Prime Minister Keir Starmer faces intense scrutiny during Prime Minister's Questions, admitting his mistake appointing Peter Mandelson as Washington ambassador despite Epstein warnings while defending a £53 million rural support package against rising energy costs. He justifies abolishing jury trials for sexual violence to expedite justice and addresses the UK's nuclear deterrent, NHS waiting lists, and HS2 progress. Amidst opposition accusations of rushing into war with Iran and concerns over GB News impartiality, Starmer concludes by urging the Travel Lodge CEO to meet MPs regarding guest safety after a scheduled cancellation. [Automatically generated summary]
Prime Minister's Leadership Under Scrutiny00:15:12
Thank you.
Want to see their amazing films?
Watch all 150 award-winning documentaries at studentcam.org and catch the top 21 winners airing this April on C-SPAN.
C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer addresses the ongoing situation in Iran and the Middle East while taking questions from members of the House of Commons.
He also speaks about rising energy and fuel costs, the US-Israel war in Iran, UK nuclear deterrence strategy, and support for British farmers.
We now come to Prime Minister's questions, Wendy Mawrth.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Our deepest condolences are with the families and friends of the two young people who've died following the outbreak of meningitis B in Kent.
Others are seriously ill and this will be a deeply difficult time for their loved ones.
Mr. Speaker, health experts are working to identify close contacts and distribute antibiotics and will begin a targeted vaccination programme in the coming days.
Can I take this opportunity to ask anyone who attended Club Chemistry on March 5th, 6th or 7th to come forward, please, to receive antibiotics?
Mr. Speaker, yesterday President Zelensky addressed parliamentarians.
Many people were there and I had the opportunity to reaffirm to him that no matter other international events, the UK support for Ukraine will not waver.
I also welcome Prime Minister Kearney and NATO Secretary General Ruck Rutter to Downing Street for further discussions on international security.
Mr. Speaker, this morning I had meetings with Minister Colleagues and others.
In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.
Thank you Mr. Speaker.
May I first of all associate myself with the comments and the condolences made by the Prime Minister regarding those people affected by the meningitis outbreak.
New data today shows that nearly 60% of hospices are considering cutting frontline services.
In the West Midlands, St Giles Hospice has already reduced beds and reduced staff due to financial pressures.
So with services being cut, can the Prime Minister explain why hospices are being told to wait until autumn for the new framework and will he commit today to proper long-term sustainable funding to secure this vital lifeline for the future?
Prime Minister, it is important that the funding and the framework is put in place and we support the work of hospices and doing everything we can to support them.
Thank you Mr. Speaker.
My constituent Caroline from Grenissy told me that since December the cost of her heating oil has nearly tripled from £257 to £700.
Local farmers I met last week also raised their concerns that the oil industry has not been properly regulated, disadvantaging off-grid customers.
Whilst I welcome the government's £53 million support package that was announced for rural communities, will the Prime Minister confirm how disabled people, vulnerable and low-income households can access this support and how he will improve regulation of oil to bring down the cost of energy bills?
Prime Minister, well can I thank you, my first instinct is always to protect people from the cost of living.
The immediate action we've taken in relation to those that heat their homes with oil is the 53 million that we announced this week.
That's particularly important for rural communities and, of course, Northern Ireland.
But de-escalation in the Middle East is the quickest way to reduce the cost of living.
And anyone who advocated for the UK to rush headlong into the offensive without a clear picture of what it meant for our forces or without thinking through the economic impact for families should stand up and apologise.
Opposition, Kimmy Bernal.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
The Prime Minister tried to avoid scrutiny on the Mandelson files by releasing the documents immediately after Prime Minister's questions last week.
So let me ask him now: did the Prime Minister personally speak to Peter Mandelson about his relationship with the convicted paedophile, Geoffrey Epstein, before appointing him as our ambassador to Washington?
Mr. Speaker, let me start where I must.
This was my mistake in making the appointment, and I've apologised to the victims of Epstein.
I do so again.
The government is complying with the humble address in full, but we are also continuing to support the police in their investigation.
The matter of process was looked at by the independent advisor on ministerial standards.
It's clear the appointment process wasn't strong enough, and that's why I've already strengthened it.
But it was my mistake, Mr. Speaker, and I've apologised for it.
She should follow suit and apologise for a gross error of judgment in calling for the UK to join the war in Iran without thinking through the consequences.
Mr. Speaker, I know he doesn't want to talk about the documents he tried to bury last week.
He's going to try and talk about anything else, but he's not going to get away with it.
I asked him a question he did not answer.
We know the Prime Minister was warned about the risk of appointing Peter Mandelson.
This is not about the process.
He knew that Mandelson stayed in Epstein's house after Epstein had been convicted for child prostitution.
He knew that.
So I will ask him again.
Did he speak to Peter Mandelson about this before the appointment, yes or no?
Prime Minister.
Mr. Speaker, I've already made clear that he was asked questions and gave untruthful replies.
The government is complying with the humble address.
The process has been set out.
The independent advisor has looked at it and he said, quote, the relevant process for a political appointee was followed.
Now, obviously, this is a question of my judgment, but what about her judgment?
She wanted to rush into a war with Iran without thinking it through.
At the weekend, Mr. Speaker, three weeks in, she said, oh, there isn't a clear plan behind the US strikes in Iran.
That's the question she should have asked at the start.
The decision to commit the UK to a war is the biggest decision a Prime Minister can take, and she got it completely wrong.
I didn't hear an answer, Mr. Speaker, and he's right.
It is about his judgment.
He has repeatedly told us that Peter Mandelson lied to him.
But he won't tell us if he actually picked up the phone and spoke to Mandelson before appointing him.
This doesn't make any sense.
The Prime Minister told us on the record, and I quote, I believed the lies he told me.
If the Prime Minister didn't speak to him, how can he say he lied to him?
Prime Minister, Speaker, the process is clear.
It's been looked at by the independent advisor.
And she asked me about the process and judgment on appointments.
She appointed the shadow justice secretary.
He said last night that Muslims praying in public, including the Mayor of London, practising his faith, are not welcome.
He described it as an act of domination, straight from the Islamist playbook.
If we're in my team, he'd be gone.
It's utterly appalling.
She should denounce his comments and she should sack him.
He wants to talk about Justice Secretary's.
His Justice Secretary is abolishing jury trials.
My shadow justice secretary, my shadow justice secretary, my shadow justice secretary is defending British values.
I know who I would rather have sitting on the front bench next to me and it's not him.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, this is important.
He does want to talk about anything else except what I'm asking him.
Three times I have asked him if the Prime Minister spoke to Peter Mandelson.
Three times he has refused to answer.
We can only assume he did not speak to Peter Mandelson.
From the documents published, we know he left the questioning of Mandelson's relationship with a convicted paedophile to two of Mandelson's closest friends, one of whom was also friends with a convicted paedophile.
Asking those questions should have been his job.
Why did he fail to do his duty?
Mr Speaker, so her position is that the shadow justice secretary is defending British values when he says Muslims praying together in Trafalgar Square are not welcome.
Mr Speaker, even Tommy Robinson, I can hardly believe I'm saying this, has said today that if the shadow Justice Secretary had made these hateful comments two years ago, the Conservative Party would have kicked him out.
Now, Tommy Robinson isn't some sort of moral signpost.
He was pointing out how much their party has changed.
They're more inclined to his views, and he's right about that.
The fact that he's sitting on her front bench shows she's too weak and has got absolutely no judgment.
The Prime Minister wants to talk about my leadership.
I'm shocked, because his former deputy has just fired the starting gun on the race to replace him.
And I'll tell him one thing.
She and I both agree that this weak man should be replaced by a strong woman.
I'll finish, Mr. Speaker.
I have too much to say today.
There is still a lot to ask about the Mandelson files.
There's still a lot to ask.
The Prime Minister knew that Mandelson had kept up a relationship with Geoffrey Epstein.
The documents released also show he'd been warned about appointing Mandelson.
He claims he was lied to.
Mandelson had twice been fired for dishonesty.
So why did the Prime Minister believe Peter Mandelson over the vetting documents?
Mr Speaker, she asks about leadership.
When I see religious events in Trafalgar Square, when I see Hindus celebrating Diwali, when I see Jews celebrating Hanukkah live, when I see Christians performing the Passion of Christ or Muslims praying, that shows the great strength of our diverse city and country.
I've never heard her party call out anything other than the Muslim events.
It's only when Muslims are praying.
The only conclusion is the Tory Party has got a problem with Muslims.
Can I just say, people say, I am not responsible for the answers.
I've just got to say that.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's a shame he's not responsible for the answers either.
The Prime Minister wants us to believe that he is a serious leader, but he doesn't do the work.
He outsources the decisions and when things go wrong, he blames the vetting, he blames the chief of staff, he blames the cabinet secretary, he blames anyone but himself.
This Prime Minister appointed Peter Mandelson but didn't bother to ask the questions.
If he cannot be straight with the House on something as simple as this, why should we believe a word he says about anything?
She talks about dozens of...
Three weeks ago, she said we should rush into war.
She didn't do the work.
She didn't think through the consequences.
Committing our military to a war without thinking through the consequences is the gravest mistake a Leader of the Opposition can ever.
And she comes back a week later and says, oops, I got that one wrong.
She's utterly irrelevant and she's got no judgment.
This is the Leader of the Opposition who said I should have empty chaired the most important NATO summit in years.
This is the Leader of the Opposition who said Greenland is a second order issue.
And this is the Leader of the Opposition who jumped into a war with Iran without stopping to think.
On top of that this week, the failure to condemn and sack again, I'm not responsible for the answers, but it's certainly not opposition questions.
Mr Speaker, add to that the failure to condemn and sack the shadow justice secretary for the poison and division that he spreads.
It's turning out to be quite a month for the Leader of the Opposition, who claims she never makes any mistakes.
Claire Hammer.
Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker.
Just a moment.
Sir, please.
Claire Hammer.
We've seen this play out before.
A US rush to military escalation with no plan for what comes next.
We've seen schoolgirls bombed in Iran, whole families killed in Lebanon, chaos in a region already scarred by repression and genocide and economic shocks that hurt the most vulnerable at home.
In Irish there's a phrase, the out there and she and off we go, have we learned no lessons?
People are asking exactly that.
How many times do these horrors play out before the lessons are learned?
The Prime Minister has said that the US will not be drawn into a wider war.
Will he guarantee two things, that that position will hold in the face of mounting pressure from Trump and Netanyahu?
And can he guarantee that this House would get a vote before the UK involves in any further conflict?
Prime Minister.
Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, my principles have been clear and unwavering.
We will protect our people in the region.
We will take action to defend ourselves and our allies and we will not be drawn into the wider war.
I want to see this war end as quickly as possible.
Mr Speaker, the longer it continues, the bigger the impact on the cost of living.
And that's where we've intervened to support households with costs of heating oil.
The best way forward is a negotiated settlement with Iran giving up any aspirations to develop a nuclear weapon.
Sha'ed David, leader of the Liberal Democrats.
Thank you Mr Speaker and can I join the Prime Minister in offering my condolences to the family and friends of the two young people who've been killed by the meningitis bug in Kent and all those affected by this horrifying outbreak.
Sovereign AI and Britain's Future00:07:39
Mr Speaker, Britain's independent nuclear deterrent is critical for the defence of our nation and for the whole of Europe.
But the current Trident missiles will reach the end of their lives in the 2040s so we have to make a choice now.
lease new missiles to the United States, accepting whatever terms the president gives us, or build our own here in the United Kingdom.
The Conservatives in reform say we have to rely on President Trump and the United States because we couldn't possibly do it ourselves.
Does the Prime Minister agree with them?
Prime Minister.
Mr. Speaker, our independent nuclear deterrent protects us every day and we should never forget how important it is.
It is important that we renew it.
We will do that in the best interests of Britain.
He's openly advocating a plan which he doesn't know how much it would cost and how it would work.
That isn't the way to deal with our independent nuclear deterrent.
I'm surprised that response.
The French can do it.
Does the Prime Minister really think Britain can't?
But moving on, Mr. Speaker, a new world investigation into GB News has found hundreds of shocking breaches of the rules of impartiality and accuracy.
Yet Ofcom has repeatedly refused to take action.
Andrew Neill says, just as Fox basically became the channel of Donald Trump, it is clear they have turned GB News into the reform channel.
Mr. Speaker, we cannot let GB News propaganda turn our great country into their version of Trump's America.
Either the government rules aren't fit for purpose or Ofcom isn't properly enforcing them.
Prime Minister, which is it?
Prime Minister.
Well, he's right to raise an important question of free speech and our media.
It is a matter for Ofcom, and it's important that we let them deal with it.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Violence against women and girls is a global emergency.
It's a key concern that we discussed at last week's United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.
Social media platforms are promoting and profiting off vile online misogyny.
It's made its way onto playgrounds, workplaces, relationships, and even our politics, harming women and girls and exploiting young men and boys.
In the manosphere, everyone loses.
Can I ask the Prime Minister what this government is doing to tackle the harm being caused by hateful forces online?
Prime Minister.
Can I thank her and the others who attended the UN Commission for the Status of Women event?
We are committed to halving violence against women and girls wherever it takes place, whether that's online, offline, or on our streets.
That includes banning deepfakes, tackling non-consensual intimate images and abusive vile content online.
And can I say, Mr. Speaker, following up from last week, I was deeply concerned that Travel Lodge cancelled their meeting with MPs.
I want them to put that right and put it right swiftly.
Should Jeremy be right very much, Mr. Speaker.
In January of last year, I raised with the Prime Minister the issue of inadequate and inaccessible compensation for those injured by COVID vaccinations.
The Prime Minister undertook to look into it along with the Health Secretary, but I'm afraid that more than a year later, no significant progress has been made.
Now, I know that the Prime Minister and the government recognise the risk this issue poses to public confidence in mass vaccination, all the more important given the Prime Minister's opening remarks in this session, and indeed the pain it's caused to those who've been injured or lost loved ones only doing what their government asked them to do.
So can I ask the Prime Minister please to re-engage with this issue and ensure that his government makes swift progress now in resolving it?
Prime Minister.
Can I thank him for raising it and acknowledge the question he asked me last year in relation to this and actually pay tribute to him and to Kate for her campaign.
It's vital that we look closely at the rare and tragic cases where things went wrong.
We mustn't fail to do so because that will maintain confidence in our health service, important in relation to COVID, of course, but important, as he rightly points out, today as well.
We are committed to looking at reforms to the vaccine damage payment scheme and engaging with those affected to make sure it meets their needs.
Specifically, we expect the fourth module of the COVID inquiry to report next month, which will look specifically at the issue that he has raised.
I can reassure him we'll look at other recommendations very closely.
Don Butler.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
At the international conference last week, it is clear that mobile phone theft is international organised crime, dragging in young people as young as 14 years old.
The Mayor of London and the Met Commissioner have spent money in latest tech to combat this crime and it's working, but they need help.
Manufacturers have the ability to invoke a kill switch so that mobile phones stolen are worthless, but they're not doing it.
SAMHSI's taken it more seriously than Apple.
Will the Prime Minister agree with me that if manufacturers do not do this, the government will implement legislation to design out crime and keep our streets safe?
Can I thank her for her question and welcome the Mayor of London's crackdown.
The Metropolitan Police have made hundreds of arrests, recovered thousands of phones, and mobile phone theft has fallen.
I agree with her there's more to do and we must work with tech industry in order to do so because if we can reduce the value of stolen phones it helps bring the business models that drives theft.
So we're committed to those working with the industry.
We're willing to consider any further necessary action to drive down on this.
Thank you Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday the Chancellor announced £2 billion funding for UK sovereign AI and quantum.
And the DCIT Select Committee was told government procurement will adapt to encourage UK companies to develop sovereign AI systems for government use.
In light of these positive events, will the Prime Minister ensure this happens with key digital systems in health, defence and policing made sovereign and not re-contracted to politically motivated US companies like Palantir but re-tendered to UK companies?
Prime Minister.
Can I thank him as he says the Chancellor set out yesterday the huge economic opportunities of innovation and AI.
We've put £5 billion behind British start-ups and we'll launch our sovereign AI unit with £500 million to help AI businesses start and grow.
Investing the £2 billion that he referenced in our quantum capabilities so we can be the first country in the world to roll out quantum computers at scale.
Procurements must be the launch plat for start-ups and we're determined to deliver that.
Paul Davis.
Thank you Mr. Speaker.
NHS waiting lists are down 374,000 thanks to this government.
Well reform would take us back to the days when decent healthcare was only for people who could afford it.
Innovation needs to be at the heart of our health service when striving for better patient care.
Does the Prime Minister agree with me that Haddisfield Royal Infirmaries partnership with Huddersfield University's Health Innovation Centre is a great example of this?
Can he tell me how the government intends to expand the brilliant model of health innovation centres nationally?
Defending Jury Trial Rights00:03:41
Prime Minister is a good example and he makes a very powerful point.
Thanks to our record investment in the NHS, Mr. Speaker, we have the lowest waiting list for three years, the shortest waits in AE for four years and the fastest ambulance response time for five years.
Stronger community health services like the local innovation centre that he mentions are at the heart of our 10-year plan to go further.
But we would not have come this far already, Mr Speaker, without the decisions made at the budget, which were opposed by all of the parties opposite.
Sir David Davies.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Last week in the government's attack on jury trials, his own backbenchers said the following.
Unworkable, unjust, unpopular, unnecessary.
Wrong in principle, wrong in practice, oppressive, authoritarian, and quite honestly, reactionary.
3,000 of his own lawyers, his own fellow lawyers, said juries have not caused this crisis.
And the Prime Minister himself, earlier in his career, said scrapping juries enables wrongful convictions.
Now the Institute of Government is saying that they are massively overestimating the savings they're going to make on this.
So let's be clear.
His backbenchers oppose it, his professional colleagues oppose it, and in a previous life he opposed it.
So why is the Prime Minister forcing through a policy that's unjust in principle, unworkable in practice and opposed by everyone?
Well Mr Speaker, we're not abolishing jury trial and he knows that.
I have worked with women and girls who've been victims of sexual violence and rape, who have waited a very, very long time for their cases to come to court.
Many of them drop out because of the weight.
They have described to me personally the mental anguish that they go through when their case can't get heard for years, when they're told of adjournments time and time again.
I'm not prepared to look them in the eye any longer and not do something about it.
We owe it to them.
This is about getting the balance right.
We're not abolishing jury trial.
There's about 3% of cases go to jury trial, as he very well knows.
97% don't.
After this, it'll be 2.25%.
That is the difference between the policy we're advancing and the policies it now is.
So it's not abolishing jury trials, but I'm not prepared to see those who've been victims of violence against women and girls, I'm not prepared to see them repeatedly let down.
That's what happened for 14 long years.
It's not good enough, and I set my face about doing something about it.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I spent 20 years as a secondary school teacher in Wales.
We worked hard.
Labor has given them the biggest upgrade of rights in a generation.
Rights that millions of us fought hard to win.
But the Honourable Member for Clacton wants to chuck it all in the bin.
Does the Prime Minister stand by these rights and agree that only a vote for Labour in May will enshrine these fundamental workers' rights?
Mr. Speaker, I'm very proud of our Employment Rights Act.
It delivers strong rights and protections, including for all our brilliant school staff.
And reform, he's right, would rip up those protections.
They have nothing to offer but grievance and division.
And Mr Speaker, they have no judgment because just like the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Clacton said we should do all we can to support the US strikes and he said I make that perfectly, perfectly clear.
Energy Crisis and Tax Reform00:08:37
It was perfectly, perfectly clear.
He got it completely wrong and perfectly, perfectly clear that he's now desperately trying to U-turn.
Absolutely no judgment, not fit to be Prime Minister.
Angel Farage!
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Over the course of the last year, our North Sea neighbours, Norway, have opened 49 drill sites for gas and oil.
On our side of the North Sea, the number is zero.
Given that our critical reserve of natural gas is down to two days and how vulnerable we are, and with talk potentially of energy rationing coming later this year, isn't it time we changed course, got rid of excessive taxation on the exploration companies, opened up the licenses, became self-sufficient in natural gas, and with that would come thousands of jobs, increased tax revenues, and cheaper gas prices.
Isn't it time we followed Norway?
Mr. Speaker, oil and gas will be part of the mix of our energy for many, many years to come, as I've said out many, many times.
But he's now highlighting the consequences of the war that he said we should rush into.
He wanted us to go to war.
He said it was perfectly clear that we should support the strikes.
Then, just like the Leader of the Opposition, a week later, he said, oh, no, I got that one wrong.
You can't make mistakes about decisions as serious as committing to war.
It's a gross error.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
95% of the food that we import from non-EU countries has lower welfare standards than that of British farmers, costing us millions and putting worse food on our plates.
So that's why the Labour Rural Research Group will be shortly launching our spring push on farming profitability to support British farmers by introducing honest labelling and levelling the playing field for trade and regulation.
So will the Prime Minister commit to meeting with me and the LRRG to discuss how we can work to back British farmers and improve their profitability?
I'm very happy to discuss that with my honourable friend.
We will always protect high welfare standards and through our fruit and drink deal, bringing down barriers for farmers selling to our largest market.
Mr. Speaker, alongside a record £11.8 billion farming budget and investing in cutting-edge innovation, our farming profitability review is focused on boosting profitability.
I've already acted and set up the Farming and Food Partnership Board, investing £30 million in our farmer collaboration fund.
Thank you Mr. Speaker.
Traffic chaos from a botched road realignment affecting Calvert Green, Steeple Claydon and Twyford.
Landowners still awaiting payment for land taken.
Woeful underfunding of promised mitigation projects in Wendover in inadequate noise modelling.
Now the Prime Minister and I used to, many years ago, be united in our opposition to HS2.
He changed.
But with the upcoming HS2 reset, will he make a personal intervention to ensure that my constituents and communities living with this hell on earth of a construction project are finally treated with the fairness and respect that they deserve?
Can I thank him for raising this?
I do know how much it impacts his constituents and how deeply they feel about it.
And it is important as we reset and clear up the mess that was left that we bear in mind and have in our mind's eye those who are the most affected and make sure that it is fair and that their voices are heard and we will do so.
Oliver Rail.
Thank you Mr Speaker.
Burnley-Manchester Road station is a key driver for growth.
It's Burnley's link to Manchester and Leeds and more importantly for them it's their link to Burnley.
We've had over half a million journeys last year and yet it's inaccessible despite big empty promises from the last Tory government.
We're no further to fix it.
A promise of funding was made which never came.
Will he help me get this delivered and back my campaign to make Burnley-Manchester Road an accessible modern station fit for Burnley's ambitions?
He's a great champion on this issue and I'll make sure he gets a meeting with the Rail Minister to discuss the detail.
The previous government took the decision not to shortlist Burnley-Manchester Road Station for accessibility improvements.
We're giving Lancashire Combined County Authority £641 million with the freedom to invest in their priorities, including better accessibility.
That's what a Labour government represents, empowering local people to make the best decisions for their local area.
Andrew Snow.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Every week the Prime Minister comes here and reads out this pre-scripted nonsense that bears no resemblance to the questions he's actually asked.
The Leader of the Opposition asked him about Peter Mandelson and he answered about the war in Iran.
The Leader of the Opposition asked him about Mandelson again and he answered with an attack on the shadow justice secretary.
He was asked about Mandelson again and talked about protests in London.
What is he scared of?
What is he hiding?
For a man who has spent years presenting himself as a forensic investigator, he has certainly had a blind spot to the details for this convicted paedophile with a friend in high Labour places.
So I shall ask him again, when he found out that Lord Mandelson had an ongoing relationship with the convicted paedophile, Jeffrey Epstein, did he speak to him personally before appointing him ambassador to the United States?
Mr Speaker, we've set out the process.
It has been put before the House.
But I know why they don't want to talk about the war because they supported going into the war without thinking through the consequences.
That is a huge error of judgment.
I realise they don't want to talk about it ever again.
I'm not surprised.
Nor do they want to talk about the Shadow Justice Secretary saying that Muslims are not welcome to prayer in Trafalgar Square.
She should remove him from their front bench or I suspect he'll be up there next on that trail.
Matt Bishop.
Thank you Mr. Speaker.
As the Prime Minister mentioned earlier, the CEO of Travel Lodge has today again refused to attend a meeting with wider members of this House and the other places to answer serious concerns about guest safety and safeguarding.
This refusal only deepens the lack of trust in the company's commitment to protecting women and vulnerable guests.
Will the Prime Minister meet with me and invite the CEO of Travel Lodge to discuss the issue and will he join me in urging the CEO to explain directly to all parliamentarians why she is unwilling to face scrutiny on such an important matter?
Prime Minister.
Mr Speaker, I thank him for raising this and he's raised this with me personally.
Our thoughts are obviously with the victims.
I was very concerned to hear that the CEO of Travel Lodge cancelled the meeting with MPs and I would urge them to reconsider.
That meeting needs to go ahead with relevant MPs and with the relevant minister and the sooner it goes ahead the better.
I hope that the CEO of Travel Lodge is listening to this exchange and I thank him for raising it not just on this occasion but on repeated occasions.
That completes Prime Minister's questions.
Let the front benches change over.
Coming up Monday morning, Niall Stanage, the Hill White House columnist on Trump administration's strategy in the Iran conflict and other White House news of the day.
And then USA Today congressional reporter Zach Shermile will talk about the week ahead in Congress, including the latest on DHS funding efforts.
And later, American University's William Leo Graham discusses the future of the Cuban government as the Trump administration ramps up pressure on Cuba's president to step down.
C-SPAN's Washington Journal.
Join the conversation live at 7 Eastern Monday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at c-SPAN.org.
Guarding American Democracy00:01:44
On Monday, the Supreme Court hears a case examining whether federal statutes can preempt state laws that allow ballots mailed in by Election Day to be received and counted by officials after voting day.
The Republican National Committee and state Republican parties challenged a Mississippi law that allows a five-day grace period for absentee ballots to arrive.
The case could set an important precedent as many states receive and count so-called late-arriving mail-in ballots and could significantly affect military voting.
Hear the oral argument in Watson v. the RNC, live starting at 10 a.m. Eastern on C-SPAN.
C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app, and online at c-span.org.
Democracy is always an unfinished creation.
Democracy is worth dying for.
Democracy belongs to us all.
We are here in the sanctuary of democracy.
Great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies.
American democracy is bigger than any one person.
Freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected.
We are still at our core a democracy.
This is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom.
The chief of the U.S. Capitol Police, Michael Sullivan, testified on the agency's 2027 budget request before a House Appropriations Subcommittee on Capitol Hill.
During the nearly 55-minute hearing, Chief Sullivan discusses the record-breaking request, which reached $1 billion for the first time.