May 2026

Why not?

I thank all the speakers and contributors to this afternoon’s debate. I especially thank and welcome the contributions from my right hon. Friends the Members for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale) and for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes); my hon. Friends the Members for Harrow East (Bob Blackman), for Isle of Wight East (Joe Robertson), for Gordon and Buchan (Harriet Cross) and for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam); and the hon. and learned Member

I thank the hon. Gentleman, who represents a party that for the best part of 10 years had a presumption against oil and gas, for now seeking to be a champion for that industry. There was a global oil price crash in 2014. What did we do? We implemented a policy of maximum economic recovery. We cut taxes and stemmed job losses—the exact opposite of what this Labour Government are doing in the North sea, where they are accelerating the decline, making thousands of people redundant. It is frankly of

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. We are exporting emissions and exporting jobs, and that is having a detrimental impact on our economy and communities up and down this United Kingdom, not least in north-east Scotland. I see that every time I go home. One thousand jobs will be lost every month under this Labour Government, and we will lose out on £50 billion of investment. Pubs, restaurants and shops are closing up in the granite city under this Labour Government. The impact is being fel

My hon. Friend puts it better than I ever could. She is absolutely right; it is completely nonsensical. In Aberdeen there will be a referendum on this Government’s approach to the North sea in just a few short weeks. On 18 June, the people of what was until recently the oil capital of Europe will have their say on how they feel this Government have treated them and the industry of which they are so proud. It is not just the production of oil and gas that is being driven to extinction by this Gov

I could run through the list of what we achieved in office on nuclear, as the Minister has heard me do many times, but let me remind the hon. Member that the Labour party has never opened one nuclear power plant in all the years it has been in office —a record that will probably continue over the next three years. This act of national self-harm has to come to an end. There is only one party that has a plan to cut bills, support industry, protect jobs, and make Britain energy secure. Energy costs

No, I will not. That is why Britain needs a serious plan to cut bills. With the Conservatives’ cheap power plan, that is exactly what Britain would get: a £200 cut to energy bills. It could be delivered right now if this Government prioritised the people of this country rather than wacky, unrealistic ideology. But we would not stop there; we would go much further and much faster. To make this country energy-secure, to protect British jobs, grow tax revenue and welcome billions of pounds of inves

I will not. We would back our world-class oil and gas industry by scrapping the ban on exporting technologies and welcoming the £5 billion of exports that that would create.

I am sorry, I will not. The North Sea Transition Authority would be rechristened the North Sea Authority and tasked with one noble mission: to maximise North sea oil and gas drilling and raise billions of pounds more in tax cuts for the British people. The Conservatives would scrap the energy profits levy—the anvil around the neck of the industry—which Labour extended and increased as one of their first acts in government. A profitable, attractive and investible North sea would strengthen public

Rosena Allin-Khan voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Emily Thornberry voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Chris Elmore voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Jim McMahon voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

I welcome His Majesty’s Gracious Speech, as it puts energy security, economic security and industrial renewal back on track for the people I represent. Wolverhampton and Willenhall have a proud history of industry, innovation and hard work. From our foundries and factories to our engineering and manufacturing expertise, our communities helped to power British and global growth for generations. However, the policies of the past are taking their toll today: policies of turning the UK away from man

I will not. Sorry. The Bill takes important steps to tackle rising household bills, strengthen protections for vulnerable households, and pave the way for the warm homes plan. It also rightly accelerates Britain’s drive for energy security by speeding up investment in clean power, grid infrastructure and modern energy networks. Wolverhampton is already positioning itself at the forefront of green innovation, with investment in advanced manufacturing, clean technologies and the green innovation c

Of course, getting £100,000 a year for owning 100 acres is a wonderful incentive, but is it possible to grow those crops? We are the breadbasket of England. Is it possible to grow wheat and barley where there are solar panels? But I do not want to go on about it; we know the arguments now. As for nationalising British Steel, we do not take an ideological view. Hundreds of my constituents work in British Steel. Greg Clark ran it for nine months, and paid all the wages. I personally am neither for

Catherine West voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

The Foreign Affairs Committee heard about the pressure that the Foreign Office was under to move quickly on the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States. Now, concerns have been raised about the lack of transparency surrounding the papers connected to that appointment. If the Government have nothing to hide, why are they changing the terms and scope of the Humble Address, and withholding and redacting documents from the Intelligence and Security Committee? Will the Minst

It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), who speaks with great authority and talks a lot of good sense. I have to say to Labour Members that a change of Prime Minister will solve nothing. We tried that four times, and it did us no good at all. This King’s Speech should have been an opportunity for fundamental reform, but do the Government have the courage to do that? We Conservative Members suspect that they do not. For too many years, we have concentrated o

Tulip Siddiq voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)