector of the free world, let Britain step up to the mark and become a global leader in digital transparency, regulation and safeguarding.
- 12 Feb 2025 · Political Donations · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about a cap on political donations; to make provision for a review to recommend the level at which such a cap should be set and to consider the impact of such a cap; to make provision about political donations made by foreign nationals through companies; and for connected purposes. This is a Bill that will take big money out of British politics, protect our democracy from foreign interference, and restore public trust in our electoral system. For too long, our politics has been exposed. It is far too easy for those who do not have the national interest of our country at heart, or who have made their wealth through illicit means, to funnel money into British politics. The Bill is simple in its aim: to ensure that it is the people of this country, not the deep pockets of foreign billionaires, oligarchs or corporate interests, who decide our country’s future in elections and referendums. Trust in our political system is faltering. Many people look at our politics and see a system rigged in favour of the rich and powerful. A recent poll by YouGov found that more than two thirds of the British public support a limit on political donations. Not-for-profit organisations such as Unlock Democracy, Spotlight on Corruption and Fair Vote say that that we should take swift action to tighten electoral finance legislation, or else risk democratic backsliding. The message is clear: people want change. We want big money kicked out of politics. Under our current system, however, there is no limit to what a single individual or business can donate. That is not democracy; it is a bidding war for influence, ripe for exploitation by oligarchs and foreign billionaires. Look at the mess this has resulted in. Just over a month ago, people across Britain recoiled in horror to read the news that the US billionaire Elon Musk planned to donate an uncapped amount of money to Reform. If he were to follow up that plan, we would be powerless to stop him. Most alarming were the past donations to the Conservative party from individuals with links to the Russian Government. This is not just about fairness; it is about national security. Britain has long prided itself on being a beacon of democracy, but we must not be complacent. Our political financial regulations have glaring loopholes that are open for exploitation by foreign money, funnelled through UK-registered companies, opaque financial networks and questionable donors. Malign actors who do not share our values of tolerance, liberty and the rule of law should not have unrestricted access to our democracy. We know that hostile states seek to undermine our democracies all the time—we have seen it in cyber-attacks and disinformation campaigns—yet our political finance laws remain riddled with loopholes that allow foreign and dark money to shape British politics. The Bill seeks to close those gaps, ensuring that our elections and referendums belong to the voters and not to foreign interests. This Bill seeks to deliver two fair, necessary and overdue changes. First, it will introduce a fair cap on political donations, as determined by a review, and secondly, it will close British politics to the influence of foreign money by preventing foreign donors from funding our politics. These are essential measures that must be brought into effect. We must protect our elections from manipulation, and ensure that there is further transparency in political funding. In doing so, we will help to restore faith in our democracy and introduce vital safeguards for our political institutions. There is already a consensus in the House that foreign donations have no place in British politics, but that gaps in the law allow this to happen. We must act now to close the legal loopholes that allow these donations to flow unchecked. We in the House have a responsibility to uphold the integrity of our democracy, and it is our duty to drive the change that our country needs. Britain has always been a nation that stands for fairness, democracy and integrity. It is time for us to take a firm stand against undue influence in our politics, and ensure that our democracy serves the people. The Bill is not radical; it is reasonable, necessary and long overdue. It will ensure that political influence is not bought, but earned through genuine public support. Introducing a cap on political donations is not about limiting participation; it is about making sure that every vote, every voice and every citizen matters equally in our political system. Let us give control of British politics back to our constituents, not to unaccountable tech billionaires or those who seek to buy influence. Let us renew our commitment to an open and fair democracy—one that belongs to the people of this country, now and for generations to come. Question put and agreed to. Ordered, That Manuela Perteghella, Dr Roz Savage, Ellie Chowns, Liz Jarvis, Sorcha Eastwood, James MacCleary, Claire Young, Mr Alistair Carmichael, Wera Hobhouse, Sarah Olney and Martin Wrigley present the Bill. Manuela Perteghella accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 16 May, and to be printed (Bill 183).
- 6 Jan 2025 · Veterans’ Housing · Hansard source
More
The transition from military to civilian life is a critical moment for many veterans, but too often, those with complex mental health issues fall through the cracks, especially when it comes to accessing housing. The armed forces covenant is an excellent positive step forward, but its voluntary nature means that not all veterans will benefit equally. Will the Minister commit to reviewing the transition process, and particularly mental health services provision, to ensure that all veterans receive more comprehensive and tailored support?
- 6 Jan 2025 · Frozen Russian Assets: Ukraine · Hansard source
More
Does my hon. Friend agree that the UK, working shoulder to shoulder with our European allies, must lead the way in confiscating and repurposing frozen Russian assets for Ukraine? By ensuring that Ukraine has every financial and military resource that it needs, we can not only help the Ukrainians to reclaim their country but send a powerful message that Britain stands unwavering in the defence of freedom and democracy against Russian aggression.
- 30 Jul 2024 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
More
T8. Will the Government commit to do whatever they can to urgently secure an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, get the hostages home, and re-establish as soon as possible a dedicated peace process to set us on the path to a two-state solution, as raised by many of my hon. Friends today, including my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran)?
Explore activity by topic or department
Contributions by debate topic
4 Jul 2024–3 Jul 2025. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained.
View as listWhat this shows and doesn't show
Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →