Martin Rhodes MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 2 Jul 2025 · West Bank: Forced Displacement · Hansard source

  More

  I agree. We need to make sure that there is a Palestine to first be recognised and then be part of that two-state solution. In May 2025, Israeli Ministers approved 22 new illegal settlements in the west bank—the biggest expansion in decades. Defence Minister Israel Katz, as reported by the BBC, said the move “prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger Israel”. I hope the Minister can address that issue in his remarks. How can we hope for a negotiated two-state solution when the very existence of a Palestinian state is framed as a danger by Israeli Ministers? Since the ’67 war, Israel has occupied the west bank and East Jerusalem, which has led to 160 settlements housing 700,000 Israelis. Those settlements exist alongside an estimated 3.3 million Palestinians under occupation and are widely seen as illegal under international law. Last year, the UN International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion that Israel’s continued presence in Palestinian territory was unlawful. Furthermore, the court said that all settlements should be evacuated due to their establishment and maintenance being in violation of international law.

• 2 Jul 2025 · Spending Review 2025: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) for securing this important debate and for his speech highlighting what a Labour Government in Westminster can mean for our constituents in Scotland. The spending review delivers a major boost to Scotland. Over the next three years, the Scottish Government will receive £9.1 billion of funding. That marks the largest real-terms settlement since devolution began. Labour has ended austerity in Scotland. These are not just numbers; this funding is an opportunity for real change. It must be used to strengthen the services people rely on every day: our NHS, schools, police and housing. It is now down to the Scottish Government to deliver on those matters with this funding from the UK Labour Government. I also welcome the spending review’s creation of and support for four investment zones and green freeports, in the north-east, in Inverness and Cromarty Firth, at Forth Green and, most importantly to me, in the Glasgow city region. That includes £160 million each over 10 years. The Glasgow investment zone will focus on advanced manufacturing, a future growth sector that the city is well placed to lead, with its world-class universities and a strong pool of talent in the region. The investment zone will be focused on sites in Renfrewshire, alongside existing innovation districts and underdeveloped sites near critical infrastructure around Glasgow airport. Local partners expect it to generate at least £1.7 billion of investment and up to 18,000 full-time equivalent jobs over 10 years, and boost the region’s research and innovation economy. In recent years, we have seen the benefits of further devolving power and funding to city regions across the UK, with the ability at local level to create and tailor policies to better serve our communities. In Scotland, however, devolution appears to have stalled at Holyrood. There is little appetite to pass power and more funding to the Glasgow city region and other communities across Scotland. I hope that the Minister will indicate that the UK Government would support further devolution to the Glasgow city region, and I hope that the Scottish Government move quickly to achieve that. The UK Labour Government have provided the Scottish Government with a huge and historic opportunity to make progress with the commitments in the spending review to empower our city regions with more powers and funding to better deliver for our communities. In 2026, Scotland will have the chance to choose a Government who not just talk but deliver: a Scottish Labour Government who turn record funding into real results for all of our communities.

• 2 Jul 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q11. Figures from British Transport police show a staggering 47% rise in violence and serious public order offences against rail staff between 2021 and 2024. This epidemic of violence was allowed to escalate under the previous Conservative Government, who failed to act while frontline workers were increasingly put at risk. Does the Prime Minister agree that our transport workers deserve to do their jobs without fear, and will he reaffirm this Labour Government’s commitment to ensuring that train operating companies are held fully accountable for protecting those who keep our railways safe and moving?

• 26 Jun 2025 · BBC World Service Funding · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Jeremy. In recent years, we have seen a rise in disinformation, with malign actors seeking to sow division and distrust within communities, across countries and throughout entire regions. One of the key problems with our global information ecosystem is that it takes significantly more time and effort to refute false or misleading information than it does to produce it. That is why continued funding and support for the BBC World Service is not just desirable but essential: it acts as a factual counterweight to disinformation. There is documented evidence of states such as Russia employing trolls to spread misinformation internationally, in countries such as the UK and India, on platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter. In 2020, Facebook uncovered a Russia-linked disinformation campaign run through a front organisation in Ghana. The operation used fake accounts to post about US social issues such as race, LGBT rights and celebrity culture, aiming to sow division while concealing its Russian origins. Those and similar actions are designed to accelerate societal division and encourage support for illegal and unethical activities such as the invasion of Ukraine. In contrast, the BBC World Service shares a balanced view of international developments, delivered through news, speech and discussion, on TV, on radio and online, in 42 languages around the world. It is the world’s largest external broadcaster by reception area, language diversity and audience reach, with an average weekly audience of 450 million. It reflects and projects impartial, accurate and independent journalism. In an increasingly competitive global media environment in which authoritarian states invest heavily in state-run media, the BBC stands as a trusted voice globally. The case for the BBC World Service is about not only the rise of disinformation but the decline of similar global news services, of which the closest in scale was Voice of America, as mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley). A striking example of the self-defeating nature of the cuts to such organisations and to impartial global journalism came when Persian-language reporters for Voice of America who had been on administrative leave were called back to work following the escalation of tensions after Israel’s attacks on Iran. Just days after returning, these journalists reportedly stepped outside for a cigarette break only to find themselves locked out of the building, and they were then informed that they had been dismissed. At a moment of heightened geopolitical instability, when their language skills and regional insight were more valuable than ever, the termination of their employment was not just poorly handled; it was a serious loss for factual reporting, both for the region and for the global audience. That is precisely the role that BBC World Service continues to play. In the absence of other trusted international broadcasters, the BBC must fill the gap. If we do not, others will, and the voices that take the place of the BBC might not be platforms promoting informed and informing journalism. I trust that in her closing remarks the Minister will recognise the role of the BBC World Service and give her support to its continuing existence.

• 24 Jun 2025 · War Memorials · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) on securing this important debate on the role of war memorials. Glasgow North is home to the Western Necropolis, where nearly 500 service personnel from both world wars are laid to rest in Commonwealth war graves. Among them are Canadians, Australians and even American volunteers who served in Commonwealth forces. Their graves are a solemn reminder of Glasgow’s role as a hub of military activity, from shipbuilding on the Clyde to the hospitals that cared for the wounded. The care and preservation of such sites is about not just maintenance but memory and ensuring that the stories of those who served are not lost to time and neglect. Remembrance must not only look back; it must evolve to reflect the full breadth of our shared history. Recently, I had the opportunity to visit the Kelvingrove Museum with representatives of Colourful Heritage, which has been closely involved with a new exhibition that highlights the contribution of the more than 4 million British Indian Army soldiers who served in the two world wars. It is a striking and necessary addition to our understanding of those conflicts. Colourful Heritage has already done important work in schools across Scotland, helping young people to engage with this history. It is now taking the next step, with partners, to establish Scotland’s first permanent memorial to the British Indian Army in the grounds of Kelvingrove. Planning permission is in progress, and the design reflects the diversity of those who served: Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and those with no religious faith. The memorial will also acknowledge the unique connection between Scotland and Force K6, the all-Muslim Punjabi regiment stationed in Scotland, via Dunkirk, during the second world war. Their story, like so many others, deserves a permanent place in our national landscape of remembrance. I hope the Minister can offer support for that initiative. As we reflect today on how we maintain and fund war memorials and support them, it is worth recognising that remembrance is not static; it evolves. It must reflect the full breadth of those who served and sacrificed. That work being done in Glasgow is a meaningful example of that evolution.

• 23 Jun 2025 · Pride Month · Hansard source

  More

  Picking up from what the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire) said about delays in the process of payments to those dismissed from the armed forces, that experience of delay has been raised with me by my constituent, Paul, who I thank for giving me permission to discuss his story today. Paul loved music from an early age and, at 15, he auditioned to join the Army as a bandsman and passed with flying colours. Later that year, still not yet 16, he did his three-month basic Army training in Aberdeen. It was at that time that he realised he was gay, and his time in the Army became unnecessarily complex and stressful for him as he had to hide his true self. In the summer of 1988, while rehearsing for the Edinburgh Military Tattoo, he was taken aside by the military police. Paul was arrested in front of the entire regimental band and the other bands on parade. He was taken to Edinburgh castle, where the special investigation branch interrogated him for hours. He did not know what to do, so he just denied everything. He was then imprisoned for a week. During that time, he was humiliated and called degrading names. He was hosed down instead of being allowed to wash, and made to do push-ups while a corporal pushed on his back so hard with his drill boots that blood seeped through Paul’s vest. His meals were spat on and defecated in, and when he refused to eat them, they were thrown at him. He was repeatedly asked intrusive, aggressive and detailed questions about his sexual activity. During his time in jail, he was allowed one phone call, which he used to call his mother, who told him to admit that he was gay. Under the sustained pressure from the interrogation and with the advice of his mother, he admitted he was gay and he was dismissed from the Army. In 2017, Paul suffered a mental breakdown. His therapist believed that Paul’s Army experience and flashbacks contributed to that breakdown. Paul has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of his Army experiences. We owe it to Paul and all the other LGBT+ veterans that applications for financial payments are processed as quickly as possible and with as little intrusion as possible. My constituent and many other veterans are waiting for justice. I urge colleagues across the House to give their support to the Fighting With Pride campaign on this issue. In Armed Forces Week, let us remember the thousands of military personnel whose service was cut short by dismissal because of their sexuality. Finally, I call on the Government to redouble their efforts to rectify this historic injustice by delivering financial reparations in as timely and considerate a manner as possible.

• 19 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I recently met the British Transport police, whose Scottish headquarters are in my constituency, to discuss their text service for confidential reporting of non-emergency incidents on the rail network. Earlier this year, I attended a Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association event, at which the union was launching its “Keep transport workers safe” report, which highlights the abuse and harassment faced by staff across our transport systems. Given the vital role that transport workers play in keeping passengers and infrastructure safe, will the Leader of the House give us a debate in Government time on recognising their contribution, and on how best to protect them?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Covid: Fifth Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  I commend my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham and Beckton (James Asser) for securing this debate. The covid-19 pandemic had a global reach, yet the impact was not felt equally. On a local level, the pandemic had a disproportionate impact on some of the most vulnerable in society. The elderly, those with pre-existing conditions and people living in the most deprived areas saw some of the highest fatality rates. The covid-19 pandemic in the UK and globally displayed for all to see—or all who cared to see—the damning consequences of societal and economic inequalities. Globally, covid-19 is estimated to have directly caused 7 million deaths and many millions more indirectly. The global response was unequal and unjust, with many countries starved of essential vaccines, tests and treatments. Though some spoke of covid-19 as being a once-in-a-lifetime event, that is not necessarily true. A key way of honouring those who died, those who were left bereaved and those who suffered in so many ways is to focus on having a plan for the next pandemic. Studies suggest that outbreaks caused by diseases moving from animals to people are happening more often and with greater impact. That said, there are reasons for hope in that area. A number of initiatives and projects are working to ensure that the next outbreak does not catch us unprepared. One example is the 100 Days Mission, which is a global initiative that aims to have safe, effective and accessible vaccines, tests and treatments within 100 days of the next pandemic. It is estimated that had the world deployed vaccines, tests and treatments within 100 days for covid, rather than within 300 days, we could have prevented 8.3 million excess deaths and avoided trillions in economic losses. It is welcome that the UK Government continue to support that mission and more general global health research and development. Research in that area and in so many others is so important. We live in an age where some decry experts. I suggest that we need more expertise, research and science, not less. We need to remember those who suffered and those who died, and we need to mark that by a commitment to ensure that we are better placed than ever before for any such eventuality in the future.

• 4 Jun 2025 · National Wealth Fund: Glasgow City Region · Hansard source

  More

  2. What discussions he has had with the Scottish Government on priorities for the National Wealth Fund’s strategic partnership with the Glasgow city region.

• 4 Jun 2025 · National Wealth Fund: Glasgow City Region · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister agree that in recent years, we have witnessed the benefits of further devolving power to cities and city regions, which have created tailored policies to better serve communities? In Holyrood, however, devolution appears to have stalled, and there is little appetite to pass power down to our cities, towns and communities. Does she agree that the recent Glasgow city region devolution proposal makes a compelling case for further devolution to that city region?

• 3 Jun 2025 · Dementia Care · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend mentioned person-centred care in dementia. Does she agree that initiatives such as Playlist for Life in my constituency, which uses meaningful music to reconnect people with dementia to their memories and their identity, should be more widely supported across the NHS?

• 19 May 2025 · Gender Self-identification · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Mr Mundell; it is a pleasure to serve under your chairing. I thank the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for her introduction on the petition. My constituency has the second-highest number of signatories to this petition—after Brighton Pavilion—which has also been reflected in my inbox. I thank those constituents for making their views known through signing the petition and through correspondence, and those with a range of different views on the issue for contacting me. [Gill Furniss in the Chair ] This petition refers to people’s self-identity. Let us be clear: all of us have our own identity. How we see ourselves is an integral part of the human condition, and is universal. It is part of how we understand ourselves, how we seek to relate to others, and how we feel about who we are. We all have our own journey to self-identity, and hopefully to acceptance of that identity. Legislation cannot stop that innate self-identification of human nature, but legislation can frame how easily we can live that identity honestly, openly and safely. That is as relevant for trans men and trans women as it is for any human being. Supporting trans people to have their self-identity respected is as important for all of us. That is not a claim for special treatment; it is a call for equality in how people are treated. I believe that we need to modernise, simplify and reform the Gender Recognition Act. That particularly means reviewing adult identity services to ensure that all trans people can access appropriate, timely and high-quality care. Trans people are so often let down by healthcare and support services. That said, I recognise that easier access to gender recognition certificates is meaningful only if it enables trans women and trans men to live with dignity and respect. That brings me to the recent Supreme Court case. It is extremely important to highlight that the Court warned against “reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another”, and noted that transgender people are protected under the Equality Act through the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Although the ruling clarifies the legal definition of sex in the Equality Act, it does not clarify how the Act should be implemented, or how the Gender Recognition Act interacts with the Equality Act and the right to privacy. There needs to be an inclusive process of working through the Equality Act and its range of protected characteristics. The Supreme Court judgment provides clarity on the legal definition of one of those protected characteristics, but does not in any way negate the importance of the other protected characteristics, including gender reassignment. It is clear that there are complexities in how these protections interrelate, and careful thought must be given to guidance on this. The Equality and Human Rights Commission is due to provide an updated code of practice. I believe that its deliberations must be informed by the voices and lived experience of those affected, and I have written to the commission to that effect. The interim guidance that it has published so far has only highlighted the complexity and the urgent need for appropriate and inclusive consultation and engagement. That process is necessary to avoid institutions and businesses acting in ways that fail to fully take into account the full range of responsibilities in relation to all protected characteristics. Action without a full recognition of responsibilities risks causing harm not only to trans people, but to non-binary individuals and those whose gender expression does not conform to stereotypical expectations of their sex. There is a danger that the law could be implemented in such a way that it forces trans individuals into distressing and unsafe scenarios simply for existing in public spaces. At the same time, it could put public and private organisations potentially in breach of their legal responsibilities and at risk of not protecting effectively those they seek to protect. That is why broad, inclusive consultation is vital. There is a need for actions that are proportionate, risk-based, trauma-informed and inclusive and that have appropriate safeguards and protections for all. The Supreme Court judgment that “sex” in the Equality Act means “biological sex” creates an impossible dilemma for many trans people in everyday situations. A trans man could be legally required to use a women’s changing room because he was assigned female at birth, but because he presents as male he may be challenged or even excluded by staff or other users, who assume he is in the wrong place. At the same time, if he tries to use the men’s changing room—the one that matches his gender identity and appearance—he risks being accused of unlawfully accessing a single-sex service that is not intended for him. Essentially, the situation leaves him and other users of those facilities without a dignified option. I have long campaigned for LGBT+ rights and will continue to do so. We must never lose sight of the fact that real people’s lives are at the heart of the issue. Equality depends on our upholding our shared values such as open-mindedness, and it requires continued advocacy for groups of individuals who are too often marginalised in our society. Trans people have the right to live with dignity, safety and equality under the law. These are worrying times for many, and I share many of the anxieties. I regret the nature of too many of the discussions about these issues, but I remain hopeful that if we listen calmly to each other, there is a way forward rooted in the shared values of inclusivity, respect and equality. With those values, and the actions that need to lead from them, we can all benefit. The denial of the right of one community or one person to be openly and genuinely themselves diminishes us all. It is our challenge as legislators to address these issues. I commend the petitioners for taking the opportunity to remind us in this place of that responsibility. To them, I say thanks.

• 6 May 2025 · Parking Regulation · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. It is clear from this debate that there are systemic weaknesses in how the private parking system is structured and regulated. That is the core issue that I wish to address. One of the two DVLA-accredited trade associations is the International Parking Community. Members of the IPC are granted access to DVLA data to pursue unpaid parking charges. If a constituent receives a penalty charge notice from an IPC member, they are directed to appeal via the Independent Appeals Service, a body accepted by the DVLA for the purpose of handling appeals. Although the IAS is an accredited alternative dispute resolution provider, it is not directly run by the Government. The word “independent” may lead consumers to believe that they are appealing to an impartial Government-run body, but the IAS operates independently of both Government oversight and parking operators. The International Parking Community and the Independent Appeals Service are both trading names of one company, United Trade and Industry Ltd. This overlap raises legitimate concerns about perceived conflicts of interest, as the same corporate entity that profits from private parking companies through membership fees is responsible for overseeing the code of practice and adjudicating disputes under it. This lack of separation, clearly, could undermine trust in the fairness of the process. The IAS asserts that its independence is safeguarded by its use of qualified solicitors or barristers as self-employed adjudicators, all of whom remain anonymous, are duty-bound by their professional codes and are paid fixed fees regardless of appeal outcomes. It is also true that individuals retain the option of appealing a PCN through other means, such as in court, under consumer protection legislation. However, for the average citizen, and particularly for someone without time, resources or legal understanding, the impression of full independence created by the Independent Appeals Service’s name could easily be misleading. At a minimum, the current framework could contribute to a perception of bias and could foster a lack of public confidence. These are precisely the issues that a Government private parking code of practice needs to address. I therefore look forward to the Minister setting out the progress that the Government are making in addressing the issues. I hope to hear about the progress to be made in how private parking is enforced, to ensure greater oversight, consistency and fairness.

• 6 May 2025 · Poverty: Glasgow North East · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North East (Maureen Burke) on securing this debate and on her heartfelt speech about the impact of poverty in her constituency. My constituency of Glasgow North, which adjoins hers, also faces many of the same factors that contribute to low life expectancy—factors that are clearly linked to poverty. Recent data from the Office for National Statistics has shown that the average life expectancy in Glasgow North is 75.9 years, which is 8.7 years shorter than in the healthiest parts of the UK. However, in a way, that number also acts as a smokescreen. Because it is an average that includes the most affluent areas, it conceals the true life expectancy of the most deprived communities in my constituency. Where someone is born, where they live, and even which streets they grow up on, can help determine how long they live. Although the figures highlight a shocking level of health inequality, they ultimately reflect the deeper and more complex realities of poverty. Poverty does not come from one place; it stems from a web of economic, social and cultural factors. Those are shaped by issues related to class, health, social security, wages, job security, education, housing and access to credit, to name just a few. It is the way that those pressures interact, often reinforcing one another, that sustains the poverty that we see in Glasgow and across the country. The history of place can accentuate those issues, Glasgow’s history being an example. The deindustrialisation of the city combined with the lack of necessary support, planning and investment in the late ’70s and ’80s led to mass unemployment and growing inequalities that are still felt in communities today. Although the previous Labour Government made great progress combating child poverty rates, that has not been sustained. Subsequent national policy choices and global events have only made those systemic issues of poverty worse, with the financial crash, the cuts to public services from Tory austerity and the long-term impact of a global pandemic hampering Glasgow’s prosperity. Poverty can also create vicious cycles, which can appear in many different aspects of someone’s life. For example, if someone’s job is insecure, it is harder for them to afford stable housing. Without a fixed address, it is harder for them to access social security. Without that safety net, the risk of homelessness rises and the cycle continues. That is why it is not enough to talk about employment alone. We need to ensure that work provides security and pays a real living wage. I welcome this Government’s decision to uplift the minimum wage, a vital move that ensures that more people can earn enough to live with dignity. The Employment Rights Bill will go further, ending exploitative zero-hours contracts and helping to ensure that anyone in paid work has stability and protection. But let us be clear: no single policy will solve poverty. What is needed is a joined-up approach—one that brings together housing, health, education, employment and social security. That is why the Government’s focus on building houses, improving the education system, restoring the NHS and promoting economic growth is vital to helping to deliver for those who are most vulnerable. I am also confident that the work of this Labour Government’s child poverty taskforce will be vital in delivering a cross-Government child poverty strategy to reduce and alleviate child poverty. That will be essential in improving children’s lives and life chances now and address the root causes of poverty in the long term. Glasgow is a city of immense potential, rich in culture, talent and resilience. The fact that some of its communities have the lowest life expectancies in the UK is not an inevitability—it is the result of decisions taken in the past. If we make different choices, we can build a city and a country where every child has the opportunity to thrive and every community the chance to prosper. I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say in her response.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Clean Energy Transition · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her response, but could she go further in setting out the Government’s assessment of how in the clean energy transition new jobs can be created here in the UK in the manufacturing of components for offshore wind and other green energy projects?

• 29 Apr 2025 · Clean Energy Transition · Hansard source

  More

  6. What assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of the clean energy transition on workers.

• 24 Apr 2025 · EU Trading Relationship · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairing, Sir Jeremy. Due to the limits of time, I will focus on the UK’s creative industries, particularly music and the performing arts. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport estimates that music, the performing arts and the visual arts add approximately £11.2 billion to the UK economy annually and employ 283,000 people. Without dedicated provisions in the UK-EU trade and co-operation agreement, performers, artists and production teams face the challenge of navigating different regulations in each of the 27 EU member states, each of which has its own administrative and financial barriers. Although larger and more established acts may absorb those challenges, they pose disproportionate barriers to emerging talent. Furthermore, this acts as a barrier to cultural exchange between the EU and the UK. Ease of travel for artists and musicians helps to strengthen relationships and business connections across the continent and helps both cultural scenes to thrive. While I welcome the Government’s assurances that they are seeking some form of specific cultural carve-out, or at least allowances for music rules, performing arts and culture touring, there remains a greater need for a systemic change for the creative industry’s access to Europe, and vice versa. That is why I urge the Government to consider a dedicated cultural mobility agreement with the EU or, at the very least, a meaningful cultural exemption to safeguard the future of our creative industries and restore the cultural exchange that has long enriched the EU and the UK. I hope that the Minister will say something on that in his response.

• 3 Apr 2025 · UK Democracy: Impact of Digital Platforms · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) for bringing this debate to the Chamber. Throughout history, from the printing press to social media, technological advancements have often outpaced the laws meant to regulate them. Today, digital platforms evolve at a speed that outstrips Governments’ abilities to fully understand or regulate their impact—especially concerning for democracy, which depends on informed citizens making choices shaped by debate. Yet democracy is increasingly undermined by bad faith actors, misinformation and manipulation. As digital natives and future voters, young people face particular risks, and Governments owe them a duty of care to help them to develop in an informed and safe way online. However, older citizens with less experience of social media and newer tech platforms can also face difficulties in how they interact and interpret information or disinformation. In addition to the risks of early forms of digital platforms for democracy, such as the spread of misinformation, contemporary digital platforms now possess novel risks such as deepfakes, AI bots and short- form video content. I will focus my speech on how this situation relates to our democratic engagement. In Scotland, 16-year-olds have the right to vote in local and national elections; with the Government’s manifesto promising votes at 16 in UK elections, it is important to consider the impact of digital platforms on young voters and the younger generations who will one day become voters. It will not surprise many to hear that young people are extensive users of digital platforms and that their online habits are evolving rapidly. According to Ofcom, 86% of 9 to 16-year-olds use social media, and even among children as young as 5 to 7, a third are now active online. Platforms such as TikTok and Discord are increasingly shaping young people’s understanding of the world, including politics. Ofcom reports that children aged 5 to 15 are now spending an average of five hours and 24 minutes a day engaged in social media activity. It is right to note that there are benefits to the use of digital platforms by young people in our political system. These platforms allow young people access to the entire sum of human knowledge, and therefore have real scope as a great source of education and knowledge. They can not only provide helpful information and analysis on our politics, but act as a new means of getting young people engaged and interested in our democratic system. Despite these benefits, it remains the case that there are real risks and harms associated with children’s use of social media and their outlook on democracy. Recent TV shows such as “Adolescence” have highlighted that digital platforms can act as echo chambers where extremist communities can influence young people’s ideas and opinions. A recent survey published by the University of Glasgow’s John Smith centre, based in my constituency, found that nationally, 57% of 16 to 29-year-olds would prefer to live in a democracy; that said, 27% of those surveyed would prefer to live in a dictatorship. The fact that more than a quarter of this age group would prefer to live in a system completely juxtaposed to our own democracy should be a warning to us all. In difficult times globally, with uncertainty and disruption to previously accepted patterns of international, national and local environments, the lure of simplistic but dangerous solutions promoted by bad faith actors can be all too persistent. I welcome the actions taken to address these challenges by committing both to making the digital world a safer place for young people and to delivering real, tangible improvements in their lives through other policy initiatives, but we must work harder as we move forward to respond to the ever-changing environment of online activity that we face. Social media giants must be held accountable for the role their platforms play in shaping public discourse, and no tech executive should be above the law. I commend the efforts of the hon. Member for Lagan Valley in securing this Backbench Business debate and introducing it today. We must not only protect young people—and, in fact, all citizens—from harm online, but equip them with the tools to shape their future, assuming they are not just passive consumers of digital content, but informed and engaged citizens in our democracy.

• 3 Apr 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Under current passport application rules, an applicant needs a counter-signatory who has known them for at least two years and is in good standing in their community or from a recognised profession. One of my constituents has faced a problem with these requirements due to losing contact with her social circle as a result of complex post-traumatic stress disorder. Although in theory discretion exists in these rules, my constituent remains unable to get a passport. Will the Leader of the House allocate Government time for a debate on ensuring passport accessibility?

• 3 Apr 2025 · Glasgow 2026 Commonwealth Games · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her response. Does she agree that it is important that the games bring benefits to local communities? What discussions is she having with colleagues in the Scotland Office, the Scottish Government and Glasgow city council to ensure that local communities in Glasgow benefit from the games in 2026?

• 3 Apr 2025 · Glasgow 2026 Commonwealth Games · Hansard source

  More

  6. What discussions she has had with the Glasgow 2026 Organising Company on the 2026 Commonwealth games.

• 2 Apr 2025 · Gaza: Israeli Military Operations · Hansard source

  More

  I recognise what the Minister has said about what has been done, but given the desperate situation, what more could be done through diplomatic efforts to ensure that Israel allows in humanitarian aid at speed and at scale, and to support the Arab initiative, so that Gaza is rebuilt as part of a recognised, viable Palestinian state?

• 31 Mar 2025 · Political Donations · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests regarding donations to my election campaign and through my local Labour party. Often in debates like this, we look at our political system and there is a preoccupation with the form of the democratic system—for example, debates about our voting system or whether we should have a second Chamber. Important as they are, they can often dominate the discourse. The internal mechanisms of democratic political systems are important, but we also need to examine and discuss the relationship of those internal mechanisms with external actors and the political electoral systems in which we operate. That is why I welcome my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) moving the motion, and I am grateful to the petitioners for bringing the matter before us. At the general election, I stood on a manifesto that pledged to protect democracy by strengthening the rules on donations to political parties. I take that commitment seriously, as effective regulation of political finance is, in my view, crucial for maintaining public trust in our electoral systems across the UK. As has already been mentioned, under current legislation, any company registered as conducting business in the UK is a permissible donor to a political party operating in Great Britain. It is therefore possible for money from foreign sources to enter our politics via donations from UK companies. That undermines the credibility of our political system and gives greater scope for a further decline in trust. That leads to the interests of those foreign groups or individuals, in practice or perception, being seen to have influence in our political system through their funding. I want to address one point that has been raised in this debate, which is the matter of accountability and deterrence. Although foreign donations to political parties and other campaigners are illegal, the current legislation fails to act as a sufficient deterrent. There is an often-quoted behavioural study of day centres that sheds light on this issue—apologies, Mrs Harris, but I will cite it again. In the study, parents who arrived late to pick up their children were fined, but instead of reducing lateness, the number of late pick-ups actually increased. Understandably, the parents began treating the fine as a fee for extra childcare, seeing it as an acceptable trade-off rather than a punishment. We face a similar risk in our political donation system. Under current rules, the electoral system can issue fines of up to £20,000 for breaches. However, for a political party that can spend millions of pounds on a campaign, that amount may be seen as a small price to pay for breaking the rules. It becomes less of a deterrent and more like an operational cost, just as the day care fine became the cost of convenience. If we are serious about protecting the integrity of our electoral system, we must ensure that penalties are strong enough to truly deter illegal behaviour, and are not just seen as a fee to be factored into campaign budgets. As my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran mentioned, the Committee on Standards in Public Life agrees and suggests that maximum fines should be 4% of the campaign’s total spend or £500,000, whichever is higher. Without sharper teeth in our regulations, we risk allowing those with deeper pockets to buy an unfair advantage, undermining the very principles of democracy. I therefore support the Government’s intention to strengthen the rules on donations to political parties to protect our democracy and uphold the integrity of elections. I understand that they will be published in due course, but I urge the Government to do it as quickly as possible. While the current rules remain in place, the potential for abuse remains evident. The Electoral Commission stated in January this year that it would use its expertise and experience in regulating the political finance regime to help to ensure that any changes are workable and evidence based. Any proposals to change the rules on donations should be properly scrutinised and debated before becoming law. I look forward to this debate continuing when said changes to electoral law are put before the House. To maintain public trust in our electoral system, those rules must be strengthened. It is upon all of us in this place to increase people’s engagement with the political process. However, to develop that engagement and promote transparency, we need to build trust. One way in which we can build that trust is to take action on the rules on political donations.

• 27 Mar 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  An issue of concern for constituents in Glasgow North and elsewhere is the unregulated use of off-road vehicles. Anyone can easily purchase one without registration, and their subsequent use can lead to antisocial behaviour and in some places, including in my own constituency recently, to very tragic consequences. Will the Leader of the House provide time to debate the regulation, including registration, of these off-road vehicles?

• 25 Mar 2025 · Great British Energy Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I very much welcome the amendment. Does the Minister agree that community energy is important not just for jobs and investment but for engaging communities with the transition to a new energy system? Does he recognise the need for the Government to support those initiatives with funding going forward?