Richard Tice MP: speeches

Speeches

• 13 May 2026 · Debate on the Address · Hansard source

  More

  That is interesting, because I spent most of the election campaign in the west midlands, where we absolutely smashed it. We secured full control of councils such as Newcastle-under-Lyme and Walsall, and we are now the largest party in Birmingham, which is truly remarkable. We are also the largest party in Bradford, which is fantastic news. That success is because voters have looked at this Government and the failures of this Prime Minister, and they have said, “We want to vote Reform, and we want this Prime Minister out.” I suspect that what we have seen—

• 13 May 2026 · Debate on the Address · Hansard source

  More

  If we have just won and become the largest party in Bradford, by definition we must be popular. Obviously, I would like to please everybody, but sometimes that is not possible; that is the joy of democracy. The reality is that the voters have spoken.

• 13 May 2026 · Debate on the Address · Hansard source

  More

  Well, that is the joy of competition, and given what happened in last week’s elections, we seem to be winning the competition. I conclude by saying that surely this Government should have listened to voters last week and said, “Actually, we’ve got it wrong on energy. We need more oil and gas to bring the bills down, just as they are bringing them down in the United States. We need to be more sovereign and independent, and more distant from the failing economic model of Brussels.” Instead, they have done the opposite. However, I bring hope to this country: the good news is that once there is a new, unelected Labour Prime Minister, that will accelerate a general election, in which the country will vote Reform.

• 28 Apr 2026 · Houses in Multiple Occupation · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend share my concern that the proliferation of these houses in multiple occupation is leading to whole streets being transformed and communities being torn apart, with no sense of engagement from those occupying these HMOs, and it is leading to rubbish, mess, destitution, disruption and utter chaos in streets and whole communities?

• 28 Apr 2026 · Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman, but let me remind him what the Prime Minister said during Prime Minister’s questions just last week: “No pressure existed whatsoever”. “Whatsoever” is the critical word, and that is the flaw in the hon. Gentleman’s argument. We now know that not only did the Prime Minister inadvertently mislead the House with regard to “full due process”, but he has misled the House a second time with regard to whether or not any pressure existed “whatsoever”. The evidence is in; while this is a Prime Minister who prides himself on process, anecdotally it seems that that is a culture that does not exist around him or perhaps within him. For example, we now know that those in the Cabinet Office questioned whether there should be any vetting at all. In other words, they did not want full due process. We now know, too, that in respect of the decision on whether to retain Sir Olly Robbins or fire him, full due process was not followed. As for the issue of whether or not a decision to refer any Member of the House to the Privileges Committee should be whipped, precedent clearly shows that it should not. I would argue that precedent is a process, and that in this instance, the process of not whipping a vote of this kind is not being followed. I therefore urge all Members to ignore the whipping, to follow their conscience, and to follow the evidence. The evidence is in: the Prime Minister inadvertently misled the House of Commons.

• 28 Apr 2026 · Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges · Hansard source

  More

  The motion to refer the Prime Minister to the Privileges Committee revolves around two words. Pressure is the first. The other, which is vital, is process. Of course, the Prime Minister is the master of process. He bangs on about it all the time. He is the king of process here in the Commons. He says that “full due process” was followed, yet we have already heard from other hon. Members that Sir Simon Case, the then Cabinet Secretary, gave the Prime Minister due process in November 2024. Sir Simon said that the vetting and due diligence should be carried out before confirming the choice of ambassador. The Prime Minister chose to avoid that due process. There is a second key element of due process that has not been properly teased out so far this afternoon, and it relates to the timing of the decision on vetting through January 2025. If full due process was being followed, the security authorities and the vetting authorities should have been allowed to take whatever time they deemed necessary to make their judgment. With Mandelson—goodness me—there was a lot to go through to check that clearance. We have heard from a number of senior civil servants that they were not allowed to carry out full due process and to take as long as they determined was necessary, even if that took them beyond the inauguration of the President of the United States—no, no. I shall move on to the second work, which is whether any pressure whatsoever was applied. We have heard from not one, not two, but three separate senior civil servants that the pressure was not on the decision itself, but on the speed of the decision, because the decision had already been taken by due process not being followed. We have heard Sir Olly Robbins confirm that pressure was felt to get on with the decision; we heard yesterday from Ian Collard that pressure was applied for that decision to be made; and we have, of course, heard from Sir Philip Barton that—again—the pressure was to “get on with it.” There was “no space” in the decision. In other words, due process was not followed.

• 27 Apr 2026 · Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response Update · Hansard source

  More

  With regard to the release of these Mandelson documents, there is genuine concern about what may be redacted and what may not. Given the ongoing dispute as to the pressure brought to bear between No. 10 and the Foreign Office, can the Minister confirm that nothing will be redacted with regard to pressure brought to bear on the Foreign Office about the vetting process?

• 23 Apr 2026 · UK Biobank Data · Hansard source

  More

  This scandal is essentially a China data theft of UK Biobank’s data, which is generously donated by some half a million British citizens. Let us remember that the UK taxpayer funded approximately £200 million for setting up UK Biobank. They fund about £15 million every single year, which is used by some 22,000 researchers, including 2,000 or 3,000 in China, I understand. Will the Minister confirm that our generosity will not be abused by Chinese researchers and that UK Biobank should exclude them in the future in order to ensure that this data theft comes with sanctions?

• 22 Apr 2026 · Pension Schemes · Hansard source

  More

  I have constituents in Boston and Skegness who have suffered because of the ridiculous and appalling failures of Capita under these two contracts, and they are not the only contracts on which it is failing. To what extent has the Minister looked at the bigger financial picture at Capita? Last year, it earned revenue of almost £1.5 billion from the Government. It has contracts worth over £7 billion, yet it has just disclosed in its results that it has lost over £150 million. It has debts of £140 million, and its market cap is only £350 million. Given how much outsourcing work it does for so many British citizens, to what extent are the Government preparing for plan B in case of a financial crisis at Capita?

• 21 Apr 2026 · Middle East: Economic Update · Hansard source

  More

  Is the Chancellor aware that the price of gas in the US is 10% lower than at the start of the war, while here in the UK it is 30% higher? That proves that if we produce what we consume, there is actually a domestic price of gas. Will she have a word in the shell-like ear of the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero and tell him to get on and approve the licences at Jackdaw and beyond, including onshore? That would mean more gas, more production and lower prices.

• 16 Apr 2026 · Modernisation Committee Report: Access to the House of Commons · Hansard source

  More

  The Modernisation Committee has indeed put forward some excellent proposals with regard to accessibility and our procedures. It also refers to the recently published 125-page restoration and renewal proposals, which we at Reform have rebranded “ridiculous and ruinous”, as they are the wrong schemes at the wrong price, based on the wrong brief under the wrong governance structures. Madam Deputy Speaker, your predecessor in the Chair informed us that this is not the time to debate the matter of restoration and renewal. Bearing in mind, though, that it is a multibillion-pound proposal—possibly up to £40 billion—and the fact that these proposals have been out for a number of weeks, can you, Madam Deputy Speaker, or the Leader of the House confirm to hon. Members when these proposals will be debated in full, so that we can expand on our thoughts?

• 16 Apr 2026 · British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  Is that it, Secretary of State? It has taken five months for the Secretary of State to come up with an energy price scheme which he has admitted here in the House today only supports 10,000 businesses. He seems to forget that there are millions of small businesses up and down the country—restaurants, fish and chip shops, pubs, ceramics or farmers. When will the Secretary of State admit that the reality is the reason this country’s economy has no growth is because of high energy prices? When will the Secretary of State do the right thing and scrap net zero so we can bring our electricity prices down?

• 15 Apr 2026 · Strategic Defence Review: Funding · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister accept and agree with the mood of the majority of the British people, and I think the mood of this House, which is to accelerate defence spending to 3% of GDP in this Parliament, not the next Parliament? Can the Minister confirm that the year-long delayed defence investment plan will arrive before the summer holidays?

• 13 Apr 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  All our constituents are worried about the price of energy, including the price of gas. But is the Prime Minister aware that the price of gas in the US has fallen by 20% since the start of this war while the price of gas in the UK has increased by 50%, proving that if we produce and consume our gas domestically we can have much lower bills, and proving too why we must allow the consents for Jackdaw, Rosebank and all of the oil fields across the North sea and onshore as well?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Middle East Conflict: Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  The Secretary of State has just misled the House—inadvertently, I am sure. Can he explain why the price of gas in the United States is about a third of the price of gas in the UK? It is because the Americans use it domestically, is it not?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  This is a critical question. Who is more dangerous to the British economy—the Secretary of State for Energy or the Chancellor of the Exchequer?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  Earlier today, the Secretary of State refused to answer my question about why the price of gas in the United States is between a third and a quarter of the price of gas here in the UK. Perhaps the Minister could help us all and help the British people with that question, which goes to the heart of the price of gas and the size and cost of our bills.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  Madness!

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady criticises us for trying to extract oil and gas, so does she also criticise Norway’s successful and excellent programme of drilling 49 new wells last year? We drilled none.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  Is the hon. Member aware that there is about a decade’s worth of wonderful shale gas in the great county of Lincolnshire that can power this great nation?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  Does the right hon. Lady agree that the simple thing to do to bring down bills is to scrap net stupid zero, so that we can scrap all the carbon taxes and all the green levies, and all our consumers and households would be better off?

• 19 Mar 2026 · UK Steel Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  Well, at least this Government have a steel strategy, unlike the previous Administration. Credit where credit is due: they are right to impose tariffs and quotas. But that is as far as it goes, because otherwise it is visionless and hamstrung by net stupid zero. We have the absurd situation in which the public sector is buying tens of thousands of tonnes of steel from China, rather than from Scunthorpe and British Steel. This is a complete betrayal of thousands of workers in Scunthorpe. There is no vision. Will the Secretary of State confirm when the blast furnaces will be closed at Scunthorpe—Reform would renew and replace them—and will he guarantee that when the electric arc furnace in Port Talbot is built, it will definitely open for business?

• 10 Mar 2026 · Digital ID: Public Consultation · Hansard source

  More

  The public want faster, better public services, but the existing gov.uk app works very well—I suspect most of us use it. That is a massive difference from what the public do not want, which is a digital identity card system. The first mistake that the Minister has made is calling this statement “Digital ID”. Can the Minister be honest with this House and the British people: is this about improving the gov.uk app as it currently exists or is it about a digital identity card system through the back door?

• 4 Mar 2026 · China: Foreign Interference Arrests · Hansard source

  More

  I recently made a submission to the Rycroft review relating my concerns about Chinese communist regime influence on the Labour party. Given that we now understand that the partners of a sitting Labour MP and of a former Labour MP have been arrested today, the Minister will understand why I shall be updating that submission ahead of my meeting with the Rycroft review next week. Will the Minister confirm whether the Rycroft review can take account of these arrests, or will it need to be extended until a decision is made on whether charges are brought?