Alex Ballinger MP: speeches

Speeches

• 19 Nov 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his earlier comments. When I speak to constituents in Halesowen, Cradley Heath and Quarry Bank, their message for me is clear: they are concerned about illegal immigration, and they want the Labour party to secure our borders. That was one of our manifesto commitments, because there is nothing progressive about allowing smuggling gangs to take people across Europe, or about children drowning in the channel. I welcome the Bill, and I welcome the tough measures that the Home Secretary announced on Monday. I will speak to Lords amendments 7 to 9 and 12 to 15. They are mostly about criminalising the online advertising and marketing of illegal migration actions, often conducted by smuggling gangs. There are lots of reasons why people flee a country and seek refuge in another, including conflict and persecution.

• 19 Nov 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Could the Minister talk more about the data that we already have, how we are properly tracking the number of refugees already, and why Lords amendment 37 is not appropriate?

• 19 Nov 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, of course. We are a compassionate country, and a place of refuge for many people who are fleeing persecution or face other issues. Everything that the Government have announced this week, and the measures in the Bill, allow us to be compassionate; but we can also be also tough on the smuggling gangs, who are in no way compassionate, and who are bringing people into this country on very dangerous journeys. As I said, people are fleeing conflict and poverty, and I have mentioned in other debates the importance of the Foreign Office investing in conflict resolution and prevention in order to mitigate the challenges from which people are fleeing. However, that does not excuse the smuggling gangs that are operating for profit, or the organisations that market these dangerous journeys, often on Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp or Telegram. They are selling the service of smuggling people across continents on dangerous journeys. I am pleased that Lords amendment 8 cracks down on online gangs’ marketing and advertising, and that we have some tough new criminal measures to use against them. I understand the need not to place the liability on the platform providers, but how will we work with those platforms, if we see smuggling gangs advertising routes or selling illegal work opportunities on them? How will we ensure that the legislation is effective? Lords amendments 12 and 13 are about cracking down on such advertising, even if it is not in the UK. People advertising smuggling opportunities are likely to be based in Europe or the middle east, so it is important that our legislation is extended to allow us to go after the gangs operating outside the UK, where possible, and I welcome that change. In summary, this is an excellent Bill and I support the amendments. It is important that we use all the powers that we have to go after the smuggling gangs. The legislation is an important step, and I am pleased that we are building on it with what the Home Secretary announced earlier this week.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Member recognise that the immunity that was promised never came into action because the British courts rejected it? Does he accept that we are not taking away immunity, because it was never possible in the first place?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I come to today’s debate, as many Members on both sides of the House do, as someone who was proud to serve my country and who has the utmost respect for those Members who served in Northern Ireland on Op Banner. For me, this debate is complex, but at its heart are two simple questions: how do we respond to trauma, and how do we uphold accountability? The wounds of the troubles are still raw. I saw that earlier this year, when I visited Northern Ireland and went to the WAVE trauma centre. I met people who are still experiencing trauma, and I met victims of the troubles whose only crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time—people who lost parents, people who lost limbs, and people whose lives were irreversibly changed by violence in which they took no part. I met Alex Bunting, a taxi driver who was going about his day when a sudden explosion tore his vehicle apart and severed his left leg in 1991. The question of who was responsible for the attack was never solved, but it was assumed to be an IRA operation that struck the wrong target. I also met Kathleen Gillespie, who was held hostage by the IRA with her children while her husband Patsy was chained to a cab and forced to drive a lorry at an Army checkpoint; he and five young soldiers were killed. Patsy was used by the IRA as a human bomb. Kathleen was angry with the last Government, because she felt that his barbaric death was treated like it never happened under their legacy Act. Alex deserves answers, Kathleen deserves answers, and both deserve accountability. So do many others, not only in Belfast but here in Britain. Families in the west midlands are still seeking answers after the Birmingham pub bombings of 1974, which took 21 young, innocent lives. Half a century on, the families’ trauma remains, and they still wait for justice. That is why accountability matters—accountability for the terrorists, including the IRA, who carried out the overwhelming majority of killings, but also accountability for our armed forces when standards were not upheld. However, the Conservatives’ legacy Act of 2023 undermined every route for accountability. Most gravely, it created a system of conditional immunity for members of the IRA—effectively a blanket amnesty for anyone who was willing to co-operate with the commission. That is not justice; it places terrorists and those who served our country on the same moral footing. Families were rightly appalled. Audrey, whose brother Private Winston Donnell was murdered by the IRA in 1971, said: “We always had a very slim hope of getting justice, but…this amnesty has let us and other families down. Our Government has let us down badly.” Victims of IRA terrorism, and victims of state wrongdoing, deserve the opportunity for accountability. No veteran should be dragged repeatedly through processes dealing with the same matter. That is why the new protections in this Bill are so important. They mark a genuine improvement, and put veterans’ welfare first. They are important, sensible and overdue protections for our veterans, who overwhelmingly served with honour and distinction. This legislation seeks to fix the grave failings of the Conservatives’ discredited legacy Act of 2023. It helps victims to pursue justice, it restores the chance of accountability for terrorist crimes, and it provides stronger, fairer protections for veterans than anything in the previous Government’s approach.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Taxes · Hansard source

  More

  Does the shadow Chancellor recognise that the previous Government were the only Government in living memory to oversee a reduction in real living standards over the course of five years? Does he accept that the difficult situation with the cost of living is in large part due to his Government’s decisions over those five years?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Taxes · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Chancellor for giving way. He will of course remember his time as the Work and Pensions Minister, when he oversaw a £33 billion increase in the welfare budget. Of course he is talking about cuts now, but not about welfare cuts, because he had the opportunity to make those cuts and failed to do so. He is talking about cuts to teachers, nurses and our armed forces. Which of those three areas is he talking about cutting right now?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Taxes · Hansard source

  More

  My constituents, of course, remember Liz Truss’s devastating mini-Budget, when those rules were not followed. That had a massive impact on not just our public services but the mortgages and cost of living that my constituents are still feeling today. Does my right hon. Friend agree that going back to that irresponsible financial management would be a disaster for this country?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Taxes · Hansard source

  More

  Why didn’t you, then?

• 4 Nov 2025 · Houses in Multiple Occupation: Planning Consent · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd, and a pleasure to join this important debate, called by my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm), which gives me a chance to raise an issue that really matters to my constituents in Halesowen—the rising number of houses in multiple occupation. We all recognise the need for more housing, especially during a cost of living crisis, but it must be provided in an appropriate manner, and not in a way that undermines safety or community cohesion. In Halesowen, the biggest concerns that I hear regarding HMOs are parking, road safety and antisocial behaviour. Parking is already a challenge in our town; when HMOs are approved without adequate spaces, cars spill on to residential streets, causing frustration, congestion and preventable accidents. I am pleased that recent applications in relation to Nimmings Road and Olive Lane have been rejected for failing to meet those standards and for compromising safety. Road safety is also an important concern. More cars on already narrow roads mean greater risk, especially where speeding is already an issue. Main routes such as Stourbridge Road and Long Lane are already gridlocked at peak times, and poorly planned HMOs cause further strain and risk making our roads less safe for local residents. There is also the issue of antisocial behaviour. When HMOs are rushed through without proper consultation, they can change the character of our neighbourhoods. West Midlands police has found links between HMOs and increased reports of crime and drug offences, so these are genuine concerns that deserve to be taken seriously. I will ask my hon. Friend the Minister two things. First, will the Government review planning guidelines for HMOs, to ensure that local authorities have the flexibility to consider parking, infrastructure and community impact before granting permission? Secondly, will the Minister consider introducing stronger licensing frameworks to prevent over-concentration of HMOs in particular streets or wards, so that growth is genuinely sustainable and in keeping with local needs?

• 4 Nov 2025 · Official Development Assistance Reductions · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is raising some good points about national security and migration. He is probably well aware that the top three nationalities that come to the UK on small boats are from conflict-affected states: Afghanistan, Syria and Iran. Does the hon. Member share my concern that the UK dismantling the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s conflict and migration department is the wrong decision at a time when we should be investing in conflict prevention, rather than withdrawing from it?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Israel-Palestine Conflict: Government Response · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the statement of the Chair of the Committee. I think all of us on the Committee are relieved that since our report was published, we have now reached a ceasefire. The UN has been able to re-enter Gaza and the situation it has seen on the ground is devastating. The UN’s humanitarian chief described it as like going through the ruins of Hiroshima. While it is welcome that the UN is able to restart its humanitarian deliveries, this is only a first step towards the lasting peace that is needed. Does the Chair agree that the UK must play its part, with international partners, on security and governance as we move towards a two-state-solution? We need to enable Palestinians to rebuild the place where they live in a way that is fair for them.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Defence Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I am incredibly proud of our naval engineering history in the Black Country, including at companies such as Somers Forge in Halesowen and Brooks Forgings in Cradley Heath. I am delighted that this Labour Government are increasing defence spending to levels never seen under the previous Government. Does the Minister agree that that investment in Northern Ireland, at places such as Harland & Wolff, will not just benefit the local economy there but the supply chain all across the country?

• 15 Oct 2025 · Defence Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  4. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of the defence industrial strategy on Northern Ireland.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the many petitioners who brought forward this debate, which is fundamental to parents in my Halesowen constituency. I have been speaking to many of them, and the message I am receiving is clear: the system is not working. Parents raised three major themes with me. First, getting support for children with special needs is too much of a fight. Time and again, EHCP processes in Halesowen have breached the 20-week timeline, and in many cases, parents are waiting for more than a year to get support. Secondly, the waiting list for child and adolescent mental health services is much too high; many families have told me that they must wait years and meet ridiculous thresholds to receive support. Thirdly, I hear from teachers and parents that capacity in mainstream schools is stretched to the limit. They know what children need but are unable to deliver in a complex and under-resourced system. That is best described in parents’ own words. One parent said to me: “I cannot underestimate the battle that parents have with the system and local authorities: to get an assessment; to get an EHCP that is meaningful and lawful; to get suitable education provision; and to get healthcare and social care support. The constant fight is exhausting.” The only conclusion must be that fundamental reform of the system is needed. It is not working for parents, teachers or the children themselves. There are no easy solutions to these very complex problems. When it comes to reform, I ask that parents—like the parents here today—are at the very heart of any changes we make.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Humanitarian Access · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that Israel’s attack on our friend Qatar—indeed, against the very negotiators that were supposed to be discussing this ceasefire—shows that it has no interest in securing peace, and that there must be consequences for that action?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I go back to the example of RAF Gan. The Maldivians refused the Soviet Union back in 1976, because the UK had a good reputation with them. We honoured our agreements and respected international law, and they felt that it was inappropriate for them to be seen to be supporting a country that had not done the same. In the case of Diego Garcia, this is a situation that has been negotiated for many years. The Conservatives recognised that there was a threat to our sovereignty, because they started the negotiations. As we have heard from my hon. Friends, if we are unable to conclude a deal soon, there is a serious risk that our operations at the base would be thwarted. It would not be in 99 or 140 years after the deal; it would be in weeks or months.

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Could the right hon. Lady outline what was in the deal that the last Conservative Foreign Secretary was negotiating? The points of sovereignty and everything else were conceded by her party.

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does the right hon. Gentleman, who is my colleague on the Foreign Affairs Committee, acknowledge that by opening negotiations with Mauritius, the last Government conceded that there was a point around sovereignty to be discussed and that, certainly from then onwards, it was difficult for this Government to roll back that point?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will carry on for a moment, and then I will give way. Despite the risks, the Conservatives have come out in opposition to this deal. The right hon. Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly)—the former Foreign Secretary, who is not in his place—has described the deal as “weak, weak, weak”, but it was he who started the negotiations back in 2023. He pledged that he would complete the deal in the same year, but he was unable to do so. Maybe it was his negotiating tactics that were “weak, weak, weak”, rather than anything else. For all the Conservatives’ complaining about this agreement, they have failed again to offer any insight into why they started the negotiations in the first place.

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman will know that the Foreign Affairs Committee had the Minister in front of us to discuss the deal, so there has been parliamentary scrutiny on this, including by other Committees, just not by the Defence Committee. On the costs, as the PPS to Lord Cameron, maybe he can say a little bit about what the cost was of the deal they negotiated at the end of those 11 rounds—whether it was higher or lower than the deal we have reached now.

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister not think it is the height of hypocrisy for those in the last Government, who negotiated 85% of this treaty over 11 rounds, to wait until they were in opposition to make these claims, none of which they made during their negotiations?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  We do not know why Lord Cameron closed them down, because the Conservatives have not released any details of the deal that they negotiated up to that point. Maybe the costs were too high because they had not negotiated a better deal, or maybe things like the 24-mile security zone were not included in the deal, but this Government have secured a better deal. It is important for us to secure our national security. It is also worth pointing out that Conservative Governments have not looked after our national security over the last 14 years. I have served, and I have seen the damage that was caused by 14 years of under-investment and neglect of our armed forces. Our Army has been reduced to a size that has not been seen since the time of Napoleon. Service accommodation standards are scandalous, which our people do not deserve in the slightest, and the Conservatives cut the defence budget so deep that Russia felt that we were too weak to stop an invasion in Europe. I am pleased to see that this Labour Government are investing again in our armed forces and starting to fix the damage of those 14 years. Since we are talking about investment, let me touch on the investment value of this deal. Diego Garcia’s location—far from major population centres—makes it the ultimate secure base. It is a deepwater port in a key staging area in the Indian ocean, and is vital for our submarine operations. It contains the longest runway in the entire Indian ocean, putting our aircraft in reach of Africa, the middle east and east Asia. In order to continue the operation of such a base for 99 years, we are looking at an average cost of £101 million a year. That is around 0.2% of our defence budget—less than the cost of a single aircraft carrier. As we heard from my hon. Friends, it is a better deal than the French have achieved in Djibouti for a base that is right next to the Chinese operations, and has a total cost that is less than the amount of money that the last Government wasted on faulty PPE during the pandemic. Diego Garcia is vital for our national security—I think everybody in this place agrees with that. Two years ago, the Conservatives also agreed on the need for a deal.