Richard Tice MP: speeches

Speeches

• 29 Jun 2026 · Prisoner Early Release · Hansard source

  More

  The British people will be absolutely disgusted and revolted that these child grooming gang perpetrators and rapists might be released early. Reform’s position is clear: they should receive mandatory whole of life sentences. If the excuse from this Government is that there is a shortage of places, why do they not get on and deport the 10,000 foreign nationals clogging up our jails?

• 24 Jun 2026 · Points of Order · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your advice on how to ensure that named day written parliamentary questions are answered by the Department on time. My written questions 10935 to 10940 to the Foreign Office about a company called Siren Associates Ltd had not been answered by 22 June. They are of great personal and national importance, and we want to know when they will be answered.

• 9 Jun 2026 · North Belfast: Violent Attack · Hansard source

  More

  Calm is essential after this horrific, brutal attack—we all know that. The Secretary of State has referred to further information coming out as we speak. Will he commit to return to the House, later today if possible, to update us on the important information about the suspect, and any other information?

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

  More

  I have given way to the hon. Gentleman already. Although people may have enjoyed my dialogue, others wish to speak. The key thing about the utter failure of this programme of government is this: having listened last week to the voters in the midlands and the north—in Labour heartlands—who voted 10 years ago for less EU and less European interference, what is this Government’s brilliant response? They have stuck two fingers up to the former Labour voters in the midlands and the northern heartlands, and said, “We’re going to ignore you. We’re going to try and go back to the failing European Union.” That surely highlights the arrogance and stubbornness of this dreadful Government.

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

  More

  I will share the love by giving way to the right hon. Lady.

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

  More

  I will give way to this good-looking gentleman.

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

  More

  I congratulate Plaid Cymru on its success, but I note the success of Reform as the second-largest party in Wales. We are proud to be the largest Unionist party across Scotland and Wales.

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

  More

  Bear with me, because I am in full flow. I believe that we have seen the last important speech from this Prime Minister. Let us see what the next few days bring.

• 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

  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?

• 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?

• 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?

• 12 Feb 2026 · Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion · Hansard source

  More

  Can the Minister confirm that, in relation to the legislation for the removal of peers, Matthew Doyle will be on the first list to be removed, given that he should not have been appointed in the first place? Can he also confirm the position on disappearing or deleted WhatsApp messages, and whether they can technically be retrieved from the system to be given to the Intelligence and Security Committee?

• 11 Feb 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Easy tiger!

• 11 Feb 2026 · Short-term Let Accommodation (Data Sharing Requirements) · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I would be grateful for your advice on how I register my utter disgust at the hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake) scoring a cheap political point about me visiting a synagogue in this constituency.

• 4 Feb 2026 · Lord Mandelson · Hansard source

  More

  This whole debate centres on the judgment, and trust in the judgment, of our Prime Minister of this United Kingdom when he decided to appoint the monster—when he decided to appoint Mandelson as our ambassador to the US. The right hon. Lady has just confirmed that the Cabinet Secretary refused to answer questions about vetting, yet the Prime Minister is asking us to trust the Cabinet Secretary to make decisions about the release of documents and information. Does she agree that it must be right that the Intelligence and Security Committee makes those decisions, as opposed to a Cabinet Secretary in whom we no longer can have trust?

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

  More

  The Minister refers to the cost, but does she agree that the Government have confirmed that it is over £34 billion?

• 19 Jan 2026 · Iran: Protests · Hansard source

  More

  As thousands of brave Iranian protesters are slaughtered on the streets of Iran, I was humbled yesterday to speak in front of thousands of wonderful Iranians here in Whitehall. They asked me to ask the Government a simple question: how much more will it take for this Government to do the right thing and proscribe that terror group, the IRGC—and, while they are at it, the Muslim Brotherhood?

• 19 Jan 2026 · Local Elections: Cancellation · Hansard source

  More

  Only dictators cancel elections, as well as Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat councils, which are terrified of facing the wrath of the voters. We will be carrying out a judicial review of this appalling decision to cancel elections. Will the Minister confirm that if the noble judges rule in our favour that this is the wrong thing to do, the Government will abide by their ruling?

• 15 Jan 2026 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister may be aware that there is already a thing called gov.uk. Just last night, I was delighted with the ID check; it connected with my phone digitally, and took a picture of my face beautifully. How will the new, voluntary, dead parrot digital ID scheme differ from what already exists? How will it supersede the wonderful things called national insurance numbers?

• 14 Jan 2026 · Offshore Wind · Hansard source

  More

  On roofs.

• 16 Dec 2025 · Chagossians: Trust Fund and Resettlement · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister talks warmly of the relationship with the Chagossians. They have, of course, just formed a Government in exile. Do the British Government recognise the Chagossian Government in exile?

• 3 Dec 2025 · Official Secrets Act and Espionage · Hansard source

  More

  This report by the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy is not only damning; it refers to “systemic failures”, “shambolic” aspects and “inadequate” communications. I am particularly struck by paragraphs 41 to 45, which call into question the judgment of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Lord Carlile, described the decision not to proceed with the case as “inexplicable”, and the Committee in paragraph 45 is gentle in saying that it was “surprised” by the decision not to proceed. The question has to be asked: do the Government still have confidence in the Director of Public Prosecutions?