Nadia Whittome MP: speeches

Speeches

• 2 Jul 2025 · Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism · Hansard source

  More

  I want to make it clear to Members that the order we are voting on is not about whether we support Palestine Action’s political positions or protest methods. To vote against this motion, Members do not have to agree with the group at all; they can still support holding it criminally liable for its actions. The question is whether it should be proscribed as a terrorist group, placed alongside the likes of al-Qaeda, Islamic State and National Action. It is fitting that this debate takes place on the 97th anniversary of women winning the vote on equal terms with men, thanks in no small part to the suffragettes. The suffragettes carried out direct action far more extreme than anything those in Palestine Action have done, but today their role in changing history for the better is commemorated. Whatever we think of its actions, Palestine Action is part of a similar tradition, with the target this time being to stop the genocide in Gaza. It is unprecedented for a Government to ban a civil disobedience protest group in the way that they are attempting to today, but what is not unprecedented is protesters breaking into military bases. That has never before resulted in proscription. Proscribing Palestine Action would be a draconian overreach. It would threaten the fundamental right to peaceful protest. It would set a dangerous precedent that could be used in future to further silence dissent, while diminishing what the Terrorism Act is meant to prevent.

• 2 Jul 2025 · Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism · Hansard source

  More

  I agree entirely with the hon. Member. UN experts urge us not to do this. They state that they are “concerned at the unjustified labelling of a political protest movement as ‘terrorist’”. Hundreds of lawyers have written to the Home Secretary, warning that proscribing Palestine Action would conflate protest and terrorism. Amnesty International and Liberty have both expressed deep concerns. A senior civil servant has briefed that there is disquiet among Home Office staff about the decision, and has called it “absurd”. It is important to remember that this proscription would affect not just members of Palestine Action, but anyone who supports them. Donating to a fundraiser or posting positively about the group on social media would be committing a crime. We risk criminalising huge numbers of our constituents. I regret our being denied the opportunity to vote separately on the proscription of Palestine Action. The other two bodies are neo-Nazi organisations whose proscription I wholeheartedly support. This grouping together of organisations that so clearly do not belong in the same category demonstrates again why we cannot allow this proscription to go ahead. I have no choice but to vote against the order.

• 30 Jun 2025 · Welfare Reform · Hansard source

  More

  Disabled people’s organisations have been clear that even with these concessions, they oppose this Bill. The Government talk of co-production of the PIP review, but it is not co-production if the starting point is delivering cuts, and if the Government are asking disabled people where they would prefer those cuts to be, rather than how we can create a system that truly supports disabled people. Does the Secretary of State not accept that, after months of the Government ignoring disabled people, the only way that meaningful co-production can take place is if the Bill is pulled and they go back to the drawing board?

• 30 Jun 2025 · Welfare Reform · Hansard source

  More

  It’s because you were in power for 14 years.

• 18 Jun 2025 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Why should we implement this model for sex work when the evidence from the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland shows that it has increased violence towards sex workers?

• 9 Jun 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the fact that the Government are responding to the huge public pressure and are expanding eligibility for winter fuel payments. I am concerned that we are about to make a similar mistake, which, once again, we will come to regret, in cutting disability benefits. Will the Treasury drop those cuts before they cause harm to our constituents, instead of reversing them after the fact? I have listened carefully to what my hon. Friend has said. To be clear, I am not asking him to keep the status quo, or to not support people into work; I am simply asking him not to cut disabled people’s benefits.

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

  More

  Men, women and children in Gaza do not care that our Government have a profound disagreement with the Israeli Government. The Israeli Government do not care either, because they are continuing to act with impunity. It is quite simple: there is a genocide in Gaza being committed by the Israeli Government. We are complicit in that genocide. We have the power to act and we are not acting. What are we waiting for? Why have we not sanctioned Israel for its war crimes? Why have we not implemented a full arms embargo, including on F-35 fighter jet parts? Why have we not recognised the state of Palestine? We can do it, because rightly we did it for Ukraine. Why are we not treating Palestinian lives as equal?

• 12 May 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Vulnerable people are dying in the channel and in our asylum system in record, horrifying numbers. Today, yet another person tragically died trying to reach our shores. The exact figures are murky, but from what we know, last year was the deadliest year ever for people seeking asylum in the UK. The UN estimates that 82 people, including at least 14 children, lost their lives in the channel, but French frontline charities believe the fatality rate to be significantly higher. Meanwhile, freedom of information requests reveal that 51 people died in asylum accommodation, and among them were a 15-year-old boy and two babies. People are drowning while trying to reach safety. Once they arrive, they are dying by suicide, from infectious diseases and from unknown causes in poverty, in low-quality accommodation or on the streets, like the teenage victim of modern slavery who took his own life while terrified of deportation, the father of one who died of diphtheria after being held in a Government processing centre, or the seven-year-old girl who was crushed to death on an overcrowded boat. In several cases of deaths in asylum accommodation, there have been alleged lapses of safeguarding codes. These deaths are utterly unacceptable and often preventable, yet the Home Office keeps no official record. As such, we do not know how many lives are being lost. The Government rightly want to reduce deaths in the channel, and the starting point must be to know the numbers. My new clause 1, which is supported by 24 MPs, is a call for truth and transparency. It would mandate that the Home Office records and reports statistics and information on the deaths of people in our asylum system who are meant to be in its care and people at our borders. It would provide opportunities for scrutiny and accountability, because no matter where they come from or how they got here, people deserve dignity. We must not allow them to die in silence, ignored and uncared for, so I urge the Government to act. We need a new approach to refugees and asylum. We need to stand up to Conservative Members scapegoating desperate people for the problems that our communities are experiencing after 14 years of Conservative austerity, instead of parroting them.

• 12 May 2025 · Immigration System · Hansard source

  More

  Migrants are being scapegoated for problems they did not cause. To be truthful, these arbitrary measures will not fix those problems, but they will harm migrants, people who need social care, our economy and anyone who fears racial abuse, which the rhetoric surrounding this issue emboldens. Why are we trying to ape Reform, when that will do nothing to improve our constituents’ lives and will just stoke more division?

• 7 May 2025 · Personal Independence Payment: Disabled People · Hansard source

  More

  Has the Minister seen the latest analysis from the New Economics Foundation, which estimates that fewer than 50% of disabled people are claiming these benefits, and that the acceptance rate has remained static? It is not actually the case that people are claiming who should not be claiming: people are claiming benefits to which they are entitled.

• 7 May 2025 · Personal Independence Payment: Disabled People · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 7 May 2025 · Personal Independence Payment: Disabled People · Hansard source

  More

  The Government claim that the proposed cuts are about getting disabled people into work, but they have provided no evidence that they will result in significantly more disabled people in work. Even if that was the result, there would still be some disabled people who are unable to work. They deserve support too, but under the proposals, many of them would not receive it. The proposed disability cuts mean more poverty, suffering and hardship for disabled people. One young person living with mental illness told Just Treatment, which I hosted in Parliament yesterday: “I feel suicidal when I get caught up in the thoughts of losing this life changing support.” Another says that she will not be able to access “food, shelter, and vital care” for her condition. A third young person says: “I am terrified they will take my PIP away, that I will end up homeless, and my only option will be suicide.” We should be in no doubt that these proposals will cost lives. That is not hyperbolic: the benefits system has already been a key factor in the deaths of disabled people such as my constituent Philippa Day, who tragically took an overdose and was found next to a letter from the DWP refusing a home assessment visit. If the Government go through with these disability benefit cuts, they will be making a huge mistake that the public will not forgive us for. We must be true to our values as a party and stand up for the whole of the working class, including disabled people, whether they are in work or not. It is not too late for the Government to drop these cuts. If they do not, I will vote against them.

• 7 May 2025 · Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. Trans people and trans-led groups have been very concerned by new clause 21 tabled by the Opposition. They have rightly described it as an attack on trans people’s rights and their privacy. Can the Minister offer some reassurance that, as well as opposing this amendment today, the Government will not seek to introduce similar legislation via other means in the future?

• 6 May 2025 · Middle East Update · Hansard source

  More

  For more than a year and a half, we have witnessed a genocide being livestreamed on our screens. We have seen children in Gaza being blown apart by Israeli bombs and infants wasting away from Israel’s imposed starvation, and now Israel is proposing a full invasion and occupation of the entire strip. The Israeli Government are making a mockery of international law, and we are enabling it. It is not enough for the UK Government just to condemn the Israeli Government; when will our Government end all arms sales to Israel and implement trade sanctions? We cannot be asking in years to come, “What did we do to prevent a genocide?” and for the answer to be, “Not enough.”

• 30 Apr 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  I wish that the Leader of the Opposition would stop weaponising victims of child sexual abuse to score political points. It is damaging victims, and if she cared about child protection she would not do that. It is a disgrace; you are a disgrace. New data shows that in March last year, in the Hyson Green and Arboretum ward in my constituency, 64% of children were in poverty, which is the highest proportion in the whole of the east midlands and a damning indictment of the previous Conservative Government. One of the proudest achievements of the last Labour Government was the action they took on child poverty. Will the Prime Minister confirm that this Labour Government will do everything in their power to eliminate child poverty, and that their taskforce has not ruled out abolishing the two-child benefit limit, which is the single most cost-effective way to pull children out of poverty?

• 24 Apr 2025 · Lesbian Visibility Week · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow and Gateshead East (Kate Osborne) for securing this incredibly important debate and for her tireless work in advocating for the rights of lesbians and the entire LGBTQ+ community. I am very glad that she is in Parliament and that I have the privilege of working with her. As an MP who is an out queer woman, I am also grateful for the foremothers who made living as my true self in the public eye possible, from the countless activists who fought for and won the rights that we all enjoy today to lesbian MPs such as Maureen Colquhoun, a campaigner for the abolition of women’s prisons, the liberalisation of abortion law and the decriminalisation of sex work who was deselected in a homophobic campaign, and of course my hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle), a key architect of the Equality Act who I am privileged to call my friend. Lesbian Visibility Week’s mission is to recognise and celebrate LGBT+ women and non-binary people. This year’s theme is rainbow families. Rainbow families have always existed and always will, but queer women and non-binary people both here and internationally face many barriers to having the families they want. In the UK, many people are shocked to learn that we still do not have equal access to IVF, despite the previous Government publishing a women’s health strategy in 2022 that promised to tackle the issue. Ninety per cent of integrated healthcare boards in England require LGBTQ+ couples to self-fund at least six cycles of artificial insemination before they are eligible for NHS IVF treatment. Lesbian couples should not be forced to pay for private treatment simply as a gateway to NHS care. That is why I am proud to back the IVF equality manifesto and the wider fertility justice campaign manifesto, which also campaigns for important changes to birth certificates. It would be remiss of me to talk about family without emphasising the importance of chosen family in the LGBTQ+ community. Although there are many supportive parents and family members out there who should be celebrated, a common experience within our community is rejection, hostility and a lack of acceptance by those we are related to. That is why chosen family is so important. I want to be clear that just because someone does not share our DNA, it does not mean that they are any less our family. I am so grateful for the deep bonds that I have formed outside the traditional family unit, as well as within it. That is something I think many of us can benefit from, whether we are LGBTQ or not. Visibility is something to celebrate. Every person should be able to live openly and freely, loving who they want, but sadly many lesbians still do not feel able to do so in certain contexts. Visibility sometimes comes at a price. Queer women are still the victims of hate crimes simply for being queer women, and rates are rising. Let us be clear that the overwhelming danger towards women, whether they are LGBTQ+ or not, comes from violent cis men. That is why I am deeply concerned about the impact of last week’s Supreme Court judgment and the way in which it is being interpreted. Making it legal to exclude trans women from bathrooms and changing rooms is discriminatory. Forcing them to use men’s facilities would put them at greater risk of violence. It also sends a dangerous message, because it enables people who see themselves as the gender police to challenge people in bathrooms and harass them. Of course, trans women will above all be the victims of this behaviour and face being driven out of society, but other people will also be affected. Cis lesbians, women of colour, non-binary people, trans men, women with conditions such as polycystic ovary syndrome and anyone who is gender non-conforming—who does not conform to these Eurocentric and ever-narrowing standards of femininity and womanhood—are likely to become a target too. Incredibly, anti-trans campaigners regularly use lesbians as a justification for their agenda—an agenda that, by the way, undermines all of our rights. They claim that they are standing up for lesbians who do not want to share their spaces with trans women, when polling shows that cis lesbians and bisexual women are more supportive of trans people than any other group. They claim that trans people are forcing young cis lesbians to become trans men. This is the same as what was said about gay people under Thatcher: that we were “converting” children. Today, thankfully, most of society accepts that that is absolute nonsense, and there are more young women than ever before identifying as lesbian and bisexual. We should be pleased that people feel able to be their true selves, but it also puts to bed the lie that young lesbians are being forced to become trans men. Finally, it is important to remember that many of the rights that queer people have now are relatively recent. The last Labour Government is quite rightly often remembered as a time of progress for LGBTQ+ people, but just as rights can be won, they can be lost. This Labour Government risks being remembered as a period when things went backwards for our community. We have only been in government for less than a year. It is possible to turn the ship around, but we must recognise that actions such as the blanket ban on puberty blockers and barring trans women from women’s spaces are dangerous steps in the wrong direction. We must take action to remedy them.

• 22 Apr 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my right hon. Friend the Justice Secretary for the announcement she made today and the Government for listening to bereaved families and surviving victims. It is only right that the inquiry is statutory to ensure that it has the power to compel witnesses and hold those responsible for failings to account. What assurances can she give that the inquiry will be conducted in a timely manner and that the lessons it uncovers will be implemented swiftly to help ensure that similar attacks do not take place?

• 22 Apr 2025 · “For Women Scotland” Supreme Court Ruling · Hansard source

  More

  Research shows that half of trans people already fear using public toilets, so I am deeply concerned about the impact of comments by the Minister and the Prime Minister’s spokesperson that trans people should use a toilet that many of them would not feel comfortable or safe in. Can I ask: how would trans people’s exclusion from the toilets they have long used be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, as the Supreme Court judgment and Equality Act dictate? Would the Minister like to clarify that there is, in fact, nothing in law that requires trans women to use men’s toilets, trans men to use women’s toilets, or non-binary people to use a toilet corresponding with the sex they were assigned at birth?

• 1 Apr 2025 · Sentencing Council Guidelines · Hansard source

  More

  Pregnant women and new mothers are at high risk in custody. They are seven times more likely to experience a stillbirth and at least two baby deaths have taken place in recent years. Among other important measures, the Sentencing Council has issued guidance on the use of prison sentences for pregnant women and new mothers, which were supposed to come into effect today. Any delay to that risks causing untold, preventable harm. I am relieved that the Lord Chancellor has committed to protecting that guidance, but how quickly will it be implemented, because women cannot wait any longer?

• 26 Mar 2025 · Spring Statement · Hansard source

  More

  I understand that this Government inherited from the Conservative party a huge financial mess, caused by over a decade of austerity. However, what is the justification for cutting disability benefits—a third of disabled people are already in poverty—instead of taxing the growing wealth of the super-rich? A 2% tax on assets over £10 million could raise £24 billion a year.

• 25 Mar 2025 · Women’s Health Services · Hansard source

  More

  I want to put on the record my thanks to the Health Secretary for coming to Nottingham last week and meeting some of the families who have been harmed by extremely serious failings in maternity services at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS trust, and for his sincere commitment to them. It was clear just how moved he was by their stories. One of their asks is that the Government implement the 22 recommendations from the Shrewsbury and Telford Ockenden review, so I ask the Minister today to commit to doing that.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am a proud trade unionist, and I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I commend the Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister for introducing this landmark legislation, as well as my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald), who did a huge amount of work on it as shadow Minister. All of them have dedicated their lives to standing up for working people, and this Bill is a culmination of that work and the work of trade unionists over many, many years. I would like to speak in support of new clause 73. My own experience of taking time off work as an MP and the contrast with the experience of those on statutory sick pay made it clear just how badly reform is needed. Some years ago, when I needed to take a leave of absence because of the severity of my post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, I received full pay and a phased return, but for many workers, that is a million miles from their experience. The UK has some of the worst sick pay entitlements in Europe. The fact that the Bill means that sick pay will be paid from day one, instead of after day three, is very welcome, as is the removal of the eligibility threshold, increasing access for more than 1 million low-paid workers. However, we must acknowledge that without increasing the rate, the low level of statutory sick pay will continue to place a terrible burden on those who are already poorly paid. That is why amendment 7, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain), is so important. Those are far from the only issues. Another problem is the inflexibility of statutory sick pay, and that is why I have worked with the mental health charity Mind to table new clause 73. More than 8 million working-age people have long-term health conditions and experience challenges at work. Statutory sick pay currently does not allow for a proper phased return or for workers to reduce their hours during periods of ill health. Statutory sick pay can only be paid for a full day of sickness. If a worker needs a half day, for instance, SSP cannot be used to cover the hours they are not working. If we force people to return to work before they are ready, whether that is because they cannot afford to remain on statutory sick pay or because a phased return is not an option for them, they are far more likely to be trapped in a cycle of poor mental wellbeing and to fall out of work completely. New clause 73 would mean that sick pay was paid pro rata, by hours rather than days, to allow for that greater flexibility. Years of successive Government reviews have come to the same conclusion: a flexible statutory sick pay model would improve lives and better support people to remain in work. I have appreciated Ministers’ engagement with me on this issue, and I hope the Government will commit to looking at it further, especially as the cost to the Government would only be administrative. However, the impact it would have on people’s lives is huge. The Labour movement fought long and hard for the right to sick pay and proper support for those with long-term illness and disability, whether in work or not, because our movement and our party exists to stand up for the whole of the working class. At a time when more people are affected by sickness and disability, it is crucial that this Government support them and do not scapegoat them for the failures and the political choices of the Conservative party.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the shadow Minister give way?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the shadow Minister give way?

• 4 Mar 2025 · Palestinian Rights: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Sir John. I also thank the Father of the House for securing this debate. In his Oscar acceptance speech, the director of the film “No Other Land”, Basel Adra, called on the world to stop the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. We must bear witness to the atrocities documented in his film, and the genocide documented on our mobile phone screens, and heed his call. Having committed what many experts are clear is genocide in Gaza, Israel is now, during the holy month of Ramadan, once again collectively punishing the people of Gaza by withholding aid. The UK has licensed arms for export to Israel, and UK military bases have been used to facilitate military cargo to Israel, and for surveillance flights over Gaza. It is very difficult to argue that the UK Government are not complicit in at least some of Israel’s breaches of international law. If the UK is seen to take an inconsistent approach to war crimes, it undermines the international legal order, which is there to protect us all. We must not treat Israel differently just because it has been our ally. If the ceasefire holds—we must do everything in our diplomatic power to ensure that it does—rebuilding Gaza will be a huge challenge. We must play our part in that by committing significant funding and other resources. I would like the Minister to answer the following questions. When will the Government recognise the state of Palestine? Will the Government stop all arms sales to Israel and other military support? Will they implement sanctions on Israel? Will they commit to funding the rebuilding of Gaza? If the answer to any of those questions is no, why not? Why are our responses to Russia’s war crimes in Ukraine and to Israel’s war crimes in Gaza so different? Can the Government not see that hypocrisy on this issue does the whole world a disservice and threatens global security? We must be consistent and stand for human rights everywhere. That means doing everything in our power to hold Israel to account, prevent genocide in Gaza and secure rights and justice for the Palestinian people.