May 2026

My constituents did not want HS2, and they have been putting up with the disruption of construction for years. Some of them warned that this would be a colossal waste of money, and they were right. This railway is costing nearly a billion pounds a mile. Every pound of cost overrun is a pound not spent on the local infrastructure that my constituents actually use and need. Given the Department’s complete failure to date to hold HS2 Ltd to account, what commitment can the Secretary of State give t

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey) for securing this debate, and grateful to other hon. Members for their contributions. I will try to address the points that she and others have raised. I want to begin by fully recognising the change and upheaval that major infrastructure projects such as HS2 bring to the communities they pass through. I understand the concerns raised by hon. Members on behalf of their constituents. As my right hon. Friend the Transport Secretary

Let me reassert: I really do not think Members are advocating that the raw information collected as part of national security screening interviews with people who are becoming public servants ought to be shared with Parliament. The summary of those recommendations and the advice put to Departments should be and have been shared, and I think that is the appropriate way to handle that. The hon. Gentleman asks me specifically when after the Whitsun recess the document will be published. We stand re

I can confirm that all documents that need to be referred to the ISC have now been referred to it. That process has concluded, which is why we can move to publication after the recess.

Parliamentary appearance by Chris Vince

The second tranche of information will publish all remaining documents except those that are currently with the Metropolitan police in relation to ongoing criminal investigations. As I said to the House, this will be a very significant publication, which will warrant careful consideration from Members across the House. We want to publish it with sufficient notice to allow Members to consider it before coming to the House to ask any questions they may have of the Government, which is why we are n

Parliamentary appearance by Elaine Stewart

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

I think this is a question specifically to the Foreign Office in relation to evidence given by the former permanent secretary, and it is about how mitigations can be put in place to manage risks. For example, as I understand it, Mr Speaker, if you previously had a client in a commercial relationship with a business, you would not be allowed to meet them privately while you held public office. These are the types of mitigations to which I think the Foreign Office was referring, and I think they s

Parliamentary appearance by Chris Vince

The shadow Secretary of State said that for energy independence we need our own oil and gas, rather than investing in renewables. She will know that her Government paid £44 billion to subsidise our energy during the time of the Ukraine price spike. Will she tell us by how much our bills were reduced as a result of having our own oil and gas when the Ukraine crisis happened?

I was delighted to see it confirmed last week in the King’s Speech that that legislation will be introduced in this Session. We will be bringing it forward shortly.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As I have said, any summary documentation and recommendation that was put by UKSV to the Foreign Office has been shared with the hon. Gentleman’s Committee. What has not been shared was the raw data collected in interviews with Peter Mandelson. As I have said repeatedly to the House, and as I am sure the hon. Gentleman agrees, there is not such a mechanism for that level of personal detail—I am talking about how much money someone has in personal accounts, and who they may or may not have had a