May 2026

Order.

Parliamentary appearance by Caroline Nokes

I welcome the measures in the King’s Speech on energy security, as on many other issues. The Opposition’s wrong-headed approach would leave us tethered to global markets that we cannot control. They would lock our country out of much-needed jobs and condemn Brits to higher bills. The energy independence and nuclear regulation Bills, in contrast, are further leaps towards the stronger energy security we need. In my speech, I want to tackle an issue—it was actually touched on by the previous speak

In order to keep to time, I will not. Capital constraints, and relatedly, constraints in compute, are real. We must recognise that while unilateral measures to support sovereign AI are important, their scope is necessarily limited. We must again work with reliable partners that share our values, not least within the EU. Finally, we must be brave enough to open up the discussion on the fiscal framework for AI. We currently tax labour, the very thing that AI will—in some sectors and in specific wa

Order. I call Catherine Fookes.

Parliamentary appearance by Ms Polly Billington

Parliamentary appearance by Caroline Nokes

Robin Swann voted AYE on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Harriet Cross voted AYE on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

I will make a bit more progress. That is why we have already brought forward our next renewables auction and taken steps to fast-track the roll-out of renewables on public land. But renewables are only part of the story, and I want to come to nuclear, because this is going to be fun. Those drafting the Opposition amendment obviously have a real sense of humour. Here is the truth about their record. They promised a final investment decision on Sizewell C in the last Parliament and did not deliver

The right hon. Lady paints a picture of the stark consequences of the Labour party’s policy for a total proscription on new oil and gas licences. Can she advise us what the future will look like for the United Kingdom without access to oil and gas from the North sea basin?

Will the Secretary of State give way?

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way. He is accused of being messianic in his approach to proscribing new oil and gas licences in the North sea. If it can be demonstrated that UK consumption of oil and gas is not falling at a rate that is equal to, or faster than, the rate of production in the United Kingdom, will he release his screeching U-turn on new oil and gas licences in the North sea?

I would never accuse the hon. Gentleman, my constituency neighbour, of being a rank, rotten revisionist, but the problem is that in the last 10 years of his Government, oil and gas jobs in north-east Scotland went down by 100,000, and just in the two years that he was a Minister, including in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, they went down a further 10%. Why is he now manifesting as some sort of caped crusader for oil and gas workers? It is difficult for many of us in north-east

The Minister will know that Scotland has almost all the oil in the United Kingdom. We have the vast majority of the gas. We have the most onshore renewables and the most hydro. And yet, under his watch, his constituents and mine in Scotland pay the highest electricity bills anywhere on these islands. What does he say to our constituents?

The Minister must accept that there is no more august Committee in this place than the ISC. He must further accept that it is the least partisan organ of this Parliament. It is against that incomprehensible reality that the pedlars of chaos in No. 10 have sought to confound the ISC by withholding information and deviating unilaterally from the terms of the Humble Address. The Minister has given himself and No. 10 till after the Whitsun recess. Will he say very clearly when after Whitsun recess h

Order. We have three speakers remaining and we have gained a few minutes. The last three speakers can have five minutes each if they do not take interventions.

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

Nigel Huddleston voted AYE on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Parliamentary appearance by Tim Farron