Oliver Ryan MP: speeches

Speeches

• 11 Jul 2025 · Courts (Remote Hearings) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman has made some reasonable points throughout the debate. When I did my graduate diploma in law, we did a similar exercise and went to court to see big trials, but that is not what the Bill would cover. It is for small, mass cases that, as has been mentioned, deal with things like council tax arrears. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, we are short on time, so I will quietly throw myself on his mercy and ask him whether we can get to the end of this before half-past 2. The Bill would be of great benefit to the legal system. He will know from his days as a lawyer in the system that some modernisation is required. It is not always a good thing, but I believe that this is a measured approach. If we can please get through to the end of the debate by half-past 2, we can make some progress.

• 3 Jul 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  We owe our veterans and service personnel a great debt, and we eternally thank them for their service to and sacrifice for this country—particularly in proud regiment towns like Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking Healthier Heroes, Andy, Rio and the powerful community of support they have built for veterans and their families across the constituency for hosting their Armed Forces Day festival and celebration recently at Towneley Park? With the Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment parading their freedom of the borough through Burnley for the first time in 12 years on Tuesday, will she also join me in welcoming them home?

• 2 Jul 2025 · Courts (Remote Hearings) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I propose to deal with clauses 1 and 2 together, as you set out. This modest but important Bill amends current legislation to enable defendants and debtors in specific types of cases heard in the magistrates court or county or family courts to be able to appear before the court remotely via live audio or video link. The use of remote video and audio links is common and already used in civil, family and criminal jurisdictions, delivering significant benefits through swifter access to justice and by utilising the court estate efficiently, particularly at a time of backlogs. As a result of the Bill, two categories of case will be able to be heard remotely. That means that those in breach of some injunctions and orders in the county and family courts, as well as persistent defaulters on orders to pay council tax, will now be able to appear remotely. That ability to appear remotely is especially important, because in many cases, defendants must be physically brought before the courts within 24 hours of their arrest for breach of these civil injunctions. Sometimes, that is not possible. Defendants may be arrested out of hours and court facilities may be some distance away, all while the clock, as set out in the current legislation, is running down. The Bill addresses those points. People who are arrested for those breaches will now be able to appear remotely, as will those who are defaulters of orders to pay their council tax. But remote does not mean less access to justice. The courts recognise that a remote hearing is no less capable, in principle, of being fair than a hearing at which all parties are physically present. That has been affirmed by His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service’s evaluation of remote hearings during the covid-19 pandemic. Importantly, the Bill does not mandate remote hearings. It enables a defendant or debtor to attend a court in person or by live video or audio link at judicial discretion. Once a person is before the court, the ultimate determination of whether to have a remote hearing will be by the judge, who will make their own ruling, having heard from all the parties and taking into consideration the circumstances of the case. With that background in mind, I turn to the clauses. Clause 1(1) sets out the required legislative changes for an amendment to section 47 of the Family Law Act 1996 in relation to arrest for breach of order. It inserts proposed new subsection (13), which provides that the defendant may appear before the court either by way of live audio or video link. Clause 1(2) amends section 9 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 in relation to arrest without warrant. It inserts proposed new subsection (7), which provides that the defendant may appear before the court either by way of live audio or live video link. Clause 1(3) amends section 43 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009 in relation to arrest without warrant. It inserts proposed new subsection (8), which provides that the defendant may appear before the court either by way of live audio or video link. Clause 1(4) amends paragraph 8(1A) of schedule 4 to the Local Government Finance Act 1992 in relation to enforcement in England and Wales. It inserts new sub-paragraph (b), which provides that the debtor, subject to an application under paragraph 8(1A), may appear before the court either by way of live audio or video link. Clause 1 sets out the necessary changes to legislation so that a defendant or a debtor in certain circumstances can appear before a court via live link. These changes ensure that individuals who are arrested for breach of certain family or county court injunctions and orders, as well as persistent failures to pay council tax, can appear before the court in a timely and efficient manner using remote links. At its core, the Bill enhances public safety, ensuring that dangerous individuals, in the case of breaches of injunctions, such as gang injunctions, are not released for want of finding a court or judiciary out of court hours. The use of remote links in court proceedings is relatively common and has delivered significant benefits already. This provision will provide greater flexibility, at judicial discretion, where it is appropriate. As I said, it does not mandate that remote links must be used. Access to justice is not curtailed by this Bill. The defendant or debtor will be able to make representations to the judge, and the existing safeguards of access to legal representatives remain. Subsections (1), (2) and (3) of clause 2 provide that the Bill extends to England and Wales; that it will come into force at the end of the period of two months following Royal Assent; and that it may be cited as the Courts (Remote Hearings) Act 2025 once in force. There is nothing controversial about these arrangements. I commend both clauses to the Committee.

• 24 Jun 2025 · Saudi Arabia · Hansard source

  More

  11. What steps he is taking to strengthen the UK’s relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

• 24 Jun 2025 · Saudi Arabia · Hansard source

  More

  I declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is an important partner for trade and peace in the middle east and for the combating of terrorism around the world. With reference to recent events in Iran, how is the Foreign Secretary utilising our relationship to involve the Saudi Government in our de-escalation efforts in the region?

• 23 Jun 2025 · Pride Month · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention, and I absolutely will. One of the first experiences I had as an MP was being approached by a constituent, Steven, whom I had not met during the election campaign, and who has now received compensation for his disgraceful treatment when he was a member of the armed forces. I met Lord Etherton during that time and we had an Adjournment debate. It was a much longer story, and I came in right at the end of it, as so many MPs do, but I was proud to have met him and experienced the work he had put into representing those men and women who had served our country so valiantly and had been so harshly let down. This month is the chance for us to be with our people—the people who accept us, who welcome us and who care. Wearing a lanyard is not a political statement; it is a statement of respect. Raising a rainbow flag on a building is not a political statement—

• 23 Jun 2025 · Pride Month · Hansard source

  More

  There has been quite a nice cross-party feeling to the debate tonight, and that has been encouraging. There has also been some mention of trailblazers. I realise this is probably a little bit embarrassing for those on our Front Bench, but the Minister who opened the debate, my hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda and Ogmore (Chris Bryant), has been through quite a lot and written quite extensively about the role of LGBT people in public life, about the role of Parliament and about his own role as a Minister and an MP. Will the shadow Minister join me in praising him as one of those trailblazers in this place?

• 23 Jun 2025 · Pride Month · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. I am so proud of my hon. Friend and everybody else who has contributed to the debate, whether LGBT or an ally. I stand here as an openly gay man, but allies have talked about films—“Pride” and things—that they have seen. It is important for us all to be here and to recognise Pride, and I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. Wearing a lanyard or putting a flag on a building is not a political statement; it is a sign of respect. Saying that you are an ally or that you just plain do not care either way, but you support people to live how they want to live, is not a political statement; it is a statement of respect. Respect is what we should be about in this country. It is a very British thing, whatever our side or our politics, and I quite like that about the country that we live in. Life is more than black and white; it is filled with wonderful colours. Above all, there is something quite powerful in saying, “This is me and I am proud of it.” That joy pushes back against all the shame and silence that we have faced over the years, and that we still face now. As long as anyone feels the need to hide who they are, this month will be needed. Happy Pride month to people in the Chamber and people in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield.

• 23 Jun 2025 · Pride Month · Hansard source

  More

  I will start by answering the question that is so often asked, first under the breath, and then in the dark corners of the internet, and now, in some places, in the unfortunate mainstream: why do we have Pride? Why do we need Pride? The answer is that for far too many people, even in the Britain of 2025—one of the greatest places in the world to be LGBT, I believe—being yourself and being who you are feels like a trial and a struggle, and it is just not good enough. We need it because too many LGBT people are attacked, abused or dismissed because of their sexuality, and because even in our free country, too many LGBT people have to constantly check that they are not behaving in too gay a fashion in order to avoid inciting anyone or giving too much away for their own safety, or even due to fears of being othered. We need it because too many LGBT people are homeless and too many LGBT adults are experiencing mental health conditions or suffering from drug or alcohol abuse or poverty as a result of their sexuality. It looks like a parade and a party on the street, but Pride is about acknowledging that struggle—the struggle for respect and equality, and to breathe as freely as everyone else. The history of Pride is always a reminder that so many have come before us, and that they endured not just the harassment, but, in this country, the criminalisation, the chemical castration, the shaming, the ostracisation, the bullying and names and the punching and spitting—as I was spat at once, on Manchester’s Canal Street. It is a reminder of those who were killed or not cared for during the AIDS epidemic—those who were left to die, considered diseased or crazed. It is on those brave shoulders that openly gay LGB and T people like me stand in 2025. I will say now that transgender people deserve our respect and support, and that I believe in LGB with the T. Sure, we have come a long way. Some places let people marry who they love, and lots more folks understand the beautiful umbrella that exists within our community. However, the truth is that it is not the same everywhere, and it can change fast, as the Minister said. There are still many countries where someone being who they are can land them in jail or condemn them to death. Even here in the UK, both the Conservative candidate for my constituency and I had our sexuality paraded around, commented on and weaponised by other candidates at last year’s election, as if it were a slight on our character. I said to my now constituents at the election, “I am who I am. Dislike me for my politics and my opinions, but do not disengage because of who I love. By the way, as much as I am going door to door, I’m not trying to convert anyone, although we are a very broad church.” I am proud that in all the communities in my constituency, respect and tolerance found more of a home than hate. I say to my constituents in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield who are lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender, from all creeds and castes, I am here to represent you as much as anyone else.

• 17 Jun 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister may have seen my constituent Mollie Mulheron recently featured on “Newsnight”. Our local ICB recently refused her access to fertility treatment after recovery from an aggressive cancer with a high likelihood that her illness will return. Will the Minister meet me and Mollie to discuss that issue, and access to fertility treatment for cancer survivors and patients?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Disabled People in Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  I will not give way. The principle of the social contract of the welfare state is at stake, and this Government are defending it.

• 17 Jun 2025 · Disabled People in Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  Let us say it straight: disabled people have been let down by 14 years of Tory Government. The number of disabled people in working households living in poverty doubled under the Tories’ watch, to 1.3 million people last year and the pay gap for disabled people is higher now at 13% than it was a decade ago. I will touch briefly on the upcoming PIP reforms—I did have a bigger speech planned, but we are short on time. An unsustainable welfare system, one that does not enjoy public support or give disabled people enough good support, does disabled people no favours. What does do them a favour is scrapping the work capability assessment and providing extra funding to get people into to work. To have no answer to the additional 1,000 people a day who are currently going into the PIP system is to keep one’s head in the sand and to provide no real answers to the failure of the current system, which is not flexible or supportive enough.

• 10 Jun 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his commitment to peace, and for his unrelenting and tireless work towards it. A two-state solution must be protected. We cannot let that light—that hope—be extinguished. He is quite right in his comments. Today’s strong action is right, and it is welcomed by many of my constituents, but will he get even tougher? Will he get more aid in, stop the settler violence, stop the illegal settlements, and take a message from this House and this country about protecting Palestinians and their right to self-determination?

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  The Opposition motion, which I will not be supporting, uses the word “regret” an awful lot, but it omits any regret on their part for their complete failure to properly secure our borders during 14 years in government. The Conservatives ran an experiment in this country, and they will never be forgiven for it—especially for facing both ways on the immigration question for such a long time. In 2010, the Tories pledged to get immigration down to the tens of thousands, and over the next five years they failed. In 2015, the Tories said they would get net migration down to the tens of thousands, not the hundreds of thousands, and they failed. In 2017, they said they would get migration to the tens of thousands, not the hundreds of thousands, and they failed. In 2019, they said the “numbers will come down”—at that point, they had panicked slightly about the whole affair. At the time the Tories were leaving office, net migration was nearly 1 million. Time after time, over 14 years, they told the British people they would tackle net migration and bring the numbers down, but they did not—and now, after 10 months, they have the bottle to stand in front of this Government and ask, “Why are the numbers not down yet?”. We are taking action to bring the numbers closer to the approximately 200,000 that they were when Labour left office in 2010. There is this rhetoric that immigration has been an issue for 30 or 40 years, but the numbers have been sky high over the past 10—since Brexit, really. And the Tories wonder why people think they are irrelevant. There is mention in the motion of a cap, but—as always with this Opposition—there is a history lesson here. I am old enough to remember 2013 to 2015, and the cap that was announced by the coalition Government. [Hon. Members: “Surely not!”] I was a very junior councillor. A cap was mentioned by the coalition then—a complete chocolate fireguard. They got the headlines when they announced it, but it failed to do the job, so they ditched it. In the end, it was not worth the press release it was written on. It was game playing of the highest order. We are seeing the same thing again now; history is repeating itself. In the past four years, net migration quadrupled and our asylum system was completely destroyed. The processing of asylum claims took so long and numbers increased by so much that the previous Government were spending £9 million a day on hotel stays across more than 400 hotels. Hotel stays for my constituents are a treat, and not something to be doled out to people coming off boats in the channel—but unfortunately that is what the Conservatives did for the best part of five years. My constituents do not begrudge genuine asylum seekers, but that system was broken and they have told me that that is just not on. Boats over the channel were basically invented by the previous Government. Indeed, 13,500 people crossed the channel in small boats in the shadow Home Secretary’s last five months as Minister for Immigration, and 260 boats crossed in his last two. The same number of boats have crossed the channel in the last six months of this Government. I would say that that is progress. If a person is here in this country illegally—and illegal is illegal—they will be removed. That is not in contention; I do not see how it can be. In contrast to those years of open borders, this Government have secured agreements with France, Germany, Italy, Iraq and more. The arrangements with France and Germany in particular are game-changing, and I want to see French boats in the water stopping those asylum seekers in the months to come. I will finish there, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I am very short on time, but thank you very much for calling me to speak.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member. Speaking of voluntary removals and laughable schemes, does he accept that the four people his Government sent to Rwanda were in fact volunteers, and that the whole scheme was laughable and hideously expensive?

• 12 May 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Member give way?

• 30 Apr 2025 · Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Chi Onwurah) on securing this important debate to talk about the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the people of Palestine. Much like my hon. Friend the Members for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West and for Hammersmith and Chiswick (Andy Slaughter), many hundreds of constituents have been in touch with me throughout my time as the Member of Parliament for Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield to talk about the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and the death that they have witnessed on social media and television or heard about from families, friends and perhaps people from the region who have shared stories of the way lives are lived over there. I promised those people that I would raise my voice, and that is what I am doing today. As my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West said—I could not have chosen better words—there has been such an outpouring of emotion and sympathy, and a desire to help and see peace in the region. That is why we are all here to speak about this today. As we have already heard, the situation for Palestinians is desperate—it is hell on earth. It is estimated by the United Nations that 40,000 to 50,000 people have been killed since 7 October, including over 250 aid workers, and over 100,000 people have been injured. Some 90% of Gazans face immediate hunger and the prospect of starving to death, and 70% of buildings on the Gaza strip have been destroyed in Israeli bombing. There are no education facilities—nothing—and very few standing hospitals. In March, Israel stopped all humanitarian aid and completely cut off power to the strip: no food, medicine or aid, only death. I say to Israel: we must have peace and a return to the ceasefire now, and in the long term we must have a two-state solution, about which a lot of Labour Members agree. At the same time, when we talk about the context of the Occupied Palestinian Territories, we cannot forget that 59 abducted hostages are still being held by Hamas terrorists in Gaza. So I say to Hamas: Palestinians are suffering; stop this, bring the hostages home, disband and end this now. Hamas have killed thousands of innocents; they have killed women and children and they took over 200 hostages on 7 October. Hamas are not freedom fighters—they are monsters. I will not countenance any defence of Hamas or their actions. But, turning to the actions of the Israeli Government, last month Israeli tanks moved into the west bank for the first time in decades. Some 40,000 Palestinians have been displaced from areas of the west bank and 916 Palestinians have been killed in the west bank since October 2023. I have met Palestinians living in the west bank, including a woman from the Tent of Nations farm. I can only describe their experiences as daily harassment, terror and bullying by Israeli troops and settlers to unreasonable and unnecessary levels, and that is before we talk about the specific actions of some of the very aggressive settlers from the illegal settlements. Those settlers want complete annexation of the west bank and the utter destruction of the possibility of a two-state solution, and consequently, of a Palestinian state. I am glad that this Government have consistently called for a ceasefire and for the release of all hostages. On my first week in Parliament, I raised that with the Prime Minister. After the election, I was glad to hear him recommit to not only a two-state solution but a ceasefire in the region. It is worth remembering that this Government restored and increased funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees to more than ever before. I condemn the awful violence that we have seen in settlements in the west bank. I am glad that this Government have strongly sanctioned settler groups, although I agree with the previous comments that those sanctions need to go further. It is important to say that those settlers do not represent all Israelis, but a niche and extreme group. There is a wider context that can bring about peace, as this is a battle not between nations or creeds but between extremists on both sides. This Government have suspended a large number of arms transfers to Israel, where they are known to have been used or seem to have been used improperly. I know that is under constant review, which I welcome. We must do more to get aid into the region, and I am glad that the Prime Minister yesterday set out a further £100 million for the Palestinian Authority. We have to end Israel’s blocks on aid and electricity in the strip, and we must make the steps we promised in the election in supporting the creation of a Palestinian state. As was mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Hammersmith and Chiswick (Andy Slaughter), that will allow legal protection and security for Palestinians and the wider region, and self-determination for the occupied areas, which they do not currently enjoy and have not enjoyed for some time. I caveat all that with a desire, certainly on my part, that Hamas will play no part in that Palestinian state. Justice for Palestinians and Israelis who have lost loved ones is within our grasp. Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield want peace, to stop the death, get back to a ceasefire, get aid in and proudly uphold international law. We must use the opportunity of the June conference hosted by France and Saudi Arabia to progress statehood for Palestinians; recognition from the UK ought to be a serious consideration there. A political solution—a two-state solution—is the only solution. I again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West for securing this debate.

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  How would the hon. Gentleman defend the SNP Government in Holyrood, who have failed on all the issues he has mentioned? There is a broader point here about nationalism: the SNP Government have to keep the circus on the road, and have to keep telling people a line. This is the latest in a string of subjects that keep people from talking about SNP failure.

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am sorry to interrupt my hon. Friend’s excellent speech. He spoke about the flow of people. What this two-clause Bill does not set out is any controls or mechanisms by which that could be measured. There was mention of Ireland earlier; I have a slight fear that this will turn into a debate about a soft and hard border, and what that means for the UK. I find this very divisive. Does he agree?

• 24 Apr 2025 · Public Service Reform · Hansard source

  More

  18. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to reform public services.

• 24 Apr 2025 · Public Service Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for that answer. I know from my time as a councillor outside this place that under the last Government, policy was made in Westminster, with very little thought given to how it could hit frontline services more locally. However, examples such as test and trace during the pandemic show that local services can deliver national priorities effectively, so what can the Minister do to ensure that civil servants down here work better with frontline workers up there to make sure that this Government’s priorities are being delivered?

• 24 Apr 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Burnley is a premier league town once more. I am sure the whole House—though perhaps not the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr Hussain), who is not in his place—will join me in congratulating Alan Pace, Scott Parker, Josh Brownhill and all the lads at Burnley football club on their ascension to the premier league. They are back where they belong. Up the Clarets! Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating them?

• 8 Apr 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T6. What is the Chancellor doing to support businesses and boost wages in towns such as Burney, Padiham and Brierfield, which were forgotten for 14 years under the previous Government?