If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 29 April.

The state visit by His Majesty the King is a powerful reminder of the deep and special relationship we have with the United States.

In this Session of Parliament, this Labour Government have delivered the biggest upgrade in workers’ rights in a generation, the biggest improvement in renters’ rights in a generation, and more action than any other Government to tackle child poverty. In the King’s Speech, I look forward to setting out what more we will do to change our country for the better.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. I shall have further such meetings later today.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for meeting me recently to view 1,000 paper cranes folded by residents in Bearwood in recognition of the diversity of Smethwick, where neighbours and communities just get on with each other.

Residents in my Constituency and across Sandwell benefit from the lowest council tax in the west midlands and investment in new leisure centres and parks, and all our libraries are kept open. Sandwell is the third-best council in the country for fixing potholes and has expanded breakfast clubs and free school meals and ensured cheaper school uniforms for our children. Does the Prime Minister agree that this is all down to well-run Labour-led Sandwell council and the changes brought about by this Labour Government, which were opposed at every opportunity by the Tories and Reform?

I thank my hon. Friend for his work to give every child in his Constituency the best start in life. I am very glad that this Government have done more than any other to lift children out of poverty. Thanks to our work this Session, the Government have passed Laws to deliver more rights at work, build new homes, save British steel, clean up our waterways, secure our borders, deliver record funding to our NHS and so much more—change delivered by Labour, and opposed by the Tories and Reform.

We come to the Leader of the Opposition.

It is the end of this Session, and what a contrast with the beginning. Back in July 2024, the Government Benches were full adoring new MPs asking sycophantic questions; yesterday, the Prime Minister was reduced to begging those same MPs to save his own skin. He has broken his promise to grow the economy; the only thing that has grown is the welfare bill. Can the Prime Minister tell us how many more people are out of work and claiming universal credit since he took office?

The right hon. Lady talks about what we have done, in relation to people out of work. We have put in place the youth guarantee for young people; we have raised the national minimum wage, thanks to our Chancellor; we have helped young people into work by cutting NHS waiting lists, thanks to the work of the Health Secretary; we have put more police on the streets, thanks to the work of the Home Secretary; and we have cut energy Bills for young people, thanks to the work of the Energy Secretary. I am very proud of what this Labour Government have delivered in the first Session of this Parliament.

The Prime Minister does not want to say how many more people are out of work and claiming universal credit since he took office; perhaps he does not know. Let me tell him: it is 1.5 million people. That is the entire population of Leeds, Cardiff and Edinburgh put together. Hard-working people are being taxed more and more to pay for a ballooning benefits bill. Can the Prime Minister tell us why, on his watch, for the first time ever, we are now spending more on welfare than we earn in income tax?

The welfare system the Leader of the Opposition complains of is the one the Conservatives put in place. We are reforming it to improve it—and what did they do when we put that forward? They voted to keep the same broken welfare system.

That answer was as honest as the Prime Minister’s reason for sacking Olly Robbins; perhaps he would like to apologise for it right now. Let me tell him why we are spending more on welfare than we are earning in tax. It is because of him and his terrible policies—this is all under him. We are spending so much on welfare that we cannot afford to defend the country. If he will not listen to me, perhaps he will listen to the former Labour Defence Secretary, Lord Robertson, who said:

“We cannot defend Britain with an ever-expanding welfare budget.”

I agree with Lord Robertson. Why doesn’t the Prime Minister?

This is the Labour Government who increased defence spending, with the highest sustained spend since the cold war. What did the Conservatives do? When they came into power, defence spending was 2.5%; when they left power, it was 2.3%. Even their own Defence Secretary admitted that they “hollowed out” our armed forces. We will take no lectures from them on defence.

Talking about more defence spending is not the same as giving more money for defence. The Prime Minister has been in office for nearly two years. He has a welfare plan until 2031, but he has not produced a defence investment plan. We have gone backwards on defence under him, because we are borrowing to pay for welfare. Yesterday we learned that the cost of Government borrowing is at its highest in two decades; that is under him. Instead of getting a grip on the economy, the Chancellor is briefing out that there could be rent controls, in order to curry favour with left-wing Back Benchers. This is not a serious way to run the economy. It is time the Prime Minister gave her an easier job, so will he listen to businesses and the country and reshuffle the Chancellor?

At the spring statement, the Chancellor was very proud to say that inflation was down to 3% and falling; interest rates have been cut six times; and we have seen the growth figures for the early part of this year. The Leader of the Opposition says, “Well, the cost of borrowing’s gone up.” Yes—because there is a conflict in Iran. And what did she want to do? When I said we would not be dragged into that war because I had thought through the consequences, including the economic consequences, what did she do? She said we should jump in with both feet, without regard to the consequences. She cannot complain now about the implications.

I did not hear the Prime Minister say that he is not reshuffling the Chancellor; it sounds like she’s toast. Meanwhile, the former Deputy prime minister is on manoeuvres. This Government are like a bad episode of “Game of Thrones”. The Prime Minister’s own people have turned against him, and all the while, he is holed up in his castle, wetting himself about a visit from the king in the north. Yesterday, one Labour MP actually said that his days are numbered. It was one of them—I wonder who, because they are all looking guilty as hell. Isn’t the real reason the Prime Minister cannot cut welfare that he has squandered all his political capital saving his own skin?

The Leader of the Opposition talks about playing political games. That is what she was doing yesterday. This House considered her motion, and rejected it decisively, because everyone saw it for what it was: a desperate, baseless political stunt ahead of the May elections. While she and the Opposition were playing games here, I was chairing a Cobra meeting, going through the contingencies and managing that war in the middle east. They think political games are more important than managing the implications of the war in the middle east, which will affect every single one of their constituents. None of them asks any questions about it; none of them wants to debate it; they just want to debate silly political stunts. Even though we did not join the war—no thanks to her—my duty is to protect the British public from its consequences, and nothing is going to distract me from what matters to the British public.

I think the whole country is sick of this man’s tone-deaf, pompous moralising. Last week, we all saw him punch the Speaker’s Chair. This is not a man who is in control. Since the last King’s Speech, it has been one disaster after another: cronyism, jobs for friends of convicted paedophiles, peerages for other friends of convicted paedophiles, broken promises on taxes, and U-turn after U-turn after U-turn. He has lost a Deputy prime minister, two chiefs of staff, two Cabinet Secretaries, the support of his Back Benchers and all his credibility. [Interruption.] Labour Members can jeer as much as they like; they are going to have to go to their Constituency and explain to all those people why they did what they did last night. The fact is that the Prime Minister was reduced to whipping his MPs to save him, and to pleading with a tax dodger to rejoin his Cabinet. How much longer do we all have to put up with his shambles?

I changed my party and I won a General Election. She has changed her party, because when I became leader of mine, the Conservative party was three times the size it is now. She has changed it, and it is now even smaller than when she started as leader, because half of them are up there on the Reform Benches. The stunt the Conservatives played yesterday was because they do not like what we are delivering: more rights at work, more security for renters, and half a million children lifted out of poverty. That is our mandate, that is our mission, and nothing is going to hold us back.

It was 18 months ago, I remember, that my late friend Terry Etherton was sitting up in the Gallery beaming down at the Prime Minister because he had just announced the Government scheme to give compensation to those who had been wrongly sacked from the armed forces for simply being gay. I have a constituent who lost his job at MI6 in the 1980s for his sexuality, and he has no compensation. Those in the security services also put their life on the line for their country; it is just not fair. Will the Prime Minister find the time to sit down with my constituent and me, so that together we can work out how we can extend Terry’s scheme, so that those who were in the security services can also get justice?

I thank my right hon. Friend for her dedicated work on this. I am very proud of the work that we have done to recognise LGBT veterans. On top of that, people in our security services are some of the bravest and most professional who serve our country. That some of them lost their job because of their sexuality is a historical wrong, and I confirm today that the Security Minister is assessing this closely. I will make sure that my right hon. Friend is updated and has the meeting that she has asked for.

I call the leader of the Liberal Democrats.

Yesterday, we heard Christian Turner, Peter Mandelson’s replacement as US ambassador, say that the only country Trump has a special relationship with is Israel; that the Prime Minister’s job is in danger after next week’s elections; and that in the US, Jeffrey Epstein’s associates have evaded responsibility for their actions. The Prime Minister has had to fire one US ambassador for lying. Does he fear that he will have to fire a second for telling the truth?

Given what I have had thrown at me in the last two weeks by all the Opposition parties, that is the least of my problems. I know that the right hon. Gentleman likes stunts, but I was surprised that he joined in with the one yesterday. His business spokesman said last week that he was satisfied that I had not misled the House. The right hon. Gentleman’s opening position was that it was inconceivable that officials would give clearance to Mandelson and not tell Ministers that it was against the United Kingdom Security Vetting recommendation. That is what he said, and it did not happen. I expect frivolous accusations from the Leader of the Opposition. Clearly, I was wrong to expect anything better from the man in the wetsuit.

I have got my drysuit on today, and let me tell the Prime Minister that when Boris Johnson was faced with that motion, he did not whip his MPs. There was a difference there.

Experts are warning that food prices will rise by 10% this year as farmers’ costs soar. Trump’s war has exposed how weak Britain’s food security is, yet under the system brought in by the Conservatives, England is the only country in Europe where farm payments do not actively support farmers to produce food. So will the King’s Speech include a good food Bill to fix that mistake and ensure that people can afford the food they need?

Of course food security is important, and that is why I was considering that, among other issues, in the ministerial meetings yesterday in Cobra. That is what I was spending my afternoon doing: ensuring that we were prepared and managing the risks of a conflict that will affect every single one of our constituents. What was the right hon. Gentleman doing? He was wasting his time in here on a baseless allegation and engaging in party political issues. He should have been working on the single most important issue of the day, but he wasted his time on a baseless political stunt.

The war in Iran has exposed how dangerously reliant we are on imports for our food, fuel and medicine, but the reality is that climate breakdown will make the current instability look trivial. Will the Prime Minister use the upcoming King’s Speech to address this fact and redirect our economy towards food security, energy security and security in the supply of our medicines?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to highlight the real risk of climate change, both internationally and at home. I am proud that we have restored the UK’s position as a global leader on climate action. That means cutting emissions with our carbon budget, investing £7 billion in nature recovery and driving ahead with renewables. They are the right steps to protect supply chains, to protect our economy and to protect working people.

Depending upon the results in the elections next week, this may well be my final PMQs. I suppose that the same is perhaps true for the Prime Minister as well. But before then, does he understand that, yes, it is because of inaction on the cost of living crisis; yes, it is because of the debacle of the winter fuel payment; yes, it is because of the thousand jobs being lost a month in Scotland’s North sea and the closure of Grangemouth; and yes, it is because of his judgment on Matthew Doyle and Peter Mandelson; but above all else, the reason that his time in office will soon be coming to a close is that he promised change but has delivered chaos?

I am proud of what this Labour Government have achieved and I am proud of what we will achieve. If this is the right hon. Gentleman’s last session here, let us reflect on his great achievements in Westminster. He kicked out his predecessor and then lost 39 MPs at the next election. I hope he can keep up that record in Holyrood next week.

This Labour Government’s £29 billion of investment in the NHS and £2 billion in life sciences is critical to fixing our NHS and tackling health inequalities. The Barts life sciences cluster in Whitechapel will become one of Europe’s leading NHS-centred clusters, and we have already secured £800 million in private investment. Will the Prime Minister direct the Office for Investment to co-sponsor this initiative and ensure that the National Wealth Fund co-invests, so that we can turn east London’s health inequalities into a driver for UK life sciences growth, transforming the future of healthcare in London, the UK and globally?

I am proud that Labour is investing in life sciences. I thank my hon. Friend for championing that project for over a decade. The national wealth fund is designed to co-invest, alongside private investors, and Ministers are happy to discuss those proposals with her.

Today I can announce a significant new investment by AstraZeneca, which is investing £300 million in UK life sciences, made possible by the pharmaceutical arrangement that we have struck with the United States to future-proof thousands of jobs in Macclesfield and Cambridge. That is a major vote of confidence in the UK and Labour’s plans to strengthen our economy.

In an earlier answer, the Prime Minister made it clear that he understands that global uncertainty makes national economic resilience ever more important, and that energy security and food security are central to that, so why is policy making one the enemy of the other? Twelve per cent. of our most fertile and productive land—for the food that we need to feed the nation—is being eaten up by giant industrial developments, including pylons with the accompanying infrastructure and huge solar developments. Will the Prime Minister meet me and colleagues who feel similarly? By corroding Britain’s food security now, we risk compromising our nation’s future.

The right hon. Gentleman is right to raise food security. Obviously, that is one resilience that we need and must protect in this country. We also need to move to secure independence of energy, because one thing that is making life so much harder for all those in the food sector is that their energy prices go up every time an international conflict affects the prices here. By getting energy independence, which requires infrastructure, we can protect them from that and therefore make them more resilient.

Like many MPs, I will head up to my Constituency later to campaign for the local elections. When I am out on doorstep talking to voters in the Shipley constituency, I am proud of the difference that this Labour Government are making. Renters are no longer worried thanks to secure tenure, families are supported by free breakfast clubs and extended free childcare support, and workers are no longer on exploitative zero-hour contracts. What is the Prime Minister most proud of, and what is his message for voters in my Shipley constituency and across the UK?

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. This is the first Government in a generation to take key services back into public ownership, to give rights and powers to workers, renters and the less fortunate, and to invest in public services and lift children out of poverty. As we face war on two fronts, we will do more. A stronger economy, stronger energy security, stronger on defence—that is the difference that this Government are making.

Many of us across this House worked hard to pass the Online Safety Act 2023, not because we thought it would be the last word on online safety, but because we believed it was an important step forward in making online platforms more accountable for the content on their services and for the algorithms that curate it. Can the Prime Minister reassure us that whatever his Government decide to do to restrict our young people’s access to social media will not be used as cover by social media companies to do less themselves to keep young people safer online?

I can give the right hon. and learned Gentleman that assurance. Those platform providers need to take responsibility. He will have noticed the fight that we had with Grok just a few months ago—disgusting images were being created on social media, and we took that on in a fight, which we won, across the House—as well as with chatbots. We need to build on the legislation that we have, and we definitely need more protection in general, particularly for children, but his point is valid: that should not take any responsibility away from those that provide the platforms in the first place.

With £158 million in fair funding, £20 million of Pride in Place funding for New Addington and funding for new trams, this Labour Government are finally giving Croydon the backing that it needs. Building a Croydon for all starts with ensuring that our residents have the dignity and stability of a decent home, but hundreds of families in my Constituency face homelessness because of no-fault evictions, so will the Prime Minister outline how the Government are progressing on their plans to fix the private rented sector and ensure that renters in Croydon have the security and peace of mind that they deserve?

My hon. Friend is a brilliant representative for Croydon, and she is right: for too long, renters have been at the mercy of rogue landlords, pushing thousands into homelessness. I am delighted to confirm that this Friday no-fault evictions will be scrapped once and for all. That sends an important message to anyone living in a damp, unsafe home, anyone who has suffered an unfair rent increase, and every family forced to move over the last year to year. Change is here, delivered by Labour, and opposed by the Tories and Reform every step of the way.

Please could the Prime Minister explain to the House why, if he has done nothing wrong and process has been followed, he needed to force his MPs to vote against an investigation? Is it because he is worried that they do not believe his version of the truth?

No, it’s because they can see a baseless allegation and political stunt when they see it. The hon. Gentleman is a former GP, so here is the truth: we have recruited 82 more GPs and upgraded his medical centre. Opposition Members want all the benefits, but they never want to pay for them.

Derby is a manufacturing powerhouse, but too many people in our city have not felt the benefit of that success. That is why tomorrow we are delighted to be launching Team Derby with our East Midlands Mayor Claire Ward. Does the Prime Minister agree that with our brilliant Chancellor and our Labour Government backing our city, Team Derby can ensure that every pound of investment in Derby delivers real change for our residents, so that everyone feels part of our success story?

I think we should all back Team Derby. Our investment is helping to renew our submarine fleet, building new nuclear reactors and creating jobs and growth. I am proud to see Labour MPs working with the Labour Mayor and a Labour Government to deliver a brighter future for Derby.

Despite the Government’s ambitious house building targets, the charity Shelter believes that the current approach is not providing enough social and genuinely affordable homes. Will the Prime Minister end his Government’s warm embrace of the developer-led model, and instead heed Liberal Democrat calls for 150,000 social homes per year, and new powers for local councils to build them?

We are going to build 1.5 million homes. We are upgrading the rights of renters, because we know how important it is for everyone to have a safe and secure roof over their head. The hon. Member’s challenge to me would have more force if the Liberal Democrats had not abstained on the measures that we are taking to move this forward.

While our NHS across England has seen noticeable improvements thanks to the work of this Labour Government, Southend hospital and the wider Mid and South Essex NHS Trust has continued to struggle. I thank the Department of Health and Social Care for working with me and my colleagues on that issue, and for placing the trust on the intensive recovery programme. Does the Prime Minister agree that that is the right action, and will he meet me to discuss our wider plans to improve healthcare in Southend as part of our Opportunity Southend initiative?

After years of failure being tolerated, and failing staff and patients, our new intensive recovery programme is targeting sites that need tailored support. There is more to do, but we are seeing real progress across our NHS—[Interruption.] Opposition Members have never heard this from a Government. Waiting lists are the lowest for three years—that did not happen in 14 years—and A&E waiting times are the best for five years. They do not recognise any of that because they did not do any of it. We have the fastest ambulance response times in half a decade. Do not forget that the Opposition parties opposed the record investment that was necessary to make all that happen.

Everything international law is supposed to protect is being violated: a genocide against the Palestinian people, the catastrophe in Sudan, the Gazafication of Lebanon. Against that backdrop, last week the Government closed the international humanitarian law unit and stopped funding access to the Centre for Information Resilience database of 26,000 human rights and conflict incidents across Israel, Palestine and Lebanon. That database underpins decisions on IHL breaches, arms export suspensions, and whether the UK is acting within the law. Usually, criminals or their accomplices are the ones destroying evidence of their crimes, not a human rights lawyer or a Government who are apparently committed to upholding international law. My question is simple—

Order. You have taken far too long. Prime Minister.

Let me reassure the House that the work of the international law unit has not ended. It will simply be done by a different team under a restructure. We will, of course, continue to monitor international humanitarian law in Gaza and elsewhere, and invest in conflict prevention and resolution.

This Labour Government have backed the reopening of Doncaster Sheffield airport from the very start. It means jobs, investment, growth and opportunity, not just for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme, but for the whole region. Reform councillors in Doncaster are considering reversing their decision to support the investment that would currently facilitate the airport’s reopening. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that the airport remains a huge priority for the area, and will he continue to work with us to find a way forward to make sure that we get our airport back open?

My hon. Friend is a champion for this crucial local project, and I thank him for his work. I know from visiting Doncaster just how vital reopening the airport is for local residents. It will be a huge boost for South Yorkshire and unlock thousands of jobs. I am deeply concerned by reports that decisions by Reform in Doncaster could put the reopening in jeopardy. Labour put the plan in place; Reform should honour its promises, stop playing games and get the airport open.

In a parliamentary Session that started out with a degree of anticipation, a level of expectation and a promise of change, in what could be the Prime Minister’s last Prime Minister’s Question Time, may I ask him why does he think it went so wrong? Was it his failure to support our WASPI women, his failure to support our farmers, or his failure to support our Northern Ireland veterans and victims of the Northern Ireland troubles? Or was it those around him, who seem more interested in themselves than in the country?

I am very proud—this Government are very proud—of the biggest upgrade in workers’ rights in a generation and the biggest upgrade in renters’ rights in a generation and of doing the most any Government have ever done to reduce child poverty. Those measures will have a lasting impact on working people across the United Kingdom. That is the change we are bringing about and I look forward to continuing it.

As this parliamentary Session draws to a close, it seems like a good moment to reflect on the legislation passed since the General Election—not all of it, of course. Many of us have walked through the Lobby to pass 60 Bills that have touched almost every aspect of British life, from the care of cats, dogs and ferrets to space industry indemnities, along with a whole host of measures seeking to improve life for renters, carers, investors, football fans, NHS patients, serving personnel and more. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that this is a pretty good first Session report card? Does he also agree that the best is yet to come?

My hon. Friend is right to highlight the 50 pieces of legislation—the 50 Bills—that we have put through. We whipped to change the country —we all voted to change the country. The Opposition parties, of course, opposed almost all of it. That is why we have got stronger rights for renters and why we have got stronger rights for workers, investing in our roads and railways, reforming special educational needs and disabilities provision and driving down waiting lists—all opposed by the Opposition parties. And we are only just getting started. We are going to go further on a stronger economy, on energy security and a stronger defence.

I call Sarah Gibson to ask the final question.

Before we leave the House for several weeks, I feel it is absolutely necessary to raise an issue in my Constituency, about which I have been trying to get an answer from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and from the Environment Agency. We have a landfill site in Calne that is producing a sulphurous smell that is causing residents to need to close their windows and leading to children with sore throats, but I am not getting answer except that the Environment Agency itself admits that

“controls may not be working effectively”.

Like my constituents, I find it really disappointing that we are not getting any serious response. This is not the kind of thing we expect in the UK—we do not expect the air that we breathe not to be safe. I urge the Prime Minister to help me to get a response from DEFRA and the EA on what measures can be put in place to reassure my constituents that they are not suffering ill health.

I thank the hon. Lady for raising the issue. Now that she has raised it with me, I will make sure that I go away and chase it up so that she gets the reply that, importantly, her constituents are entitled to.