Rupa Huq MP: speeches

Speeches

• 1 Jun 2026 · Equality Act 2010: Code of Practice · Hansard source

  More

  I cannot be the only Member to have had dozens of emails from constituents who are dismayed that, under this guidance, the vague, ill-defined and highly subjective term “discomfort of service users” becomes the litmus test for excluding people from essential services. I heard what the Minister said about associations, but can we be clear whether public spaces will still be able to provide trans-inclusive services? If that is not the case, I feel that this guidance is simply unreasonable, unfair and unworkable.

• 21 May 2026 · Ticket Reselling · Hansard source

  More

  2. What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on the role of the Competition and Markets Authority in the resale of tickets for sporting and cultural events. [R]

• 21 May 2026 · Ticket Reselling · Hansard source

  More

  Ending ticketing scandals was a manifesto pledge prompted by the Oasis surge-pricing scandal, but it appears only in draft form in the King’s Speech. Peak gig-going season is upon us—maybe even for you, Mr Speaker, with your Motown habit—as is a cost of living crisis. [ Interruption. ] We all know about it and love you for it, Mr Speaker.

• 21 May 2026 · Ticket Reselling · Hansard source

  More

  Indeed—reflections of you. Will Ministers meet me to discuss the solution? My meticulously researched, widely backed ballot Bill from 2024 is ready-made and ready to go. It deals with this issue by among other things banning the bots that hog tickets for resale, so that we can stop this rip-off without delay.

• 20 May 2026 · Defence Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making a powerful case for how investing in our armed forces and defence, after 14 years of Tory neglect, is imperative to get Britain growing and for our defence preparedness, but does he agree that these capabilities must always be exercised in the right way? Thirty UK arms licences to Israel were suspended in September 2024, but in the light of the Iran war that he mentioned and the fact that 72,000 Palestinians have now been killed in Gaza, could Ministers revisit this? I know that this worsening situation means many constituents want to end all arms sales with the Netanyahu regime.

• 19 May 2026 · High Speed 2 Reset · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the honesty and clarity, after years of sitting opposite the Conservatives and not knowing whether HS2 was happening at all, or where it would start and stop—it was going to be a Y-shape in the beginning. This is good news, in a way. I echo the praise for Mark Wild, who has met with my residents, and for Lord Hendy in the other place. However, for my residents in Old Oak Common—this fabled area that was once going to be the terminus—the ever-lengthening timeline is disappointing. Will the Secretary of State consider opening the Elizabeth line station a bit earlier? Some new builds, such as Oaklands Rise, were promised that there would be a brand-new station in 2026, so surely there should be something in it for them before 2039.

• 19 May 2026 · High Speed 2: Impact on Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I also have fond memories of Cheryl Gillan, who I stood against in 2005. The hon. Lady knows my seat well, and the things she describes have a lot of resonance with Wells House Road, NW10, which I think is the most blighted road in England. An email from a resident there today said: “We were told to expect six years of disruption. Now they are asking us to live with 16.” They point out that while the cost of HS2 has tripled, the community funds have not. Buckinghamshire is a recipient, as is Euston, but Ealing and Old Oak Common are not at all. Does the hon. Lady not agree that that is a travesty?

• 18 May 2026 · Backing Business to Create Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  Last Wednesday—it seems so much longer ago—saw the second King’s Speech of this Labour Government, with 37 Bills to address the UK’s economic, energy and national security at a time of gigantic global challenge, much of it unforeseeable at the time of the last King’s Speech in 2024. A stunning proposer—from Bradford like you, Madam Deputy Speaker—was followed by the Prime Minister’s forceful plea for a change to the status quo, which he mentioned 10 times. I was having visions of “Rockin’ All Over the World”, but he was, of course, spot on. After the first King’s Speech—no, not the Colin Firth film—of employment rights, renters’ rights and rail nationalisation, the sequel will bring British Steel into public ownership in the public interest, end the leasehold scam and see a social housing Bill for a million families trapped on waiting lists in temporary accommodation. Some of it was promised by the Tories and never delivered. On broken promises, as we approach the 10th anniversary of the fateful vote that bequeathed us Brexit, I welcome the EU partnership Bill and the Government’s rebuilding a stronger relationship with Europe. We were told that Brexit would make us richer, that we would see migration down and that it would make us more secure. Wrong on all three counts. As the mum of an undergrad, I know that Brexit robbed young people of their ability to work, study and live easily in Europe, so I applaud the youth experience scheme and rejoining Erasmus. I would suggest the circular economy directive as one to sign up to. The referendum was indeed fateful, but not fatal, thanks to this Government’s action securing the highest growth in the G7. I would say that circumstances have changed so dramatically since 2024, it might be time to consider relaxing some of the red lines on single market and customs union membership. Just a thought. Unlocking barriers to growth is also in the Bills on the industrial strategy, national security, investing in defence and the armed forces, and repairing public services like the NHS, policing and special educational needs. On immigration reform, I must forewarn the House that I will be one of probably a number of MPs lobbying for the modification of the earned settlement proposals, but they are not inked in yet, so we are hopeful. I regret that there is nothing in the King’s Speech on my ballot Bill on ticketing to fix Oasis-style rip-offs and surge pricing. My old union, the University and College Union, is disappointed that there is nothing much in the King’s Speech for universities or further education, despite the multiple crises that the sectors are facing. But we are where we are and, as I have said, it is an ambitious programme with 37 Bills. As events in the strait of Hormuz affect prices at the pumps in Acton, the energy security proposal in the King's Speech is very welcome. If implemented, it will mean that we are no longer at the mercy of those who would push us around in foreign wars but can withstand global instability, with clean, home-grown energy independence. All these are things the Tories would never do, and Reform—none of whose Members are in the Chamber at present—would undo. Much has been done and there is much more to do, including repairing and rebuilding the European alliances that have been so damaged by 14 years of Tory rule, the first five of which, I should remind the House, were propped up by the Liberal Democrats: they too were handmaidens to austerity, although they tend to forget that nowadays. It has not been an overnight process, but reversing the Tories’ mess to build a more resilient country is under way. Our constituents voted for change, and they expect their Government to get on with it.

• 23 Apr 2026 · Ministerial Code · Hansard source

  More

  It is really great that Ministers have rapidly set about reforming the ministerial code so that never again will the public purse be forced to pay out £253,720 for ex-Ministers who were in post for less than six months, as happened in 2022 under the Tories. Now that we hear about Peter Mandelson, the payoff he wanted and the payoff he got, are the Government open to the logic of applying the same principles of the ministerial code to disgraced ex-political appointee ambassadors, perchance? That way, we can restore consistency.

• 20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Prime Minister for his heartfelt statement and—if we are judging parties on actions, not words—for reviving the post of anti-corruption tsar. It was vacant for years and years under three of his predecessors, starting with Boris Johnson’s lockdown breaches. Now that we have the heavyweight Margaret Hodge in post, what plans does the Prime Minister have for this broader policy area?

• 16 Apr 2026 · BBC · Hansard source

  More

  Thankfully, the BBC is nothing like the public service broadcaster in Hungary—I was there monitoring elections; the winner, Péter Magyar, said that it is like North Korean propaganda. To protect Auntie Beeb, will my right hon. Friend reconsider the anomaly that, despite being a fixed-income public body—I am ex-staff myself—the BBC has not been given relief from the 2% rise in employer national insurance contributions, unlike schools and hospitals, leaving a yearly £20 million black hole at a time of falling licence fee income? Can the BBC be granted a partial or total waiver, so that we can keep getting good quality output and stop staff cuts?

• 17 Mar 2026 · Croydon Area Remodelling Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  Order. I will call Natasha Irons to move the motion and then I will call the Minister to respond. Other Members can make a speech with prior permission from the mover of the motion, which I think on this occasion has already been secured. As this is one of those 30-minute wonders, there is no time for a winding-up speech at the end.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Productivity and Economic Growth: East Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  Order. Can everyone who wants to speak stand so that we can calculate the time limit? It is going to be three-minutes, I am afraid. I call Ed Argar to set an exemplary example.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Productivity and Economic Growth: East Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  Order. One of the displays is defunct, so it may be difficult for Members to see when their three minutes have ended. I will signal 30 seconds before their time runs out.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Productivity and Economic Growth: East Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  Order. Let us not have chuntering from a sedentary position.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Energy Security and Net Zero: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  I call Minister—and birthday boy—Michael Shanks to respond for the Government.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Energy Security and Net Zero: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  I will call Susan Murray to move the motion and then the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with the prior permission of Susan Murray and the Minister. Because this is a 30-minute debate, there will not be an opportunity for Susan Murray to make a winding-up speech at the end.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Energy Security and Net Zero: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  Order. Can I just remind the hon. Member about use of the word “you”? I always get told off by the Deputy Speaker for it. “You” means me, because I am in the Chair. It should be, “Does the hon. Member agree?” But I think we get the point.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Healthcare in Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  This is a popular debate, so there will be a time limit of three minutes to begin with, but it might drop down. The first exemplar of perfect timing will be Samantha Niblett.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Healthcare in Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  We have done the maths; we can allow Members two minutes and 30 seconds.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Healthcare in Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  Order. Potentially the final three-minute speech will be Henry Tufnell, and then we might have to drop the time limit to two minutes.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Healthcare in Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  I call Blake Stephenson to wind up in 20 seconds.

• 4 Mar 2026 · NATO and the High Arctic · Hansard source

  More

  Order. I remind Members to bob if they want to speak, and then we will work out who is next.

• 2 Mar 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  Door-knocking in Ealing yesterday, I met a student whose parents fled Iran in 1979, and who told me how overjoyed they are to get rid of this despotic, tyrannical regime. Yet the methods used surely risk undermining the rules-based order. A girls’ school was hit, with 150 kids killed; we appear to have normalised the bombing of schools, hospitals, refugee camps and universities in Gaza by one of the two instigators of this action. What does the PM see as the end game of this war, and how will he stop Operation Fury turning into Operation Futility?

• 25 Feb 2026 · Diesel Vehicles: Defeat Devices · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman makes such an excellent point as he always does. It is an honour to be intervened on by him. As he said, this was done with intent all over the British Isles, in all our nations. He mentioned the VW scandal. As I say, there could be worse round the corner. Despite the outlawing of these defeat devices, VW could just be the tip of a very murky iceberg. As the hon. Gentleman pointed out, this is not just about the men in white coats in the laboratory getting their technical results. This is not a fringe issue: it affects all our constituents and has real life consequences. Air pollution is one of our most pressing environmental challenges. Noxious nitrogen oxide emissions can cause respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease and childhood asthma—even premature deaths, which have been quantified. In London, the city where we are now and where I am an MP, the devastating human impact was tragically illustrated by the desperately sad case of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah: dead at just nine years old. Hers was the first ever case in which the cause of death on the certificate was “pollution”. The family had lived by the south circular; the north circular is in my seat. Ella’s mum, Rosamund, has been such a tireless campaigner in pushing for Ella’s law. Mums for Lungs has also done great work, while Parent Power had a breakfast event this morning on the other side of the building. Clean air is not a “nice to have”, but an essential. We would not force a kid to drink dirty water, yet we expect them to breathe toxic air. Sadiq Khan’s ultra low emission zone in this city has helped to clean London of dirty diesel, but we know that children in vulnerable communities are the most susceptible. These cars were bought in good faith. Remember Gordon Brown’s 2001 Budget: in those days, buying a diesel vehicle was incentivised. It was seen as environmentally superior to petrol because of the miles per gallon; in those days, people were not looking at NOx, but more at carbon dioxide. In that year’s Budget, I think, the road tax—and certain things for company fleets—actually encouraged diesel. The VW scandal was a genuine scandal, just like the others I have seen since I have been here such as the contaminated blood and Post Office scandals. In its aftermath, the market share of diesels in this country has fallen from 50% in 2014 to just 5% now. But the bigger dieselgate 2 is on the horizon. If defeat devices have dishonestly been fitted to vehicles and emitted pollutants at levels way beyond what is legal and what consumers were led to believe, that leaves huge holes in Government enforcement and regulatory credibility. This will have been poisoning people. I have a range of questions for the Minister. Although these vehicles are not being sold new any more, figures from Mums for Lungs show that 7.5 million diesel cars—a quarter of all UK cars—are still on our roads. They are responsible for 30% of total NOx emissions. There are also the vans, buses, the HGVS—if we add all those up, we see that action must occur. In autumn 2024, the Department for Transport confirmed that it is investigating the possible use of defeat device trickery by several manufacturers. Rather than delve into the lengthy legal proceedings today, I want to raise questions about that Government inquiry, which is at best sketchy and is bound up in public health and consumer protection. It all seems to be shrouded in secrecy. There is the prospect, here, of illegally high emissions and asthma being in the equation, so every moment the results are delayed puts more children’s lungs at risk. At a time when everyone wants growth, Mums for Lungs has calculated that the UK economy is losing: action on dieselgate is expected to cost our economy £36 billion in the next 14 years. There are many reasons why we should address this issue. I am asking the Minister—my good, hon. Friend—to step up a gear. The sheer number of potential claimants in dieselgate 2—1.8 million cars, potentially—dwarfs the settlement that eventually came out of VWgate; that 2022 settlement compensated only 91,000 consumers. This latest issue affects every constituency in the nation—including yours, Ms Lewell. I have some questions: what is the status of the Department’s investigation? What is the timeline for its commencement? Where is it now? When will it conclude? What teeth does it have—i.e. what are the enforcement powers that the Department is prepared to deploy in cases of non-compliance? The Environment Act 2021 strengthened the Government’s ability to require manufacturers to recall vehicles where there are reasonable grounds to believe that they do not meet applicable environmental standards. Is the Department prepared to use those powers when appropriate? Where does the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency fit into that process? What happens to vehicles currently on UK roads if they are found to be emitting unlawfully high levels of pollutants? Will the Government consider requiring their temporary suspension from use until they are brought into compliance? Could they have a little bit of tinkering and be okay? According to one report from an international climate think-tank, excess emissions may already lead to 16,000 premature deaths in the UK and 30,000 new cases of childhood asthma. Overnight, Mums for Lungs sent me a whole load of new figures that I have not entirely processed, but which I can pass on to the Minister. If manufacturers are found to have breached the rules, who bears the financial burden of remedial action? Surely not the consumers who bought these vehicles in good faith. They thought that they were doing the right thing and believed that they were compliant. How do the Government intend to safeguard public health in the interim? In 2016, the Tory Government launched an inquiry into the use of defeat devices by VW, but ultimately, they did not prosecute. The Transport Committee at the time expressed concerns about the Department for Transport’s “ambivalence” towards VW’s use of defeat devices. It described the Department as being “too slow to assess the use of its powers”. In other words, it was asleep at the wheel. This Minister is different from that former Minister, and I am sure that he will not repeat the mistakes of the last Tory Government. There is now a second chance. The DFT should clearly prioritise the interests of the public and consumers in its current investigation. A decade after we were duped over diesel in the first emissions scandal, the public should not be left wondering whether enforcement powers will be used if wrongdoing is found. Court proceedings can take forever, but we must have assurances of urgency, transparency and consequence in the Government’s investigation, which is within their control. Communities deserve clean air and consumers deserve honesty and protection. I am no Jeremy Clarkson. I cycle more than I drive, but I do both, and I take public transport every weekday. I find that it is difficult to know what is best and it can be bewildering—what is up or down and what is happening. The goalposts are constantly changing. What is it that is demonised? First it was petrol, then it was diesel. Now they have both been overtaken by electric, which is what we should all be using. I am pleased to see the roll-out of the Enviro400 and Enviro500 buses in London. However, for the average consumer it can be bewildering when the advice keeps changing and it can then feel a bit punitive. Environmental standards must mean what they say. If they are breached there must be proportionate and decisive action. For far too long, motor manufacturers in the UK have victimised the public. They have misled consumers about pollution emitted by diesel engines, and they have put millions of citizens at risk simply because they live or work near roads. VW recovered its reputation to some extent. Certainly, on the Nextdoor app, people are still complaining that its badges are being nicked from the front of their cars. Whoever is doing that, can they stop? It is completely unnecessary to remove the circular VW logo. These companies should come clean and make things right with those who they have harmed. The Government should do everything in their power to ensure that the public are in the driving seat. We should not have to wait for dieselgate 3.