Tonia Antoniazzi MP: speeches

Speeches

• 29 Jun 2026 · Northern Ireland Office · Hansard source

  More

  I agree that our Committee has seen that the need is greater, and we are working to represent Northern Ireland and the people who live there as best we can. My Committee has recently conducted inquiries on policing and security and on legacy, which the Government directly fund. The Police Service of Northern Ireland currently receives £37.8 million a year directly from the Government as additional security funding. This ringfenced funding was introduced in 2011, and until last year it was specifically used to address the threat from Northern Ireland-related terrorism, but this ASF has now been broadened to cover all national security threats. The increase we have seen over the current spending review period may be to cover the broadened remit, but no information is publicly available about how the level of funding is determined by the Government. While we know that publishing some information may not be possible due to security considerations, my Committee has called for greater transparency, and I would be grateful for the Secretary of State’s response to our recommendations. The recent riots in Northern Ireland are of great concern, and they will be of serious concern to Members across this House. I take this opportunity to commend the PSNI and the emergency services for their response to the disorder. The PSNI was already facing a constrained financial position, so I welcome the additional £4 million provided by the NIO to meet some of the costs it incurred. Could the Secretary of State provide more detail on, and has he had any correspondence about, the funding that I have heard has been provided by the Irish Government for community cohesion following the riots. Finally, I turn to the issue of legacy and the work of the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery, which I will refer to as the ICRIR. This body was set up under the previous Government’s Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023. It is responsible for investigations of legacy cases to provide information to victims, survivors and their families about troubles-related deaths and serious injury. For the present financial year, the ICRIR is receiving £232 million over the whole spending review period. However, Peter May’s recent review of the ICRIR raises some serious concerns about its capacity and governance. According to the review, cases are being paused due to a lack of resource which, in a recent Committee session, the ICRIR disputes. It says that the current funding levels “are not sufficient” to support its view of what is required under the legislation, with “real concern that they will not have the means to deliver case outcomes within any reasonable timeframe”. The ICRIR has also seen three finance directors in the past year, with the review describing “a low level of maturity in terms of its financial and corporate governance.” The review notes that the ICRIR is submitting to the Treasury a new business case seeking additional funding. Will the Secretary of State update us on the status of that? The Secretary of State told us that confidence in the ICRIR will be gained “if it provides answers to families who have been looking for them for so long”. Does he share my fears about the impact that pausing cases will have on victims and families who have already been made to wait decades for answers about their loved ones? Can he also assure the House that confidence in the commission’s financial management and governance arrangements has improved since the review?

• 29 Jun 2026 · Northern Ireland Office · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for that contribution. It has been very clear from the Committee’s evidence sessions that, to cover the legacy issues it is still dealing with and will have to deal with, the PSNI is taking resource of time and money that it cannot afford, which impacts on what it can provide on the street, so I too would like to highlight that point. We want to see a stable Executive, backed up by fair and sustainable public finances, reflecting the needs of the people of Northern Ireland. I am concerned that the Executive’s financial constraint and the funding pressures facing the PSNI and the ICRIR are having a very real impact on people’s lives today.

• 29 Jun 2026 · Northern Ireland Office · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his intervention about the local growth fund. In our Committee session today, we grilled the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, who is sitting on the Front Bench, about this funding. On numerous occasions, we have noted our disappointment that the relevant Department has been able to shift the spending, but I am sure that the Secretary of State will give the hon. Member an explanation later. Given the potential impact of having no agreed budget on the delivery of public services if the situation continues into the autumn, does the Secretary of State foresee a circumstance in which he would step up and step in to set a budget for Northern Ireland, should the Executive remain unable or unwilling to do so? Linked to this are concerns about the Executive’s overspending and budget sustainability. At the end of the last financial year, the Government provided the Executive with a £400 million reserve claim loan to cover departmental overspends in health and education. That follows the £559 million Executive debt write-off by the Government in 2024 as part of the financial package accompanying the restoration of power sharing. The Northern Ireland Fiscal Council warns that overspending is now becoming normalised, and it describes how repeated bail-outs “could dull the Executive’s incentive to take difficult fiscal decisions”. Overspending against available budgets by devolved Governments amounts to serious financial mismanagement, according to Treasury policy. Would the Secretary of State describe the Executive’s actions in the same terms?

• 29 Jun 2026 · Northern Ireland Office · Hansard source

  More

  I think there are further discussions to be had about need, the Barnett formula and all those things. I am sure those discussions are happening and that those things are being continually reviewed, but I do agree about the need. The Executive will repay this £400 million loan over three years—£80 million this year and £160 million next year, with £160 million due in 2028-29. Given the Executive’s track record, are the Government confident that these payments will be met? Northern Ireland Ministers have warned of further overspends, given their continued constrained financial position. The two Departments responsible for the reserve claim are likely to see a drop in their resource funding this year. How will the Government respond to further overspends? Granting the reserve loan was on the condition that the Treasury conducted an open book exercise on the spending of Northern Ireland Departments. This found that spending per head on policing in Northern Ireland is 166% of what it is in England, spending per head on health, excluding social care, is 152% and spending per head on schools is 140%. On the other hand, spending per head on prisons and probation services is only 79% of that spent in England and Wales. The report presents a number of policy options, and says that the Executive could make savings of up to £3 billion. However, Northern Ireland Ministers contest many of its findings. In his response, will the Secretary of State address the Government’s expectations of the Executive taking forward these options, and tell us what steps the Government are taking to help put Northern Ireland’s finances on a more sustainable footing?

• 29 Jun 2026 · Northern Ireland Office · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting time for this timely debate on the spending of the Northern Ireland Office. As I stand here today, it remains the case that Northern Ireland has no agreed budget, despite it being a quarter of the way through the financial year. Executive Ministers have failed to agree a budget, which has left Departments and civil servants forced to rely on emergency contingency powers, with spending limited to 95% of last year’s opening budget. Most concerningly, this leaves the people of Northern Ireland uncertain about the public services they will be able to access in the coming year. Although the Finance Minister published a draft multi-year budget in January, it was not supported by the other parties in the Executive and, frustratingly, that deadlock is still unresolved.

• 29 Jun 2026 · Northern Ireland Office · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, my hon. Friend the Member for Wirral West (Matthew Patrick), for their positive engagement with the Committee. We understand the challenges the Secretary of State faces, but we hope to provide the correct amount of scrutiny to get Northern Ireland into a better place financially. Many thanks to the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart), and also to the right hon. Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson) for his kind words. I also pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for talking about the very difficult reading that is the Muckamore Abbey hospital review. I want everybody to be able to see that across this House, we care for everybody wherever they live, but especially in Northern Ireland. Question deferred until tomorrow at Seven o’clock (Standing Order No. 54).

• 29 Jun 2026 · Northern Ireland Office · Hansard source

  More

  I recognise that we do find ourselves in a rather ridiculous situation, which impacts directly on the lives of people in Northern Ireland. This precarious financial situation has serious implications beyond Northern Ireland, and the consequences for the Northern Ireland Office and the Treasury should be of concern to Members across the House. The vast majority of Northern Ireland’s funding comes from the UK Government through the block grant. Executive Ministers have raised concerns about the adequacy of the settlement and are calling for further funding. They cite the current financial year as being particularly challenging for Departments, with the block grant set to drop by 2.7%, before only modest increases in the following years. We know that the Secretary of State has met the Finance Minister on a number of occasions in recent weeks, and I would be most grateful if he updated us on his discussions with Executive Ministers on urgently finding a resolution to agree a budget, and on the support the Government are providing to enable such a resolution to be found.

• 25 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  As chair of the all-party parliamentary beer group, I was in a lot of pain this time last week—I was pedalling to pubs in Norfolk, and was probably just outside of Norwich, or maybe somewhere nearby. This week, Pedalling to Pubs came to Parliament. It has raised over £130,000 for two brilliant charities that support the beer and pub industry, Only A Pavement Away and the Licensed Trade Charity. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the riders, the support team, and the Members of this House who supported me financially to do that silly act? Will he also congratulate Ben McCarthy—an inspirational Down’s syndrome young man—and his mum, who absolutely smashed it and really showed me what it means to be committed and to support our pub industry?

• 25 Jun 2026 · Draft Conversion Practices Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for talking to me in advance of her statement and the publication of the draft Bill. Does the symmetry in the Bill allow detransitioners to bring retrospective cases against therapists and professionals who transitioned them using the affirmative approach that was in use at the Gender Identity Development Service and is still prevalent in many settings today?

• 18 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Everybody knows that my constituency is one of the most beautiful and the No. 1 tourist destination in the United Kingdom, so the safety of those who live on and visit the stunning coastline is a priority. I heard the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) ask a question about coastguard rescue officers. Will the Leader of the House make time for an urgent debate in this House on the impact of the decision to stop paying coastguard rescue officers for emergency call-outs from September, following a recent Court of Appeal ruling? What support will be provided to the volunteer coastguard teams, including those at Rhossili, Oxwich and Mumbles in my constituency, to maintain effective emergency response capability?

• 11 Jun 2026 · Legacy of Jo Cox · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech, and her sister was an absolute legend. I want to make a very light-hearted comment. As everybody knows, I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary beer group. I was really honoured this morning to stand with my hon. Friend behind the pumps in the Strangers Bar, with a beer that has been made in memory of Jo Cox. It is for sale in the bar. That is a testament to the people she reached and the lives she touched.

• 10 Jun 2026 · Belfast: Violent Disorder · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast South and Mid Down (Claire Hanna) on securing the urgent question. I pay tribute to the Chief Constable, the PSNI and the emergency services for their work and their bravery, which continues to be unstinted. Does the Minister agree that the events we witnessed last night demonstrate the importance of political leaders speaking with one voice in condemning violence, rejecting extremism and supporting those working to build a shared and prosperous future for all communities and the people in Northern Ireland?

• 3 Jun 2026 · Replacing the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  During our Committee’s inquiry on legacy, we heard serious concerns from victims and survivors about the Government’s approach to information disclosure. In the Dillon case, the Supreme Court showed a significant degree of deference to Government on national security grounds. What reassurances can the Secretary of State give to families and survivors that national security will not be invoked to withhold information simply because it is uncomfortable for the state, rather than because its disclosure would present a genuine risk to the public?

• 27 Apr 2026 · Dunmurry Police Station Attack · Hansard source

  More

  The two incidents in Lurgan and Dunmurry are of deep concern to us and to my Committee. I give my sincere thanks to the PSNI officers who have kept their communities safe. Does the Secretary of State agree that those responsible should face the full force of the law?

• 27 Apr 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Secretary of State for giving way. However, this faux outrage was never— [ Interruption. ] My Committee has done some excellent work on this very sensitive matter, and when we were in Westminster Hall there was no faux outrage. These people did not turn up to speak up for the veterans they speak of now. The Secretary of State is doing an excellent job—so is my Committee—and I find it very wrong that these matters are being presented in this way on the Floor of the House. We need a carry-over motion. We need to be in a better place, where there will be amendments.

• 27 Apr 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for the way in which he has carried out his work on the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill with such sensitivity to all parties. However, I would also like him to explain and give more detail on the responsibility to the victims and survivors of the troubles, as well as the special duty of care to our veterans.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Sex Trafficking: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend share my alarm at the findings of the Home Affairs Committee inquiry into human trafficking in 2023, which found that the partnership working between the National Crime Agency, the Home Office and websites advertising prostitution was “inexplicable, particularly given the total absence of evidence that it has led to a reduction in the scale of trafficking facilitated by these websites—and the flagrant facilitation of trafficking enabled by, for instance, single individuals being allowed to advertise multiple women for prostitution.” This is abhorrent, and I want to know what my hon. Friend thinks.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Sex Trafficking: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that while websites advertising prostitution such as Vivastreet and AdultWork constitute human trafficking operations in and of themselves in Scotland, the National Crime Agency should also be investigating these sites for facilitating organised crime in England and Wales? These websites allow single individuals to pay for multiple prostitution adverts—a practice that a KC told the Home Affairs Committee is evidence of controlling prostitution for gain, which is a criminal offence.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak in support of Lords amendment 361 and Government amendments to it. I was horrified to learn of the increasing number of cases in recent years of women facing criminal investigations and prosecutions on suspicion of illegal abortion offences. The abject cruelty that more than 100 desperate women have been forced to endure under a 165-year-old law is barbaric and completely unnecessary. That is why I tabled an amendment to the Bill last year to stop this, which was emphatically supported in this Chamber in June. The House of Lords recently supported that change as well. As a Parliament, we took that decision because we listened to the advice of professionals and the evidence gathered over a long period of time from a number of places and we chose to stand up for women. Alongside the women affected, I am very pleased that once the Bill becomes law, no more women in England and Wales will be subject to the threat of criminal prosecution on suspicion of ending their own pregnancy, but I would welcome clarification from the Minister regarding current investigations. Parliament has been resoundingly clear in its support for removing women from the criminal law related to abortion. Can the Minister confirm that once the Bill becomes law, the expectation is that all current investigations and prosecutions under these offences should be dropped? I would welcome a commitment that she will write to write to police forces in England and Wales, because they clearly have not been listening to the will of Parliament—we are aware of at least three further women having been investigated for ending their own pregnancies since the Commons vote in June. As well as firmly supporting the decriminalisation of women in cases of abortion, the House of Lords passed an amendment to protect the women already harmed by these outdated laws. I pay tribute to Baroness Thornton, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, Baroness Watkins of Tavistock and Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer for tabling this cross-party amendment. Lords amendment 361 and the Government amendments to it would pardon women found guilty of ending their own pregnancy and expunge the records of investigations, arrests and charges of women under abortion law, whether or not they were found guilty. That is important. Current law means that abortion offences are classed as serious and violent crimes, so even without a conviction, the fact that a woman has been arrested and interviewed under these offences remains on her Disclosure and Barring Service check for life. That actively harms her job prospects and ability to travel to certain jurisdictions, and it leaves her with a permanent record on police computer systems or, in the case of conviction, a permanent criminal record that she ended her own pregnancy outside the law. Colleagues will remember that the women forced to endure criminal investigations under these offences are overwhelmingly already vulnerable, and are often victims of acute abuse and exploitation. The retention of these convictions and records causes them ongoing harm under a law that Parliament has been clear has no place in modern society. This includes women whose experiences I spoke of in my speech in this place last year—women like Nicola Packer, who, after experiencing complications in her abortion treatment, was arrested and held for 36 hours in custody, and endured nearly five years of investigation and prosecution. She was found not guilty at trial, but the investigation, arrest and charge remain on her record. It includes women like Laura, a young mother and university student who was criminalised for an abortion using illicit medication forced on her by an abusive partner. She was in a physically, sexually and emotionally abusive relationship, and her partner told her not to go to a doctor. When she was arrested, he threatened to kill her if she told anyone he was involved. She was jailed for two years, and this conviction remains on her criminal record. Women who have faced investigation or conviction should not have to continue living with the consequences of this outdated legislation—laws that Parliament has finally and rightly decided should no longer apply to women. That is why clause 361 is so needed. While remaining neutral on the issue, the Government have made changes to clause 361 to ensure workability, and I emphatically support them. They take a similar approach to the changes introduced by the Bill for pardons for convictions and cautions for loitering or soliciting when under 18.

• 25 Mar 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q6. My constituents Tony and Rebecca Wadley received insulation under the Tory Government’s ECO4 scheme, but the work left their home with black mould, leaks, damp and even a solar fire—damage now requiring £100,000-worth of repairs. Rebecca is suicidal, Tony has had pneumonia and their asthmatic son cannot live at home. Like many others, they are required under the rules to use the same contractor responsible for the faulty work, but only up to £20,000. Will the Prime Minister commit to overhauling this broken system, so that my constituents and many others can receive fully funded repairs carried out by a competent builder?

• 25 Mar 2026 · Spring Forecast · Hansard source

  More

  Though the funding in the spring statement is welcome, the Secretary of State told us that he was looking at alternative sources of funding for the charity sector because of the disappointment in Northern Ireland over the local growth fund split of 70:30. Will he update the House on his conversations?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  The problem is that the MHRA lead, Professor George, is being hounded and scapegoated after recusing himself. It is really sad to see a professional in such a situation. I urge my hon. Friend to use words with caution, because he recused himself. He is a great man who is being hounded.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  We all have.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is making a very good start to his speech. I appreciate that this is very contentious, but I am concerned about the manner in which young people—children—are asked questions. The KIDSCREEN-10 index is a primary outcome measure for the PATHWAYS trial, and when I look at the questions, I wonder how my son would have answered them aged 11. One of them asks: “Have your parent(s) treated you fairly?” The truth is that any child at that age would probably say, “No.” Does the hon. Gentleman share my concern that these questions are not fit for purpose?